Nick Spino ua-cam.com/video/1c0nh_Bd5kg/v-deo.html Though in your mind, the movie’s closer to this: digg.com/video/someone-edited-the-lighthouse-into-a-spongebob-squarepants-episode
Jorrit Oudhof Same, you can’t diss an old lighthouse keepers lobster. That’d be like spitting on his pride. Rude bastard! I wish that Willam Defoe’s character killed him instead. Great movie though
This movie gave me huge respect for Pattinson, and he's truly proven himself to be a phenomenal actor, and I'm super excited to see what he will do with Batman.
If you want to gain more Pattinson respect, watch Good Time. It’s the movie that the Safdie Brother Made before Uncut Gems and ooh wee it’s good and so is Robert in it
The idea that "light" is instead the threat rather than the typical "darkness" is such a fantastic narrative play in my opinion. We as humans have so much positive connotations with illumination and just as many negatives with shadow, so there is almost something eerie and puzzling about reversing this concept....very *Lovecraftian*
BanterHyena I think you might need to look up the definition of Lovecraftian. As good as the lighthouse is, there aren't any real themes of human insignificance, cosmic alien gods or science being our downfall. There ARE themes of madness, forbidden knowledge and the unknown. But those ideas don't make something Lovecraftian by default. You can't just call a scary role reversal Lovecraftian because it's scary and unknowable. It's like saying the words Orwellian and Totalitarian are synonymous. Have an excellent day,
Acrons Cawlernc understood, I am well aware of what Lovecraftian is as a pseudo worshipper of his work. I understand the term’s implications of cosmic horror and the fear of the unknown but often the truth to the extra terrestrial life lurking in the stars is a “blinding truth” similarly to the light of the lighthouse. The tentacle imagery is a signature of his monsters too. Maybe it’s not a complete description of what the term means but it just idk I thought the idea of light being blinding was Lovecraftian Likewise, have a nice day
Il tell y’all something. I truly believe I have actually figured out the true meaning to a number of things in the film, this being one of them. It all seems to come together like Pattinson is in hell(or some type of it) and Proteus was planted there as a gaurd of heaven itself or specifically the Light, this makes sense when you read the script
Proteus is mentioned, as is Triton, and the anecdote about eating grass is a reference to the sea-god Glaucus, who was turned into a crusty-looking merman after eating some enchanted grass that made him fill with (erotic?) longing for the sea. In Plato, Glaucus and his barnacles are used as a metaphor for how the individual soul is swallowed by the material world and loses its identity. The Glaucus/Proteus/Triton archetype reinforces the film's theme that we all want to have our individual selves dissolved in the sea/sex/death.
YES THANK YOU that was totally what I was thinking at first! I watched a bunch explanation videos and for some reason they never said this. I just needed the whole greek mythologies links to piece it all together perfectly.
I don't know if the Lighthouse pretended to be smart, I think it aimed to be a carefully, caringly, cleverly crafted piece of cinema that really plays with it's audience minds to simulate a feeling of insanity and immense atmosphere.
I agree fully. It's a real piece of cinematic art, and as such, it's main purpose isn't to propose a thesis but to show us a story, largely through visual means. Not having a fully formed thesis seems like a pretty standard modernist approach. Human experience is fragmented and weird, you can't always determine meaning behind things, they just... are. And as such, art often attempts to just show us such fragments, without attempting to put them into a larger, more determined context, because that job remains to be done by the individual viewer.
@@viljamtheninja I think that maybe that the movie in trying to make any meaning true it takes away from the meaning that it might have. that isn't to say that movies have to have a definite meaning, or that they have to have some one theory that puts it all together in a neat little bow. Take the thing for example. the movie doesn't give a clear explanation for everything that happens, how does the thing do it's thing? where did it come from? is it really dead at the end of the film? but although the end is left open to interpretation, the lighthouse gives great atmosphere, some of the best in cinematic history, it used all the effects that it had to make us feel claustrophobic, it used the filter to disconnect us from what we saw, as i'm sure that most people can agree, most of the time it was hard to tell if what was happening on screen was real or not. the story however, felt like an episode of Flapjack, much of what was happening felt unreal, and it almost makes no sense, the more you watch it the less it makes sense, even knowing the symbolic background it is hard to find one idea of what any of it means. i think a show that takes it's symbolism on a different level is black mirror, it uses symbolism to give a clear meaning to things, while this film does the opposite, knowing the symbolic background and what the director used as inspiration doesn't make anything clearer. at the end of the film you can't extrapolate any meaning, what is the film trying to say? knowledge is dangerous? nature is dangerous? perhaps it is meant to take a Lovecraft turn to it, where there are things that we aren't meant to know. and their names, "old" and "young" perhaps they are in a never ending cycle, bound to the lighthouse for all eternity. then there are other things. why did young find the head in a crab trap, what meaning does that carry? or is it supposed to be taken literal, to tell us that the man died jumping off the cliff, or that someone threw him there. with all the symbolism it makes it impossible to know what any of it means. i think that i understand trying to make us find the meaning in it. in the witch, there was a real thought put into it, it was meant to give you an idea of what you should find. this doesn't have any of that, in making so much up for interpretation it makes a lot of it meaningless and comes off as a little pretentious, which is sad since i am sure that the director didn't want that and put a great deal of effort into this film. i think it's dumb. i guess it's probably just me.
@@viljamtheninja I think it has a theme and it's the insanity caused by struggle for power. Hence the greek myth imagery and story itself being a twisted story of Icarus
@@viljamtheninja I think it has a theme and it's the insanity caused by struggle for power. Hence the greek myth imagery and story itself being a twisted story of Icarus
@@loserscorner6746 Oh of course, it absolutely has a theme. I'm just saying it's not telling us exactly what conclusions to draw from it or what to "do about it". It's just showing us part of the reality of this sexuality-fueled power struggle.
I guess if Greek mythology has taught us anything, it's that the only difference between an Olympian, and a sociopathic madman that's drunk off his own power, is that one of them is immortal.
@@ummmthedestroyer thats when they finally break your mind and you make you forget he was about to fuck a dead fish lady and totally ruined the little mermaid movie for me now
Cwilliams1120 w Yeah when I rewatched it and the foghorn started playing I just got flashback and then I noticed how much they use it bc when you watch it it just gets drowned out
The one thing you missed in the mythology part was that Willem DaFoe is Proteus in this story, which also explains the shape shifting, and the hoarder of knowledge
Proteus was placed in this film intentionally and if you look hard enough it makes complete sense with the story, also Prometheus is mentioned on multiple occasions. After doing hours of research although still unclear i do believe that Proteus(Dafoe) was present on this island to test if Winslow has a good soul. He doesnt.
@@ahealthkit2745 The name 'Thomas' means twin. So maybe duality, two sides rather than two 'identicals' ; Old/young, love/hate, sex/death, fire&light/water?
The fart is known as a “power fart” it shows he’s able to do whatever he wants because he’s the boss. His first interaction with young is a fart, showing how old doesn’t need to respect young.
I feel like the aesthetic is really actually deep. They could've just filmed this in color, like they did with the vvitch (another movie Eggers filmed) but instead, they decided to film it in full black and white, on old film. They say this is just to fit in better with the time period, but I feel like it is also to do with the style of the film--the film is stark, it's dark, it's gloomy, it's depressing, it's violent. The black and white makes it that much more dramatic, it makes things more stark and real. The small aspect resembles the isolation and claustrophobia the two men must feel, stuck together like this on this island. We even see the claustrophobia in action as Ephiram is running away from the axe wielding Thomas, they're stuck together, unable to get away from each other, trapped on this small island in the middle of the dark sea. Heck, the box can even resemble the island, trapped on both sides by the dark sea. So, I feel like the aesthetic is deep.
Yes I agree. It even has role on their relationships. When Thomas feels insecure about his food he yells at Ephiram and stands up, but the camera doesn’t stand up with him, it stays at Ephiram’s level, to show the power dynamic. After Ephriam “spills his beans” the following shots leading up to the lighthouse are in a weird slow first person mode to make it feel really dream like and nightmarish. I think the the aesthetic really helps the film’s mood.
Also, since the movie is black and white, and the aspect ratio is lower, the black of the movie constantly mix with the black of the screen, creating strange proportions and increasing the weirdness of it all, which seems to be the point.
"The small aspect resembles the isolation and claustrophobia the two men must feel, stuck together like this on this island." Agree, and I would add "Nightmarish" to the mix. I once read this about Poe (seems to be a huge inspiration). ”The reader of Edgar Allen Poe never has the sense that anything exists outside the frame of his narratives. What they suggest is that the only thing beyond what our senses can perceive and our mind can fully comprehend is blackness, nothing. It is the same in those most atmospheric of experiences we all know - dreams.” Eggers seems to capture this feeling perfectly with the 1:1.19 AR IMO. Far from "dumb" - very far.
I agree as well. I feel that black and white utilized properly in modern film is also a tactic used to highlight a deeper, close intimacy in film. It had the same effect in ROMA, with Cuaron citing his use of it as a means of bringing out the texture as a reflection of the realness of the characters. Despite the fact that the whole film is fucking insane, it never once felt unbelievable, and I think the grounded textures provided by the black and white assisted that. It would've seemd really goofy and absurd a lot of the time in color, especially during the more surreal moments like with Dafoe becoming a coral-hentai boi or Pattinson banging mermaid shark junk. Overall, the film style provided a gritty, realized, and grounded feeling to the film, which aided those notions and themes of violence and sexuality.
I interpret the film as being more about the Prometheus myth than you give credit. I see it as a continuous life and death cycle for the two characters with no end, as punishments for Tom’s crime. The evidence is admittedly a little weak in spots, but hear me out- Young Tom, Old Tom, and the one-eyed bird could be the same being reincarnated. Young Tom arrives with a history (not immediately told) and no obvious physical deformities. When Young Tom falls from the ladder at the end, he seems to break his leg on the fall, then roll down the stairs. Old Tom has a limp throughout the film that isn’t reliably explained. This isn’t exact, but taking a close look at when Old Tom is killed, it seems that he receives an axe to the head on the left side of his face. The seagulls scar and dead eye are on the left side of its face. The seagull seems to harass Young Tom in particular, seemingly as a warning. When YT fell from the rope seat, he awoke to the seagull attacking his leg, which would later be broken by his fall from the ladder at the end of the film. If they are supposed to be reincarnations of each other, it would further cement the Prometheus allusion, as Tom is dying repeatedly after being driven insane on this island. A pretty harsh punishment for his crime. What doesn’t quite fit is that the head “previous lighthouse companion” of Old Tom is found in the lobster pot by YT, although (much like everything else in the film) it isn’t exactly clear who this is or even if it’s real. Anyway, this is just a crazy idea about the film, hope you enjoy!
