Paul Thomas Anderson's "There Will Be Blood" received rapturous response when it was unveiled at a surprise screening held last night at Fantastic Fest in Texas. Looks like serious Oscars fare, considering it's already being compared to — can you believe it? — "Citizen Kane"!

Variety: "Certain to be rewarded with year-end accolades, Anderson's film is a true American saga — one that rivals 'Giant' and 'Citizen Kane' in our popular lore as origin stories about how we came to be the people we are. In 'The Treasure of the Sierra Madre,' it's not the gold that destroys men's souls but greed; in 'There Will Be Blood,' the commodity that drives the greed is oil." READ MORE

Cinematical: "This is a dark, compelling and effortlessly engrossing film, one bolstered by a lead performance that ranks among the very best of Lewis' impressive career. The film will most often be compared to Orson Welles' Citizen Kane, so I guess I can get the ball rolling on that particular crutch -- but it's also an apt comparison. Which is not to say that 'There Will Be Blood' will necessarily be dissected and revered 75 years from now, but the stories are certainly similar enough." REAM MORE

OK, OK, we get it — this movie's great. But how will it fare at the quirky Oscars, eh? "Citizen Kane" reaped many top bids in 1941, including shots at best pic, director and actor, but only won the screenplay prize. "Giant" lost 9 of its 10 nominations in 1956, but snagged best director for George Stevens. "Around the World in 80 Days" claimed best pic. Those comparisons bode well for "Blood" seeping into this year's race, but those notoriously squeamish academy members may have difficulty swallowing that title. Remember all of their fussing and squirming over another pic starring Daniel Day-Lewis: "Gangs of New York." It entered the 2002 derby as the best-pic frontrunner, nabbed 10 nominations, but got skunked on Oscar night.

(Paramount Vantage)