There Will Be Blood: Overrated by Film Snobs?

In what is probably the most mind-boggling film of 2007, There Will be Blood is at most a masterpiece and at least a film-nerds dream projected onto a screen.

Though I feel the film wont be adequately synthesized and analyzed for decades to come, the most thorough  analysis i could find is this: noisewar 

But it isn't our generation's Citizen Kane

And I have just one question for Paul Thomas Anderson... was there a thematic point to having unmentioned and unexplained identical twin brothers both played by Paul Dano... or was it just because Eli's character couldn't have done both from a plot perspective? Thinking about it I can see how if it was Eli's brother that brought him to the oil there can be some sort of theme hidden there... but after awhile I think this movie has too much. 

Hate me for saying it. But I find this film indecisive (only a little bit) about it's message and purposely and unnecessarily obscure in its method.

If it's underrated then it is by those who hate the ending.

And if it's overrated then you have to thank those thousands of film nerds who wont stop blogging about the film (I'm a hypocrite.)

But to them I end this post with Roger Ebert: 

***"There Will Be Blood" is the kind of film that is easily called great. I am not sure of its greatness. It was filmed in the same area of Texas used by "No Country for Old Men," and that is a great film, and a perfect one. But "There Will Be Blood" is not perfect, and in its imperfections (its unbending characters, its lack of women or any reflection of ordinary society, its ending, its relentlessness) we may see its reach exceeding its grasp. Which is not a dishonorable thing."***