I had a similar interpretation the first time I watched it - especially considering they both have the same name and both may have been responsible for someone else's death (Young's boss and Old's apprentice, mirroring one another).
The Oscar’s, Academy awards and really any form of awards aren’t about who’s good and who deserves them, it’s about popularity. The light house was probably overlooked by most people. I personally loved it.
@@HenryZhoupokemon Untrue. The Sixth Sense was recognised by the Academy. Plenty of other horror films made by or starring black people were also not recognised by the Academy. What's your point or can you at least enlighten us with your logic and analysis?
One of the meanings that the light house has with the shadow/light dynamic could be that knowledge or enlightenment is actually bad for humanity. If you think of the light itself as a symbol for enlightenment/power and the Shadow a symbol for naivety or innocence's and powerlessness, the film makes a classic Lovecraftian message about how men are not meant to know such things. But it takes a interesting spin with WHY men aren't allowed to know such things. As the film progresses Young becomes less innocent as a character and the lighting becomes more intense showing a parallel with the maturity of man as a species. This is why Old hordes his version of enlightenment away from young because he wants to establish his generation's way of thinking, the older one's, is the peak of knowledge. Put simply its a power dynamic. A way to control Young and make him do all of the hard work on the lighthouse while reaping the rewards. This is why young dies at the end of the film. Now that Old can"t stop him anymore, Young rushes to the lantern to claim his prize. But because he has been raised in a sense by Old to be dependent on him and hasn't earned the right to view the knowledge of the light. He is overwhelmed by it and he falls into oblivion. This message is that knowledge is a form of power that needs to be controlled by one. And given, just enough, to the ones beneath the holders to propel themselves. But the film shows how this will eventually lead to revolt, revolution, a power shift, then destruction. It's a warning about how knowledge/power must be and should be passed on otherwise humanity is doomed as a species. Power and knowledge must eventually change hands as long as man is mortal. It can be done peacefully, or it can lead to out downfall. Power and Knowledge must change hands or the result is Madness and Death.
Finally, someone brings up Schneider's _Hypnosis._ That was driving me nuts, because I recognized the imagery, but for the life of me couldn't remember the title.
you completely missed a major part of the movie: Winslow and Wake are depicted as one and the same person. they both take on the name "Thomas" which means "twin", they switch bunk beds, Wake in one scene smokes rolled up cigarettes while Winslow smokes Wake's pipe, there's tons of more clues like these that affirms the idea that this could be some sort of weird purgatory, or even a case of severe schizophrenia.. the film heavily implies that all the struggle is taking place for one and the same person.
To take it a step further, the double tom name is also a reference to an actual lighthouse incident. And the title "Lighthouse" may reference Edgar Allen Poe's incomplete final poem before death
The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the Deadly Light into the peace and safety of a new dark age
I was about to mention there being some possible Lovecraftian horror based undertones in there, given the aspects of going insane, or experiencing things that one can't fully comprehend.
When I watched it, I felt like the connections to mythology were really strong, but all of the eroticism felt so random and disjunct, yet SO important and obvious. Your guy's analysis really brings it together in a cohesive way! It made me like the movie a lot more when I finally found reasoning behind such a big theme in it. Thanks Wisecrack :)
Movies are first of all an audiovisual artform. In this particular movie the aesthetics are the point. And there's no real way to explain in words what's special about them. Like Eraserhead, The Lighthouse is about the nightmarish dream state it envokes.
@@bhavendujoshi3071 I totally thought so as well. Slightly unrelated there is a movie called "Pi" that was heavily inspired by Eraserhead, and is about a man trying to decode the mathematics at the core of existence and defining 'God' in a mathematical way and it gets pretty wild in a psychological way and I just couldn't stop thinking about Eraserhead and Pi while watching The lighthouse, all 3 good, unsettling psychological movies
The one eyed crow and dead guy especially reminded me of the Tell-Tale Heart. The narrator in that one was obsessed with a man with one fake eye and one real, killed him and buried him under the floorboards (like the dead man) but couldn't stop thinking of him. He had a fake eye and not a missing eye though so could be wrong.
I quit my job and rewatched this recently last month and found that the film is the perfect horror film about having a really shitty job and boss too for that matter lol. It of course has a ton of other interpretations that are all valid but I found it shockingly relatable to the claustrophobic nature of being in an office all day, getting gaslit by your boss who doesn't respect what you do, and just kind of losing one's mind in the relentless monotony of day-to-day labor. Again, a lot of ways to view all that, but it really is a great horror dry comedy about a shitty job imo. haha
This movie is two hours long but once the credits roles and I turned my lights on I genuinely felt like I’d been sitting there watching it for a week. Only movie to ever give me an out of body experience
8:07 “the nebulous line between sex and death...” Idk what type of sex y’all are having but it seems distinctly different from death from where I’m sitting.
I feel the goal of this movie was to finally do Lovecraft right. The tone set is one that so many directors miss the mark on when it comes to Lovecraft, either too subtle, or far too in your face. This film captures the feeling of a deep unknowable dread that you cannot plan for, nor intercept, just like a blanket of existential dread that you are acutely aware of but can do nothing about. The old man reminded me of Nyarlothotep (sp?) a shapeshifting eldritch being that takes on the form of man to lie, deceive, and sew madness/chaos in the world.
I love the performance and concept of isolation in this movie, coming from a Marine Corps veteran. The idea that one moment youre drinking, having a good time and then the pressure and anxiety of being so far from home and in an uncomfortable location stirs you insane moment after moment, while it takes holding on to the key factors of living to continue pushing forward
Yeah, I was nervous when I saw you giving this movie the Deep or Dumb treatment because... well... I quite liked this movie, lol. That said, I think "possibly deep, but not dumb" is pretty fair.
The Lighthouse is arguably one of the strangest movies I've ever seen in Pandemic. I remember getting depressed and isolated while seeing the movie, so seeing this film was like attending therapies on how to bear Quarantine days. Moreover, I could appreciate how talented Robert Pattinson was as an actor thanks to this movie. As a result, Pattinson made history playing The Batman's role.
It’s a scary movie for anyone who struggles with mental illness. I had a taste of thinking I was losing my mind when I caught Covid. That was one of the scary things about Covid, I was delusional, I would have moments of clarity and moments when I thought I was trying to figure out what was real or not…and I watched this movie. I remember thinking “my mind is not right, I just need to watch movies to keep my mind off of panicking over losing my mind.” And as I watched this movie I was thinking “damn, I don’t know how anyone could watch this if they struggled with mental illness…this scary in the state of mind I’m in.” So this was pretty deep in my opinion, and after experiencing a little mental illness myself, (if you can call it that because of Covid) this movie is scary. And sad too for anyone who has to suffer from mental illness.
What if pattinson was the sole person in the island all along? Thomas and ephraim are the two personalities that he has constructed in his mind that constantly fights with one another. One wants to conceal the crime he has committed and move on; the other wants to repent. The light might represent judgement of some kind. If he conceals the crime he is constantly reminded of his actions and thus it turns him mad. If he accept what he has done and touches the light, he should die, because he has nowhere to go back to. One scene even shows pattinson on top of the lighthouse, creeping behind the tied up body of himself. I don’t know, just a guess. 😅
My favourite part of the script: YOUNG walks to the unoccupied bed and sits down. As soon as he does, OLD FARTS about three feet away from YOUNG’S face. A deliberate display of power.
I saw this movie as a representation of man's relationship with God. Old Thomas and Young Thomas share the same name, as man was made in God's image. Old Thomas tracks Young Thomas' performance in a book, and at the end of his time at the lighthouse, Young Thomas will be judged by Old Thomas. Their tumultuous interactions are symbolic of the love/hate relationship between man and God. I feel like if you view the movie through this lens, a lot of things make sense, especially how after Young Thomas gazes upon the light (something that is not meant for the eyes of man, and which he only gains access to by "killing" God) he is cast down into the darkness, and must spend an eternity in suffering.
??? I've read Lovecraft and while its littered with tiny segments of Lovecraftian tropes, I really wouldn't call it Lovecraftian at all. Seems kind of pseudo-lovecraftian at most.
I also enjoyed the Proteus connection with Willem Dafoe's character, I feel it rounds out the Prometheus connection, even though they are loosely intertwined.
A mermaid found a swimming lad, Picked him up for her own, Pressed her body to his body, Laughed; and plunging down Forgot in cruel happiness That even lovers drown... -Yeats-
I absolutely loved this film. One (possibly) revealing question that my friend asked me as it concluded was, "Do you think they were really on an island?" I can see a reading of this movie as a punishment-in-afterlife for Pattinson's character, complete with physical and mental torture and a ride across in a boat. Worth unpacking.
Holy shit, I didn't even consider the boat part! That would make Wake (Old) an allegory or even a form of Charon, the ferryman from Inferno that leads to Purgatory.
I just thought of something:... The "Lobster" scene could mean that "Steak = Woman/Vagina" and "Lobster = Man/Penis"... He wanted a "steak", but since he doesn't have, he has to be satisfied with a "lobster", even when Winslow is too ashamed to assume it. "If I have a steak... I would >>> FUCK IT
That...might... be...right. I say this because Tom took the whole thing like a rejection of character like an overreacting teenager over text messages. The guy went on like a 5 min "fuck you Wilson" rant over dinner validation. Definitely some blue ball undertones.
"I've put in so many enigmas and puzzles that it will keep the professors busy for centuries arguing over what I meant, and that's the only way of ensuring one's immortality." - James Joyce
the characters are not unnamed or "old" and "young", through the dialogue their names are explicit: Thomas Wake and Ephraim Winslow/Thomas Howard. They have the same first name in a nod to multiple doppelgänger stories and more specifically to William Wilson by Edgar Allan Poe (author whose short story The Light-House was the basis for the first draft of this film)
@@PabloVostok Lol sure, dude. That's not what I was getting at. I know that that's their names in the movie. The fact still stands they're referred to as Young and Old in the script/interviews.
@@UnravelingThreads of course Eggers is going to refer to them in a production setting (like a script or an interview) in a less confusing way if they both have the same first name. their names are in the final product and are relevant to the story and the aesthetic Eggers wanted to convey so I don't see the point of not referring to them by their names, especially if the point of this video is discuss the symbolic, aesthetic and narrative elements of the film
@@PabloVostok Just because the director uses old and young to refer to the characters in an interview doesn't really mean that those are the only intended names. It just makes it easier to discuss the characters without using their full names, and without giving away the plot twist in the second half of the film. I agree with you though, there's definitely something important about the names of the characters. Ephraim Winslow even translates into Fruitful Friend. Why would Thomas kill a fruitful friend? Unless that was, metaphorically speaking, his own nature that he killed.
Sums up my feeling of the movie perfectly - it's undeniably well crafted and intentionally lacks a central thesis and in this particular case it makes the movie to me a teeny tiny bit lacking. A movie that manages to pull off its inconclusiveness is imho "The Draughtman's Contract" where inconclusion is the thesis.
this movie kinda saved my life. it made me realize lifes absurd. i thought i was crazy. lifes crazy and were all just trying to get by. made realize theres no reason to hate anybody and any good in my life is sheer dumb luck or my own actions. but bad things are unavoidable. they will happen period. alls i can do is my best to prepair for that. these 2 were so crazy it made me realize life is crazy xD i dont need to judge myself. thats for god assuming there is one. i believe there is but? that too is not in my control. i feel everybody is trying to cope with life. just do my best. all i can do. and theres no reason to judge them. they are stuck here just the same as i am. i also think theres enpugh beauty in life to make it worth trying. and things wont get better if we dont do something about it.
This is my theory on the lighthouse: The old man is the light, not just a weird old man who stumbled on this weird light, not Poseidon, he IS the light, maybe the lighthouse itself. Because he is the light he is able to manifest himself and give the young worker visions that make him slowly question his sanity. And the light has the pirmal purpose of just feeding on new people. It seems as if there's a high mortality rate on his boats, but it was always his passengers, not the old grizzled captain. It is possible that the captain is the fire that Prometheus delivered to humans from the promythean myth. So this knowledge manifested as fire shines as light and shows visions to Winslow and eventually make him crave the act of going to the light because it is knowledge. When he comes too close the light is much too strong and strips out his knowledge/sanity and leaves him for dead on the rocks below him. He was brain dead and the gulls proceeded to eat him. This knowledge/sanity would feed the light and make it stronger and satisfy it until the next soul comes by for him to strip. Everything is certain from winslow's view and he is an extremely accurate narrator because everything he sees is a vision created by the light. I don't believe the old man is the fire of prometheus, but its a podsibility.
I think it is more likely that young is Prometheus in this allegory. The lighthouse and it's light are the fire that young in constantly seeking to steal. The old man is the old Gods who desperately craves the love and worship of others. Gods are fickle, they punish and torment people yet still demand their love - much as old does. He craves it so much he allows young to get too close to him. Young is able to slay the old God and steal the light - for which he is punished in a manner very similar to Prometheus. In this case, he is dashed on the rocks and having his liver eaten by a seagull instead of an eagle. I see it as being entirely possible that old is also the mermaid - trying to get the young man's love in any way he can.
@@IvanHawkes I understand where you are coming from, but I don't agree that the old gods crave love and attention from mortals. They are selfish beings, but are focused and the dynamic between them and other gods. They simply use humans for quarrels against each other and most humans are only favored by gods if they are related to them or if those humans give a sacrifice to them. For example, in the Iliad all of the gods are described as going off to feast with the Ethiopians, who, to the greeks, lived on the edge of the world, and so were more divine and godly than the greeks and the people in the Mediterranean were. They were gone for two weeks. To me, that doesn't sound like gods who crave love and attention while also being cruel. They simply don't care about humans and don't need them. I use a story of the Greek gods as an example because Greek mythology seems to line up the most with this story, from the promythean themes to the mermaid/siren. That's why I believe the old man is some sort of entity or possibly and old God, but his motivation is simply to feed. The scene where the old man acts like a dog isn't embarrassing because to the light, it is simply stringing along Winslow to a script where, at the end, Winslow's soul/mind/knowledge is consumed by the light. I believe that this similar sequence of events has happened before, the light attracting the younger man and absorbing his soul, this film just shows us the story of one of the many times a man's soul/knowledge was consumed by the light house.
Honestly I read it as a text on the connection between ideals surrounding masculine virility and the worship of "hard work" culminating in the usurpation of the sacred "work" through violence, stealing fire from the gods.
The fact this movie didn't get the recognition it deserves is frankly criminal. Neither actor was even nominated for the Academy Award. It received one nomination, for cinematography, which frankly was deserved. But the performances by both actors are truly unbelievable. Both of them.
The loss of identity even outside of and in the power dynamics? No matter high or low, it still got lost in the film. I think this is a clever film. It tries to reach the abstract sublime experience Bataille wrote in the Story of the Eye. Maybe combine all the choices in the film and look at how its narrative be constructed, rather than separate all the aspects of it, will be closer to the film. But that wouldn't be a philosophical analysis, it will be a literary one. And literature doesn't really care about 'deep' or 'dumb'. It either works or it doesn't.
@elchema So what do you think about this episode or The Lighthouse. I mean, I usually don't leave comments but Jared said he wasn't sure he missed anything, so I gave my piece.
@elchema You're welcomed to give your own piece of opinion. This is how literary studies work which anyone can have their own interpretation. Or you just don't care enough to actually dive deep into the film? I don't know. Maybe you think Jared covered the part I wrote about? There was a decent literary angle when thug literature was around, but I understand not everyone cares how literary works. I don't think it's suitable to have such a crude cut into The Lighthouse, because the style was too strong and if you want to analyze 'separate' aspects when the audience clearly sees the work AS ONE WHOLE THING when they're watching the film. Yes. You can have a philosophical view of art, but you will encounter the problem postmodernism and deconstructionism which both reconsider how passage are delivered. Or you can explain what 'world view' was conveyed through a piece of are. However, the beginning of this film is tied together through a very obvious feature of square spaced camera. If you want to analyze it, you will have to explain certain effects of its aesthetics because if you don't, you're going to know how the whole thing works. Is this annoying? I don't think so. It's literature geek talk. Not everyone wants to get into. But the Internet is a place filled with all kinds of niches. And you're on the Internet...
I thought a big theme of the movie was the hierarchical relationship between a boss and an employee. Old made sure Young did the worst jobs and was constantly berating him for being lazy and not doing a good job. If I remember right, Young commented on this several times during their fights. Also, the fact that Young was responsible for the death of his previous boss lines up with this theme as well. Since Young was forbidden from watching the lighthouse itself, which seems to be the easiest part of the job, I think his desire for it represents a desire for more equality and recognition in the workplace. Either that or he wants the power Old has as the boss. Great video! The film can definitely have a lot of interpretations
My issue with this movie is sorta that there's TOO many interpretations one can take. There's certain themes, like the Promethesus & Proteus myths which are obviously very telling, as well as the painting, and there's definitely a sexual frustration side, but IDK if that was loneliness or homoeroticism or what, but I feel like it's too easy to run with it into something else entirely, and I guess to some that's good, but to me it makes me question what the point is, to some degree, IDK. I enjoyed it, it's certainly thought provoking, but in the end I like something a tad bit more hammered down.
At some point I just had the feeling of “this feels like how the shining should have felt” people talk about the shining like it was the apex predator of the horror kingdom. But this movie is just. I can not fucking credit it enough. I loved every single thing about this movie.
Producer: I hear you have an artistic movie for me? Screenwriter: Yes sir, I do. In this movie, I think we should have William Dafoe fap into the lamp of a lighthouse and the goop almost falls on Robert Pattinson’s head! Producer: ... What? Screenwriter: You know, the guy from Twilight. Then later, we see him fap to a figurine in pain. Producer: Well, that does sound like art and people like Twilight.
This sounds like a pretentious copout, but I've always seen this as immensely deep BECAUSE of it's ambiguity. It masterfully captures so many emotions, creating a unique atmosphere of tension and curiosity that leaves the viewer in awe and introspection.
The aesthetics parallel and convey the atmosphere and all kind of references to clasical themes. Totally meaningfull to me. The stunning fact of this movie is that you end up thinking a lot about many things and even enjoying the experience of talking about it long after you actually watched the movie. Is it "Dumb-funded" because does not fully articulate a thesis?...I don't think so. I did pretty much enjoy the performances and also went through many different feelings during the viewing (also humor). And as I said, i spent weeks discussing differents meanings. My girlfriend just came out with an interesting theory that comes to say that there is only one real character. Being the old man something like the consciousness that point the guilt of the young man. That the movie may makes you feel dumb does not mean that the movie itself is dumb.
watched this with my man two days ago and I'm still haunted by the mermaid puss puss but it honestly was such a great movie. Both of us were laughing, stunned but pleasantly quiet in thought by the end of it. Weird journey, can't wait to watch it again. Rob Pattinson is so underrated.
Defoe performance carried the movie. Pattinson has always been a fantastic actor, the comments make me sad a lot of people are just realizing it now. I recommend checking out some of his old movies, hes always been a fantastic actor.
Are y'all ever gonna do a video covering Avatar: The Last Airbender?! It's one of the most well written, emotional and philosophical shows I've ever seen.
I AGREE! M Night, is really underrated in his directorial style, so much so that the movie was buried. Though the show had good ideas, the writers weren't able to flesh them out due to their lack of experience. But in the movie, so much work and character went into the filming that it can genuinly be seen as a masterpiece. BRAVO! I say, BRAVISIMO!
@@Frankiigii oh I disagree. The show itself is awful in how it presents it's ideas. I mean, how could anyone find a person with a scarred face, AND a Hitler like personality likable. He never should've been redeemed, and he wasn't in my eyes. It's almost as bad as dragon ball. It missteps at every story, and the animation is weeaboo garbage. Shamalan brought depth to the world and characters. Every movie he makes is better than the last. I wait with baited breath for what could show up next. I wouldn't expect someone named "potato" to get it.
I’m a cartoonist and a mermaid that plays sea shanties on the banjo. My comics are like this movie. The minute it hit the theaters everyone from everywhere contacted me and said i needed to see it. I started to memorize the curse Willam cast when the young guy said he didn’t like his lobster. It needs to be a sea shanty and is my favorite monolog of all time.
Mad deep. Everything intensional even not having a specific answer for the end, but instead letting fans come up with almost infinite theory’s. If you had a specific ending to this movie it would take away a lot of the the awe and mystery.
@@ahealthkit2745 , could it be that film has nautical themes because story happens on a remote lighthouse? But the myth of Prometheus does not have such motives. And copying the picture of repressed homosexuality too. And the old man’s visit to Salem. And the problems of father and son. For that matter, the mermaids and other Lovecraftian things almost do not play a role in the film.
I agree. This film really is masterfully made in so many ways and I really, really wanted to love it. The acting is incredibly engrossing. The cinematography is gorgeous. The aesthetics are meticulously crafted. It's chock full of symbolism, but unfortunately at the end it just feels like a bunch of motifs without a theme as the video above states. I've read several theories for this movie, from a character study on isolation induced madness, to Ephraim being dead the whole time and Tom is God punishing him, to Ephraim being Prometheus and Tom being Proteus, etc. The problem is, all of these theories have evidence backing them up but they are largely mutually exclusive and all have their own flaws that keep them from fitting just right. For example, there's plenty of evidence that Ephraim is supposed to be Prometheus and the lighthouse is the fire. In the myth though, Prometheus didn't want the fire for himself, he wanted it for humanity. The fire represented knowledge of the scientific variety, not the spiritual or esoteric type, and Prometheus was willing to become the God's scapegoat in order to provide that knowledge to humans so they could lead an easier life. But Ephraim ISN'T selfless at all, the lighthouse does not seem to represent any knowledge of any kind, and Ephraim is not seeking it to help anyone. If anything, it plays out more like the story of Icarus than Prometheus; it's more about the dangers of pride than the dangers of knowledge. The Promethean motif is obviously there and throughout the movie, but to what end? There is so much going on in this movie, so much that it's saying, but it never commits to any one thing in particular. The director stated that he intentionally left the movie open to interpretation so audiences could pull their own meaning from it, but saying something can mean anything is just another way of saying it means nothing. Movies don't have to hold your hand through everything but they still need to actually be leading you somewhere. I loved The Lighthouse, but it just felt like a journey without a destination.
@@anagoth9 that is exactly the reason of my frustration. If The Lighthouse was a Dadaism-like film that would embrace meaninglessness behind human interaction and violence, I could get behind such an idea. But instead it promises something it's not going to deliver, and that's real shame.
The fact that it’s so hard to figure out what’s going on in the movie works to benefit the unnerving atmosphere. While you’re watching the small, black-and-white screen waiting to see the next moment of disturbing or bizarre imagery or behavior, you feel a constant feeling of dread that slowly builds into a feeling of inevitability, but you never fully understand what’s going on. You know exactly what the film literally showed you, but, somehow, the story itself is uncanny. You know that the lighthouse is far more than just a lighthouse, but you’re not sure if it is a god of light and love or a tower of madness and death, or perhaps even both. And yet, the movie never really shows it being more than just a building, and by the end you can’t help but wonder if you’ve gone crazy, since the main characters certainly have.
I didn't expect that conclusion. Since Jared loves David Lynch so much, and Lynch is the king of ambiguous storytelling, you'd figure Jared would love The Lighthouse's surreal Lynchian inconclusiveness. Personally, I keep thinking about this film and wanting to rewatch it because it's so wide open to interpretation. And from the perspective of a fan of Lovecraftian cosmic horror, this film rules.
I really liked that analysis, "are we saying they're gay? No, but we're not saying they aren't either", I feel like it's important to leave labels aside when it comes to explore human sexuality in media, instead of getting caught up with "straight" "gay" "bisexual" "heteroflexible" "pansexual" and all that shit we can actually focus in the psychology behind, for example, power dynamics.
This movie works as a horror movie with a lot of room for interpretation and deeper meaning as well as one of the very rare truly lovecraftian movies (so far I only really found annihilation to be another one high up on that list). For that alone I highly enjoyed it
the fact that everything is so purposeful makes this movie impossible to dismiss. They shot on lenses made just for this film, the script is airtight, actors had to move based on the camera instead of vice versa. this film is pretty much the polar opposite of a modern Judd Apatow or Paul Fieg movie where a bunch of cameras are just rolling on actors improvising just so they have enough footage to work with in the editing room.
The process of the film's development makes it impossible for the end result to be meaningless. Every shot has to be dripping with purpose in a production like this.
It's easily one of the most expertly-crafted, beautiful, aesthetic, and well-acted films in decades. Who cares if it's deep. I just know I'll watch it a million times.
Because the most important Component of books and cinema are stories , and this director\writer happens to be grossly incompetent in the one factor that matters. Yes the acting , production, cinematography are top notch, but it’s a movie for dense idiots who don’t demand to be challenged intellectually. Liking this movie means that you are a simple minded consumer
@@severketorskeleton3759 there is nothing to interpret. In real movies, there are certain inalienable messages, themes, questions which get asked and which once seen, cannot be forgotten. I have since making this comment and watching the movie not long ago, already completely forgotten the story of this meaningless drivel. Ultimately, as I said the movie is a compelling, intriguing, well shot, well acted film, that ultimately insults the viewers by never actually going anywhere, asking any profound questions, or having an ending that is satisfying, horrifying or baffling. It just ends with stupidity. For stupid people, this is enough
@@HelloSpyMyLie if you see yourself as someone grand enough to judge other people like that, then so be it, but if you haven't even interpreted anything from the movie then all I see in you is the stupid people you say this movie was made for.
small correction: knitting was originally a man's activity, specifically sailors knit on ships since wool is naturally warm, antimicrobial, and repels water. while the activity connotes femininity and domesticity today, historically knitting was a solidly masculine skill.
Not in Native American and many other cultures, knitting has been feminine in the west even in the 18th century, refer to any 18th or 19th century novels for evidence.
Old's sea-creature transformed state resembles the titular sea monster from Albrecht Durer's 'The Sea Monster', and is possibly meant to resemble or be Glaucus, a greek mythic figure who didn't expressly have tentacles that I'm aware of, he was more part human and part a big fish.
I like movies that forgo having a definite thesis in order to just sort of meditate on certain subjects. It's like the filmmaker's saying they don't have all the answers but that they're still going to try to communicate their observations in a way that will help people to think about things themselves, perhaps from a new point of view. Ideally I feel like each person's reaction to the movie will reflect their own unique perspective on the subjects that are explored.
This is the perfect quarantine movie.
“How long have we been here? 2 days? 5 weeks? Help me to recollect”
Did you see good time?
Haha I was literally saying that exact quote to my mum the other day, it is honestly how I feel
Haven't had a drop of alcohol in a month. I might just start drinking gasoline
@@alexsilva28 ohh dearrr can you not just pop to the shop or order of amazon?? Yeah the booze has made it a lot more tolerable for me 🙄
Every day is a Friday, minus the paycheck, and the ability to go out.
“You’re fond of me cinematography, ain’t ye, Oscar?”
Oscar: How could I possibly like the shit you fix us for the award season?
Alex Silva
“You’re drunk, Oscar! You’re drunk! You’re drunk!”
? I’m confused someone explain why the film or the acting would get an oscar. It was definitely above average but nothing special
Nick Spino
ua-cam.com/video/1c0nh_Bd5kg/v-deo.html
Though in your mind, the movie’s closer to this: digg.com/video/someone-edited-the-lighthouse-into-a-spongebob-squarepants-episode
@@TheNickdog573 Nothing special ? Could you define the word special in your own words please ?^^
"Yer fond of me lobster aint ye?"
Nick Ng I actually found that hearthbreaking😢
@@jorritoudhof2768 lmao, that line sounds like he's asking about his dick
Jorrit Oudhof
Same, you can’t diss an old lighthouse keepers lobster. That’d be like spitting on his pride. Rude bastard! I wish that Willam Defoe’s character killed him instead. Great movie though
He was legit so hurt. Many a marriage therapist watching were shaking their heads so hard
@@joshuamanjarrez6321 According to some interviews with the cast, it was subtext for exactly that
Mermaids have also led people to drink overpriced coffee.
Not to mention excessive coffee-flavored drinks that are 10x more sugar than caffeine.
Lmao💀💀
Up you go sir
My god, he's right
U mean Starbucks it took me a while to get it 😂😂
This movie gave me huge respect for Pattinson, and he's truly proven himself to be a phenomenal actor, and I'm super excited to see what he will do with Batman.
the dumbass refuses to workout for the role..so ..yeah
@@sebmeister67 Haha yeah I heard that too, but I doubt that he's gonna be in the movie lookin like Jonah Hill..I hope
Ammar I. Borovnica watch good time or high life! Those are great as well
@@sebmeister67 he was joking that's how he is, he has been spotted working out. He is a goofball probably Matt Reeves told him to be a lean Batman.
If you want to gain more Pattinson respect, watch Good Time. It’s the movie that the Safdie Brother Made before Uncut Gems and ooh wee it’s good and so is Robert in it
The idea that "light" is instead the threat rather than the typical "darkness" is such a fantastic narrative play in my opinion. We as humans have so much positive connotations with illumination and just as many negatives with shadow, so there is almost something eerie and puzzling about reversing this concept....very *Lovecraftian*
it's not a super uncommon trope reversal, but I rarely see it done wrong!
Agreed, it's the norm for movies to fade to black for the ending but when they end in a favor white that always engages me more
slick vick like a flash bang
BanterHyena I think you might need to look up the definition of Lovecraftian.
As good as the lighthouse is, there aren't any real themes of human insignificance, cosmic alien gods or science being our downfall. There ARE themes of madness, forbidden knowledge and the unknown. But those ideas don't make something Lovecraftian by default. You can't just call a scary role reversal Lovecraftian because it's scary and unknowable. It's like saying the words Orwellian and Totalitarian are synonymous. Have an excellent day,
Acrons Cawlernc understood, I am well aware of what Lovecraftian is as a pseudo worshipper of his work. I understand the term’s implications of cosmic horror and the fear of the unknown but often the truth to the extra terrestrial life lurking in the stars is a “blinding truth” similarly to the light of the lighthouse. The tentacle imagery is a signature of his monsters too. Maybe it’s not a complete description of what the term means but it just idk I thought the idea of light being blinding was Lovecraftian
Likewise, have a nice day
“Learned that the seagull is Team Jacob” that blindsided me and I ended up laughing way too hard
#TeamEdward4Lyf
OMG SAME i was about to write a comment about how much I laughed at that lol
Funniest thing i have ever heard in wiscrack
I had to rewind because I wasn’t sure I heard it right then literally laughed out loud in my apartment!
Jacob who? Sorry I'm stupid
13:23 Willem Dafoe’s character also shares similarities with Proteus “the old man of the sea” who was a notorious shapeshifter.
He didn't even go into such a obvious mythological reference.
Il tell y’all something. I truly believe I have actually figured out the true meaning to a number of things in the film, this being one of them. It all seems to come together like Pattinson is in hell(or some type of it) and Proteus was planted there as a gaurd of heaven itself or specifically the Light, this makes sense when you read the script
Proteus is mentioned, as is Triton, and the anecdote about eating grass is a reference to the sea-god Glaucus, who was turned into a crusty-looking merman after eating some enchanted grass that made him fill with (erotic?) longing for the sea. In Plato, Glaucus and his barnacles are used as a metaphor for how the individual soul is swallowed by the material world and loses its identity. The Glaucus/Proteus/Triton archetype reinforces the film's theme that we all want to have our individual selves dissolved in the sea/sex/death.
YES THANK YOU that was totally what I was thinking at first! I watched a bunch explanation videos and for some reason they never said this. I just needed the whole greek mythologies links to piece it all together perfectly.
Also Young bears a lot of resemblance to Sisyphus, pushing all that coal up that rock and having to do it endlessly.
I don't know if the Lighthouse pretended to be smart, I think it aimed to be a carefully, caringly, cleverly crafted piece of cinema that really plays with it's audience minds to simulate a feeling of insanity and immense atmosphere.
I agree fully. It's a real piece of cinematic art, and as such, it's main purpose isn't to propose a thesis but to show us a story, largely through visual means.
Not having a fully formed thesis seems like a pretty standard modernist approach. Human experience is fragmented and weird, you can't always determine meaning behind things, they just... are. And as such, art often attempts to just show us such fragments, without attempting to put them into a larger, more determined context, because that job remains to be done by the individual viewer.
@@viljamtheninja I think that maybe that the movie in trying to make any meaning true it takes away from the meaning that it might have. that isn't to say that movies have to have a definite meaning, or that they have to have some one theory that puts it all together in a neat little bow. Take the thing for example. the movie doesn't give a clear explanation for everything that happens, how does the thing do it's thing? where did it come from? is it really dead at the end of the film? but although the end is left open to interpretation, the lighthouse gives great atmosphere, some of the best in cinematic history, it used all the effects that it had to make us feel claustrophobic, it used the filter to disconnect us from what we saw, as i'm sure that most people can agree, most of the time it was hard to tell if what was happening on screen was real or not. the story however, felt like an episode of Flapjack, much of what was happening felt unreal, and it almost makes no sense, the more you watch it the less it makes sense, even knowing the symbolic background it is hard to find one idea of what any of it means. i think a show that takes it's symbolism on a different level is black mirror, it uses symbolism to give a clear meaning to things, while this film does the opposite, knowing the symbolic background and what the director used as inspiration doesn't make anything clearer. at the end of the film you can't extrapolate any meaning, what is the film trying to say? knowledge is dangerous? nature is dangerous? perhaps it is meant to take a Lovecraft turn to it, where there are things that we aren't meant to know. and their names, "old" and "young" perhaps they are in a never ending cycle, bound to the lighthouse for all eternity. then there are other things. why did young find the head in a crab trap, what meaning does that carry? or is it supposed to be taken literal, to tell us that the man died jumping off the cliff, or that someone threw him there. with all the symbolism it makes it impossible to know what any of it means. i think that i understand trying to make us find the meaning in it. in the witch, there was a real thought put into it, it was meant to give you an idea of what you should find. this doesn't have any of that, in making so much up for interpretation it makes a lot of it meaningless and comes off as a little pretentious, which is sad since i am sure that the director didn't want that and put a great deal of effort into this film. i think it's dumb. i guess it's probably just me.
@@viljamtheninja I think it has a theme and it's the insanity caused by struggle for power. Hence the greek myth imagery and story itself being a twisted story of Icarus
@@viljamtheninja I think it has a theme and it's the insanity caused by struggle for power. Hence the greek myth imagery and story itself being a twisted story of Icarus
@@loserscorner6746 Oh of course, it absolutely has a theme. I'm just saying it's not telling us exactly what conclusions to draw from it or what to "do about it". It's just showing us part of the reality of this sexuality-fueled power struggle.
I guess if Greek mythology has taught us anything, it's that the only difference between an Olympian, and a sociopathic madman that's drunk off his own power, is that one of them is immortal.
The foghorn still haunts me to this day
I think it was played sooo much in the movie to make you subconsciously loose your mind while watching just like the character
The only thing i took out of this movie was...mermaid vagina.
@@ummmthedestroyer thats when they finally break your mind and you make you forget he was about to fuck a dead fish lady and totally ruined the little mermaid movie for me now
Sea birds still be a haunting me.. best not to stir with one.
Cwilliams1120 w Yeah when I rewatched it and the foghorn started playing I just got flashback and then I noticed how much they use it bc when you watch it it just gets drowned out
I had the flu two days after watching this, and had the most horrifying feverish dream involving it.
Watching it I felt as I was falling into madness.
I'm jealous of your dream
That was the movie lol
Was... was there a mermaid in that dream?
@@shanemontz8009 it had no mermaid, but a lot of Willem Dafoe laughing in horrific ways 😒
Isn’t this the Flapjack Movie?
Yes yes it is
Oh my god that makes complete sense
i was going to say the same thing lmao
Finally, someone's brave enough to talk about the latent sexuality in the Misadventures of Flapjack.
Oh, it is...
Your fond of me lobster aren’t ye?
Seconds later: HARRRRRRRRRRRRRRKKKKKKKKK
T R I T O N
Underrated comment💕
“A beautiful serene experience” “AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH”
Hahahahaha
Young and old yelling "What" at each other is actual footage of my manic and depressive sides
The one thing you missed in the mythology part was that Willem DaFoe is Proteus in this story, which also explains the shape shifting, and the hoarder of knowledge
He also neglects to point out that both Dafoe and Pattison's characters have the first name Thomas.
Proteus was placed in this film intentionally and if you look hard enough it makes complete sense with the story, also Prometheus is mentioned on multiple occasions. After doing hours of research although still unclear i do believe that Proteus(Dafoe) was present on this island to test if Winslow has a good soul. He doesnt.
@@XDarkBrotherhoodHD William Dafoe talks about protoes when he's being buried
CGIJokerman ya thats one of the few sequences of dialogue i havent had the opportunity to read through, thats a good catch, supports my “theory”
@@ahealthkit2745 The name 'Thomas' means twin.
So maybe duality, two sides rather than two 'identicals' ; Old/young, love/hate, sex/death, fire&light/water?
I’m sorry if William Dafoe farting isn’t deep, I don’t know what is.
Shallow farts, deep meaning.
anyone who saw the intro to Antichrist knows how deep he goes 😶
The fart is known as a “power fart” it shows he’s able to do whatever he wants because he’s the boss. His first interaction with young is a fart, showing how old doesn’t need to respect young.
Best comment
I feel like the aesthetic is really actually deep. They could've just filmed this in color, like they did with the vvitch (another movie Eggers filmed) but instead, they decided to film it in full black and white, on old film. They say this is just to fit in better with the time period, but I feel like it is also to do with the style of the film--the film is stark, it's dark, it's gloomy, it's depressing, it's violent. The black and white makes it that much more dramatic, it makes things more stark and real. The small aspect resembles the isolation and claustrophobia the two men must feel, stuck together like this on this island. We even see the claustrophobia in action as Ephiram is running away from the axe wielding Thomas, they're stuck together, unable to get away from each other, trapped on this small island in the middle of the dark sea. Heck, the box can even resemble the island, trapped on both sides by the dark sea. So, I feel like the aesthetic is deep.
Yes I agree. It even has role on their relationships. When Thomas feels insecure about his food he yells at Ephiram and stands up, but the camera doesn’t stand up with him, it stays at Ephiram’s level, to show the power dynamic. After Ephriam “spills his beans” the following shots leading up to the lighthouse are in a weird slow first person mode to make it feel really dream like and nightmarish. I think the the aesthetic really helps the film’s mood.
You basically just reiterated everything Jared already said about the aesthetic
Also, since the movie is black and white, and the aspect ratio is lower, the black of the movie constantly mix with the black of the screen, creating strange proportions and increasing the weirdness of it all, which seems to be the point.
"The small aspect resembles the isolation and claustrophobia the two men must feel, stuck together like this on this island." Agree, and I would add "Nightmarish" to the mix. I once read this about Poe (seems to be a huge inspiration).
”The reader of Edgar Allen Poe never has the sense that anything exists outside the frame of his narratives. What they suggest is that the only thing beyond what our senses can perceive and our mind can fully comprehend is blackness, nothing. It is the same in those most atmospheric of experiences we all know - dreams.”
Eggers seems to capture this feeling perfectly with the 1:1.19 AR IMO.
Far from "dumb" - very far.
I agree as well. I feel that black and white utilized properly in modern film is also a tactic used to highlight a deeper, close intimacy in film. It had the same effect in ROMA, with Cuaron citing his use of it as a means of bringing out the texture as a reflection of the realness of the characters. Despite the fact that the whole film is fucking insane, it never once felt unbelievable, and I think the grounded textures provided by the black and white assisted that. It would've seemd really goofy and absurd a lot of the time in color, especially during the more surreal moments like with Dafoe becoming a coral-hentai boi or Pattinson banging mermaid shark junk. Overall, the film style provided a gritty, realized, and grounded feeling to the film, which aided those notions and themes of violence and sexuality.
I interpret the film as being more about the Prometheus myth than you give credit. I see it as a continuous life and death cycle for the two characters with no end, as punishments for Tom’s crime. The evidence is admittedly a little weak in spots, but hear me out-
Young Tom, Old Tom, and the one-eyed bird could be the same being reincarnated. Young Tom arrives with a history (not immediately told) and no obvious physical deformities. When Young Tom falls from the ladder at the end, he seems to break his leg on the fall, then roll down the stairs. Old Tom has a limp throughout the film that isn’t reliably explained. This isn’t exact, but taking a close look at when Old Tom is killed, it seems that he receives an axe to the head on the left side of his face. The seagulls scar and dead eye are on the left side of its face. The seagull seems to harass Young Tom in particular, seemingly as a warning. When YT fell from the rope seat, he awoke to the seagull attacking his leg, which would later be broken by his fall from the ladder at the end of the film.
If they are supposed to be reincarnations of each other, it would further cement the Prometheus allusion, as Tom is dying repeatedly after being driven insane on this island. A pretty harsh punishment for his crime.
What doesn’t quite fit is that the head “previous lighthouse companion” of Old Tom is found in the lobster pot by YT, although (much like everything else in the film) it isn’t exactly clear who this is or even if it’s real.
Anyway, this is just a crazy idea about the film, hope you enjoy!
I had a similar interpretation the first time I watched it - especially considering they both have the same name and both may have been responsible for someone else's death (Young's boss and Old's apprentice, mirroring one another).
Certainly one of the best interpretations I've read so far. Bravo
I wonder if "the previous companion" was actually young Tom, aka himself.
You've blown my mind
Yeah, I think he nailed it. Good job.
My favourite film from 2019...can’t believe Wilem Dafoe wasn’t nominated for an oscar..
The Oscar’s, Academy awards and really any form of awards aren’t about who’s good and who deserves them, it’s about popularity. The light house was probably overlooked by most people. I personally loved it.
Its cause it's a horror movie. The academy refuses to acknowledge the genre.
Jordan Collis unless it’s about black people
@@HenryZhoupokemon Untrue. The Sixth Sense was recognised by the Academy.
Plenty of other horror films made by or starring black people were also not recognised by the Academy.
What's your point or can you at least enlighten us with your logic and analysis?
Jordan Collis...well did it get an oscar nod for Cinematography but I see your point...Horror films are held in lower regard imo..
One of the meanings that the light house has with the shadow/light dynamic could be that knowledge or enlightenment is actually bad for humanity. If you think of the light itself as a symbol for enlightenment/power and the Shadow a symbol for naivety or innocence's and powerlessness, the film makes a classic Lovecraftian message about how men are not meant to know such things. But it takes a interesting spin with WHY men aren't allowed to know such things.
As the film progresses Young becomes less innocent as a character and the lighting becomes more intense showing a parallel with the maturity of man as a species. This is why Old hordes his version of enlightenment away from young because he wants to establish his generation's way of thinking, the older one's, is the peak of knowledge. Put simply its a power dynamic. A way to control Young and make him do all of the hard work on the lighthouse while reaping the rewards.
This is why young dies at the end of the film. Now that Old can"t stop him anymore, Young rushes to the lantern to claim his prize. But because he has been raised in a sense by Old to be dependent on him and hasn't earned the right to view the knowledge of the light. He is overwhelmed by it and he falls into oblivion.
This message is that knowledge is a form of power that needs to be controlled by one. And given, just enough, to the ones beneath the holders to propel themselves. But the film shows how this will eventually lead to revolt, revolution, a power shift, then destruction. It's a warning about how knowledge/power must be and should be passed on otherwise humanity is doomed as a species.
Power and knowledge must eventually change hands as long as man is mortal. It can be done peacefully, or it can lead to out downfall. Power and Knowledge must change hands or the result is Madness and Death.
Another note, we take lessons from our fathers but fail to question why.
are you saying Old is a fucking boomer
excellent analysis.
Add to the movie's one-eyed imagery which can be a reference to Odin and how he sacrificed his eye for all the knowledge in the universe.
This helped me better than any vedio 😅
The only thing that is between Fear and Sex is Fünf.
What you did there? I see it.
@Lord Jello Cheeks was?
I see, Ben.
vier und sechs?
And then there's Semen
"Then Young finally get to see the light, which is a beautiful serene experience!"
*_"AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA_*
lol “the bird is team jacob”
My reaction was "wow, why use such a dumb, outdated refere--Ohhh, right, I get it."
Actually died laughing
@@koolgool lol I thought it was a lost reference and just realized the joke bc those vampires movies pretty much never existed to me
@@hatruong5219 lol, I'm amused that you thought it was a Lost reference. I could see that.
Earthling Cinema joke vacationing in Deep or Dumb
Finally, someone brings up Schneider's _Hypnosis._ That was driving me nuts, because I recognized the imagery, but for the life of me couldn't remember the title.
It accomplishes the rare thing that ambiguous arthouse films can do: even if you don't really understand it, it's still quite enjoyable.
I think PTA and Kubrick do that kind of thing way better tho
you completely missed a major part of the movie: Winslow and Wake are depicted as one and the same person. they both take on the name "Thomas" which means "twin", they switch bunk beds, Wake in one scene smokes rolled up cigarettes while Winslow smokes Wake's pipe, there's tons of more clues like these that affirms the idea that this could be some sort of weird purgatory, or even a case of severe schizophrenia.. the film heavily implies that all the struggle is taking place for one and the same person.
To take it a step further, the double tom name is also a reference to an actual lighthouse incident. And the title "Lighthouse" may reference Edgar Allen Poe's incomplete final poem before death
Maybe “Light is dangerous” = dangerous knowledge (Lovecraftian inversion of Plato) (?)
The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the Deadly Light into the peace and safety of a new dark age
Ah,I see you’re a man of culture too
@@cthulhu4607 what?
I was about to mention there being some possible Lovecraftian horror based undertones in there, given the aspects of going insane, or experiencing things that one can't fully comprehend.
LudicrousKid,it’s a quote from H.P. Lovecraft
When I watched it, I felt like the connections to mythology were really strong, but all of the eroticism felt so random and disjunct, yet SO important and obvious. Your guy's analysis really brings it together in a cohesive way! It made me like the movie a lot more when I finally found reasoning behind such a big theme in it. Thanks Wisecrack :)
Movies are first of all an audiovisual artform. In this particular movie the aesthetics are the point. And there's no real way to explain in words what's special about them. Like Eraserhead, The Lighthouse is about the nightmarish dream state it envokes.
Can't agree with you more. The similarities between lighthouse and erasergead are quite certain
@@bhavendujoshi3071 I totally thought so as well. Slightly unrelated there is a movie called "Pi" that was heavily inspired by Eraserhead, and is about a man trying to decode the mathematics at the core of existence and defining 'God' in a mathematical way and it gets pretty wild in a psychological way and I just couldn't stop thinking about Eraserhead and Pi while watching The lighthouse, all 3 good, unsettling psychological movies
Both movies basically end with the character embracing the light too, that stuck out to me
The Lighthouse: The Flapjack movie directed by David Lynch.
The one eyed crow and dead guy especially reminded me of the Tell-Tale Heart. The narrator in that one was obsessed with a man with one fake eye and one real, killed him and buried him under the floorboards (like the dead man) but couldn't stop thinking of him. He had a fake eye and not a missing eye though so could be wrong.
I quit my job and rewatched this recently last month and found that the film is the perfect horror film about having a really shitty job and boss too for that matter lol. It of course has a ton of other interpretations that are all valid but I found it shockingly relatable to the claustrophobic nature of being in an office all day, getting gaslit by your boss who doesn't respect what you do, and just kind of losing one's mind in the relentless monotony of day-to-day labor. Again, a lot of ways to view all that, but it really is a great horror dry comedy about a shitty job imo. haha
Have you found a better job? I gave your comment a thumbs up!
Hey Jared, HEY JARED!!
Why'd ya spill your beans?
This movie is two hours long but once the credits roles and I turned my lights on I genuinely felt like I’d been sitting there watching it for a week. Only movie to ever give me an out of body experience
"Upon learning that the seagull is Team Jacob..."
That killed me
THE LIGHTHOUSE: Is It Deep or Dumb?
Little girl: "WHY CAN'T WE HAVE BOTH?"
Crowd cheers...
@Tommy Salami heh =D
Exactly opposite to *brokeback mountain*
Because one was a mountain and the other a lighthouse?
I mean the guy almost came on the other guy...
Yes this is 10k slow burn enemies to kinda lovers
how this movie wasn't nominated for best picture, best screenplay, best directing, and best acting i will never know.
Not gonna lie, when I saw the first trailer for it. I watched it like 80 times that day.
8:07 “the nebulous line between sex and death...”
Idk what type of sex y’all are having but it seems distinctly different from death from where I’m sitting.
I feel the goal of this movie was to finally do Lovecraft right. The tone set is one that so many directors miss the mark on when it comes to Lovecraft, either too subtle, or far too in your face. This film captures the feeling of a deep unknowable dread that you cannot plan for, nor intercept, just like a blanket of existential dread that you are acutely aware of but can do nothing about.
The old man reminded me of Nyarlothotep (sp?) a shapeshifting eldritch being that takes on the form of man to lie, deceive, and sew madness/chaos in the world.
Well written
I love the performance and concept of isolation in this movie, coming from a Marine Corps veteran. The idea that one moment youre drinking, having a good time and then the pressure and anxiety of being so far from home and in an uncomfortable location stirs you insane moment after moment, while it takes holding on to the key factors of living to continue pushing forward
Yeah, I was nervous when I saw you giving this movie the Deep or Dumb treatment because... well... I quite liked this movie, lol. That said, I think "possibly deep, but not dumb" is pretty fair.
You CANT say no pun intended when you wrote the script earlier
The Lighthouse is arguably one of the strangest movies I've ever seen in Pandemic. I remember getting depressed and isolated while seeing the movie, so seeing this film was like attending therapies on how to bear Quarantine days. Moreover, I could appreciate how talented Robert Pattinson was as an actor thanks to this movie. As a result, Pattinson made history playing The Batman's role.
It’s a scary movie for anyone who struggles with mental illness. I had a taste of thinking I was losing my mind when I caught Covid. That was one of the scary things about Covid, I was delusional, I would have moments of clarity and moments when I thought I was trying to figure out what was real or not…and I watched this movie. I remember thinking “my mind is not right, I just need to watch movies to keep my mind off of panicking over losing my mind.” And as I watched this movie I was thinking “damn, I don’t know how anyone could watch this if they struggled with mental illness…this scary in the state of mind I’m in.” So this was pretty deep in my opinion, and after experiencing a little mental illness myself, (if you can call it that because of Covid) this movie is scary. And sad too for anyone who has to suffer from mental illness.
What if pattinson was the sole person in the island all along? Thomas and ephraim are the two personalities that he has constructed in his mind that constantly fights with one another. One wants to conceal the crime he has committed and move on; the other wants to repent. The light might represent judgement of some kind. If he conceals the crime he is constantly reminded of his actions and thus it turns him mad. If he accept what he has done and touches the light, he should die, because he has nowhere to go back to. One scene even shows pattinson on top of the lighthouse, creeping behind the tied up body of himself. I don’t know, just a guess. 😅
Good theory
As mcuh as I like Wisecrack, I think we have to remember just because something is not deep, does not mean it is necessarily dumb.
That’s exactly what is said in the video
My favourite part of the script:
YOUNG walks to the unoccupied bed and sits down. As soon as
he does, OLD FARTS about three feet away from YOUNG’S face. A
deliberate display of power.
so glad that “farts” is accidentally capitalised . really enhances the excerpt
I saw this movie as a representation of man's relationship with God. Old Thomas and Young Thomas share the same name, as man was made in God's image. Old Thomas tracks Young Thomas' performance in a book, and at the end of his time at the lighthouse, Young Thomas will be judged by Old Thomas. Their tumultuous interactions are symbolic of the love/hate relationship between man and God. I feel like if you view the movie through this lens, a lot of things make sense, especially how after Young Thomas gazes upon the light (something that is not meant for the eyes of man, and which he only gains access to by "killing" God) he is cast down into the darkness, and must spend an eternity in suffering.
uhhh which god? LOL.
Oh........ that actually is quite the fit description.
@@davemoore7808 Maybe because "God is dead" for those people xD.
Ok this is the best explanation I read. Saved the movie for me. Cause I thought this was the dumbest movie I've seen😃
Am I the only one who felt this was a Lovecraftian story?
??? I've read Lovecraft and while its littered with tiny segments of Lovecraftian tropes, I really wouldn't call it Lovecraftian at all. Seems kind of pseudo-lovecraftian at most.
@@cgijokerman5787 it dosent involve cosmic horror I know, but I still possibly see some of the “fear of the unknown”
I also enjoyed the Proteus connection with Willem Dafoe's character, I feel it rounds out the Prometheus connection, even though they are loosely intertwined.
A mermaid found a swimming lad,
Picked him up for her own,
Pressed her body to his body,
Laughed; and plunging down
Forgot in cruel happiness
That even lovers drown...
-Yeats-
I absolutely loved this film. One (possibly) revealing question that my friend asked me as it concluded was, "Do you think they were really on an island?" I can see a reading of this movie as a punishment-in-afterlife for Pattinson's character, complete with physical and mental torture and a ride across in a boat. Worth unpacking.
Holy shit, I didn't even consider the boat part!
That would make Wake (Old) an allegory or even a form of Charon, the ferryman from Inferno that leads to Purgatory.
I just thought of something:...
The "Lobster" scene could mean that "Steak = Woman/Vagina" and "Lobster = Man/Penis"...
He wanted a "steak", but since he doesn't have, he has to be satisfied with a "lobster", even when Winslow is too ashamed to assume it.
"If I have a steak... I would >>> FUCK IT
That...might... be...right.
I say this because Tom took the whole thing like a rejection of character like an overreacting teenager over text messages.
The guy went on like a 5 min "fuck you Wilson" rant over dinner validation.
Definitely some blue ball undertones.
That ending with the light is an amazing shot. The sound design of Wakes screaming and lighting really makes it feel unreal..
I’ve watched and studied this film at least 20 times yet I still found myself looking for more meaning in the film.
Very creative process
"Let Neptune strike yer Winslow, Harkkkk!"
My damned fav line.
Have it your way, I like yer lobster
"I've put in so many enigmas and puzzles that it will keep the professors busy for centuries arguing over what I meant, and that's the only way of ensuring one's immortality."
- James Joyce
Mr. Krabbs keeps his secret recipe in the wet-ass lighthoussy.
the characters are not unnamed or "old" and "young", through the dialogue their names are explicit: Thomas Wake and Ephraim Winslow/Thomas Howard. They have the same first name in a nod to multiple doppelgänger stories and more specifically to William Wilson by Edgar Allan Poe (author whose short story The Light-House was the basis for the first draft of this film)
They're referred to as "Young" and "Old" in the script and when Robert Eggers talks of those characters in interviews.
@@UnravelingThreads then I guess I just pulled two/three names out of the air
@@PabloVostok Lol sure, dude. That's not what I was getting at. I know that that's their names in the movie. The fact still stands they're referred to as Young and Old in the script/interviews.
@@UnravelingThreads of course Eggers is going to refer to them in a production setting (like a script or an interview) in a less confusing way if they both have the same first name. their names are in the final product and are relevant to the story and the aesthetic Eggers wanted to convey so I don't see the point of not referring to them by their names, especially if the point of this video is discuss the symbolic, aesthetic and narrative elements of the film
@@PabloVostok Just because the director uses old and young to refer to the characters in an interview doesn't really mean that those are the only intended names. It just makes it easier to discuss the characters without using their full names, and without giving away the plot twist in the second half of the film. I agree with you though, there's definitely something important about the names of the characters. Ephraim Winslow even translates into Fruitful Friend. Why would Thomas kill a fruitful friend? Unless that was, metaphorically speaking, his own nature that he killed.
I think there is such thing as “abstract art” and this is just a version of that...
Sums up my feeling of the movie perfectly - it's undeniably well crafted and intentionally lacks a central thesis and in this particular case it makes the movie to me a teeny tiny bit lacking. A movie that manages to pull off its inconclusiveness is imho "The Draughtman's Contract" where inconclusion is the thesis.
this movie kinda saved my life. it made me realize lifes absurd. i thought i was crazy. lifes crazy and were all just trying to get by. made realize theres no reason to hate anybody and any good in my life is sheer dumb luck or my own actions. but bad things are unavoidable. they will happen period. alls i can do is my best to prepair for that. these 2 were so crazy it made me realize life is crazy xD i dont need to judge myself. thats for god assuming there is one. i believe there is but? that too is not in my control.
i feel everybody is trying to cope with life. just do my best. all i can do. and theres no reason to judge them. they are stuck here just the same as i am.
i also think theres enpugh beauty in life to make it worth trying. and things wont get better if we dont do something about it.
This is my theory on the lighthouse: The old man is the light, not just a weird old man who stumbled on this weird light, not Poseidon, he IS the light, maybe the lighthouse itself. Because he is the light he is able to manifest himself and give the young worker visions that make him slowly question his sanity. And the light has the pirmal purpose of just feeding on new people. It seems as if there's a high mortality rate on his boats, but it was always his passengers, not the old grizzled captain. It is possible that the captain is the fire that Prometheus delivered to humans from the promythean myth. So this knowledge manifested as fire shines as light and shows visions to Winslow and eventually make him crave the act of going to the light because it is knowledge. When he comes too close the light is much too strong and strips out his knowledge/sanity and leaves him for dead on the rocks below him. He was brain dead and the gulls proceeded to eat him. This knowledge/sanity would feed the light and make it stronger and satisfy it until the next soul comes by for him to strip. Everything is certain from winslow's view and he is an extremely accurate narrator because everything he sees is a vision created by the light. I don't believe the old man is the fire of prometheus, but its a podsibility.
I think it is more likely that young is Prometheus in this allegory. The lighthouse and it's light are the fire that young in constantly seeking to steal. The old man is the old Gods who desperately craves the love and worship of others. Gods are fickle, they punish and torment people yet still demand their love - much as old does. He craves it so much he allows young to get too close to him.
Young is able to slay the old God and steal the light - for which he is punished in a manner very similar to Prometheus. In this case, he is dashed on the rocks and having his liver eaten by a seagull instead of an eagle.
I see it as being entirely possible that old is also the mermaid - trying to get the young man's love in any way he can.
@@IvanHawkes I understand where you are coming from, but I don't agree that the old gods crave love and attention from mortals. They are selfish beings, but are focused and the dynamic between them and other gods. They simply use humans for quarrels against each other and most humans are only favored by gods if they are related to them or if those humans give a sacrifice to them. For example, in the Iliad all of the gods are described as going off to feast with the Ethiopians, who, to the greeks, lived on the edge of the world, and so were more divine and godly than the greeks and the people in the Mediterranean were. They were gone for two weeks. To me, that doesn't sound like gods who crave love and attention while also being cruel. They simply don't care about humans and don't need them. I use a story of the Greek gods as an example because Greek mythology seems to line up the most with this story, from the promythean themes to the mermaid/siren. That's why I believe the old man is some sort of entity or possibly and old God, but his motivation is simply to feed. The scene where the old man acts like a dog isn't embarrassing because to the light, it is simply stringing along Winslow to a script where, at the end, Winslow's soul/mind/knowledge is consumed by the light. I believe that this similar sequence of events has happened before, the light attracting the younger man and absorbing his soul, this film just shows us the story of one of the many times a man's soul/knowledge was consumed by the light house.
I like this theory alot
@@OGM_OriginalGameMusic thanks man, I appreciate the support!
Honestly I read it as a text on the connection between ideals surrounding masculine virility and the worship of "hard work" culminating in the usurpation of the sacred "work" through violence, stealing fire from the gods.
“Can you be deep without fully articulating a message” now THATS deep
The fact this movie didn't get the recognition it deserves is frankly criminal. Neither actor was even nominated for the Academy Award. It received one nomination, for cinematography, which frankly was deserved. But the performances by both actors are truly unbelievable. Both of them.
The loss of identity even outside of and in the power dynamics? No matter high or low, it still got lost in the film.
I think this is a clever film. It tries to reach the abstract sublime experience Bataille wrote in the Story of the Eye. Maybe combine all the choices in the film and look at how its narrative be constructed, rather than separate all the aspects of it, will be closer to the film. But that wouldn't be a philosophical analysis, it will be a literary one.
And literature doesn't really care about 'deep' or 'dumb'. It either works or it doesn't.
elchema Why’d you spill yer beans?
@elchema So what do you think about this episode or The Lighthouse.
I mean, I usually don't leave comments but Jared said he wasn't sure he missed anything, so I gave my piece.
@elchema You're welcomed to give your own piece of opinion. This is how literary studies work which anyone can have their own interpretation.
Or you just don't care enough to actually dive deep into the film? I don't know. Maybe you think Jared covered the part I wrote about?
There was a decent literary angle when thug literature was around, but I understand not everyone cares how literary works. I don't think it's suitable to have such a crude cut into The Lighthouse, because the style was too strong and if you want to analyze 'separate' aspects when the audience clearly sees the work AS ONE WHOLE THING when they're watching the film.
Yes. You can have a philosophical view of art, but you will encounter the problem postmodernism and deconstructionism which both reconsider how passage are delivered. Or you can explain what 'world view' was conveyed through a piece of are. However, the beginning of this film is tied together through a very obvious feature of square spaced camera. If you want to analyze it, you will have to explain certain effects of its aesthetics because if you don't, you're going to know how the whole thing works.
Is this annoying? I don't think so. It's literature geek talk. Not everyone wants to get into.
But the Internet is a place filled with all kinds of niches. And you're on the Internet...
I thought a big theme of the movie was the hierarchical relationship between a boss and an employee. Old made sure Young did the worst jobs and was constantly berating him for being lazy and not doing a good job. If I remember right, Young commented on this several times during their fights. Also, the fact that Young was responsible for the death of his previous boss lines up with this theme as well. Since Young was forbidden from watching the lighthouse itself, which seems to be the easiest part of the job, I think his desire for it represents a desire for more equality and recognition in the workplace. Either that or he wants the power Old has as the boss. Great video! The film can definitely have a lot of interpretations
Wisecrack giving me that quarantine content I need 🥰
My issue with this movie is sorta that there's TOO many interpretations one can take. There's certain themes, like the Promethesus & Proteus myths which are obviously very telling, as well as the painting, and there's definitely a sexual frustration side, but IDK if that was loneliness or homoeroticism or what, but I feel like it's too easy to run with it into something else entirely, and I guess to some that's good, but to me it makes me question what the point is, to some degree, IDK.
I enjoyed it, it's certainly thought provoking, but in the end I like something a tad bit more hammered down.
At some point I just had the feeling of “this feels like how the shining should have felt” people talk about the shining like it was the apex predator of the horror kingdom. But this movie is just. I can not fucking credit it enough. I loved every single thing about this movie.
Maybe it's because I'm Scandinavian, but I didn't see an octopus, I saw Kraken (one of many old Scandinavian sea monsters)
Producer: I hear you have an artistic movie for me?
Screenwriter: Yes sir, I do. In this movie, I think we should have William Dafoe fap into the lamp of a lighthouse and the goop almost falls on Robert Pattinson’s head!
Producer: ... What?
Screenwriter: You know, the guy from Twilight. Then later, we see him fap to a figurine in pain.
Producer: Well, that does sound like art and people like Twilight.
This sounds like a pretentious copout, but I've always seen this as immensely deep BECAUSE of it's ambiguity. It masterfully captures so many emotions, creating a unique atmosphere of tension and curiosity that leaves the viewer in awe and introspection.
I watched The Lighthouse, Parasite and Portrait of a Lady on Fire in one day.
Best day of cinema viewing in quote some time.
The aesthetics parallel and convey the atmosphere and all kind of references to clasical themes. Totally meaningfull to me. The stunning fact of this movie is that you end up thinking a lot about many things and even enjoying the experience of talking about it long after you actually watched the movie. Is it "Dumb-funded" because does not fully articulate a thesis?...I don't think so. I did pretty much enjoy the performances and also went through many different feelings during the viewing (also humor). And as I said, i spent weeks discussing differents meanings. My girlfriend just came out with an interesting theory that comes to say that there is only one real character. Being the old man something like the consciousness that point the guilt of the young man. That the movie may makes you feel dumb does not mean that the movie itself is dumb.
watched this with my man two days ago and I'm still haunted by the mermaid puss puss but it honestly was such a great movie. Both of us were laughing, stunned but pleasantly quiet in thought by the end of it. Weird journey, can't wait to watch it again.
Rob Pattinson is so underrated.
Defoe performance carried the movie. Pattinson has always been a fantastic actor, the comments make me sad a lot of people are just realizing it now. I recommend checking out some of his old movies, hes always been a fantastic actor.
Are y'all ever gonna do a video covering Avatar: The Last Airbender?! It's one of the most well written, emotional and philosophical shows I've ever seen.
This, so this!
I AGREE! M Night, is really underrated in his directorial style, so much so that the movie was buried. Though the show had good ideas, the writers weren't able to flesh them out due to their lack of experience. But in the movie, so much work and character went into the filming that it can genuinly be seen as a masterpiece. BRAVO! I say, BRAVISIMO!
@@yeshuamcfly1154 I couldn't agree more😂🤣💀
@@yeshuamcfly1154 the show is amazing, the movie is mostly trash. By far Night's best movie all around is the Sixth Sense.
@@Frankiigii oh I disagree. The show itself is awful in how it presents it's ideas. I mean, how could anyone find a person with a scarred face, AND a Hitler like personality likable. He never should've been redeemed, and he wasn't in my eyes. It's almost as bad as dragon ball. It missteps at every story, and the animation is weeaboo garbage. Shamalan brought depth to the world and characters. Every movie he makes is better than the last. I wait with baited breath for what could show up next. I wouldn't expect someone named "potato" to get it.
I’m a cartoonist and a mermaid that plays sea shanties on the banjo.
My comics are like this movie.
The minute it hit the theaters everyone from everywhere contacted me and said i needed to see it.
I started to memorize the curse Willam cast when the young guy said he didn’t like his lobster.
It needs to be a sea shanty and is my favorite monolog of all time.
Of the 3 I have see, that one was the second best sponge Bob movie.
God, what a legendary UA-cam video that was.
Mad deep. Everything intensional even not having a specific answer for the end, but instead letting fans come up with almost infinite theory’s. If you had a specific ending to this movie it would take away a lot of the the awe and mystery.
When something tries to be everything at once, it just ends up being nothing.
It's definitely deliberately trying to be something specific. The nautical theme wouldn't be so over-present without it.
@@ahealthkit2745 , could it be that film has nautical themes because story happens on a remote lighthouse? But the myth of Prometheus does not have such motives. And copying the picture of repressed homosexuality too. And the old man’s visit to Salem. And the problems of father and son. For that matter, the mermaids and other Lovecraftian things almost do not play a role in the film.
I agree. This film really is masterfully made in so many ways and I really, really wanted to love it. The acting is incredibly engrossing. The cinematography is gorgeous. The aesthetics are meticulously crafted. It's chock full of symbolism, but unfortunately at the end it just feels like a bunch of motifs without a theme as the video above states. I've read several theories for this movie, from a character study on isolation induced madness, to Ephraim being dead the whole time and Tom is God punishing him, to Ephraim being Prometheus and Tom being Proteus, etc. The problem is, all of these theories have evidence backing them up but they are largely mutually exclusive and all have their own flaws that keep them from fitting just right.
For example, there's plenty of evidence that Ephraim is supposed to be Prometheus and the lighthouse is the fire. In the myth though, Prometheus didn't want the fire for himself, he wanted it for humanity. The fire represented knowledge of the scientific variety, not the spiritual or esoteric type, and Prometheus was willing to become the God's scapegoat in order to provide that knowledge to humans so they could lead an easier life. But Ephraim ISN'T selfless at all, the lighthouse does not seem to represent any knowledge of any kind, and Ephraim is not seeking it to help anyone. If anything, it plays out more like the story of Icarus than Prometheus; it's more about the dangers of pride than the dangers of knowledge. The Promethean motif is obviously there and throughout the movie, but to what end?
There is so much going on in this movie, so much that it's saying, but it never commits to any one thing in particular. The director stated that he intentionally left the movie open to interpretation so audiences could pull their own meaning from it, but saying something can mean anything is just another way of saying it means nothing. Movies don't have to hold your hand through everything but they still need to actually be leading you somewhere. I loved The Lighthouse, but it just felt like a journey without a destination.
@@anagoth9 that is exactly the reason of my frustration. If The Lighthouse was a Dadaism-like film that would embrace meaninglessness behind human interaction and violence, I could get behind such an idea. But instead it promises something it's not going to deliver, and that's real shame.
The fact that it’s so hard to figure out what’s going on in the movie works to benefit the unnerving atmosphere. While you’re watching the small, black-and-white screen waiting to see the next moment of disturbing or bizarre imagery or behavior, you feel a constant feeling of dread that slowly builds into a feeling of inevitability, but you never fully understand what’s going on. You know exactly what the film literally showed you, but, somehow, the story itself is uncanny. You know that the lighthouse is far more than just a lighthouse, but you’re not sure if it is a god of light and love or a tower of madness and death, or perhaps even both. And yet, the movie never really shows it being more than just a building, and by the end you can’t help but wonder if you’ve gone crazy, since the main characters certainly have.
I didn't expect that conclusion. Since Jared loves David Lynch so much, and Lynch is the king of ambiguous storytelling, you'd figure Jared would love The Lighthouse's surreal Lynchian inconclusiveness.
Personally, I keep thinking about this film and wanting to rewatch it because it's so wide open to interpretation. And from the perspective of a fan of Lovecraftian cosmic horror, this film rules.
I really liked that analysis, "are we saying they're gay? No, but we're not saying they aren't either", I feel like it's important to leave labels aside when it comes to explore human sexuality in media, instead of getting caught up with "straight" "gay" "bisexual" "heteroflexible" "pansexual" and all that shit we can actually focus in the psychology behind, for example, power dynamics.
This movie works as a horror movie with a lot of room for interpretation and deeper meaning as well as one of the very rare truly lovecraftian movies (so far I only really found annihilation to be another one high up on that list). For that alone I highly enjoyed it
the fact that everything is so purposeful makes this movie impossible to dismiss. They shot on lenses made just for this film, the script is airtight, actors had to move based on the camera instead of vice versa.
this film is pretty much the polar opposite of a modern Judd Apatow or Paul Fieg movie where a bunch of cameras are just rolling on actors improvising just so they have enough footage to work with in the editing room.
The process of the film's development makes it impossible for the end result to be meaningless. Every shot has to be dripping with purpose in a production like this.
It's easily one of the most expertly-crafted, beautiful, aesthetic, and well-acted films in decades. Who cares if it's deep. I just know I'll watch it a million times.
This ^
Because the most important Component of books and cinema are stories , and this director\writer happens to be grossly incompetent in the one factor that matters. Yes the acting , production, cinematography are top notch, but it’s a movie for dense idiots who don’t demand to be challenged intellectually. Liking this movie means that you are a simple minded consumer
@@HelloSpyMyLie how do you interpret the movie's message?
@@severketorskeleton3759 there is nothing to interpret. In real movies, there are certain inalienable messages, themes, questions which get asked and which once seen, cannot be forgotten.
I have since making this comment and watching the movie not long ago, already completely forgotten the story of this meaningless drivel. Ultimately, as I said the movie is a compelling, intriguing, well shot, well acted film, that ultimately insults the viewers by never actually going anywhere, asking any profound questions, or having an ending that is satisfying, horrifying or baffling. It just ends with stupidity. For stupid people, this is enough
@@HelloSpyMyLie if you see yourself as someone grand enough to judge other people like that, then so be it, but if you haven't even interpreted anything from the movie then all I see in you is the stupid people you say this movie was made for.
Pattison’s performances in The Lighthouse and Good Time gives me a lot of hope for his portrayal as Batman, he’s such a great actor
small correction: knitting was originally a man's activity, specifically sailors knit on ships since wool is naturally warm, antimicrobial, and repels water. while the activity connotes femininity and domesticity today, historically knitting was a solidly masculine skill.
Not in Native American and many other cultures, knitting has been feminine in the west even in the 18th century, refer to any 18th or 19th century novels for evidence.
Old's sea-creature transformed state resembles the titular sea monster from Albrecht Durer's 'The Sea Monster', and is possibly meant to resemble or be Glaucus, a greek mythic figure who didn't expressly have tentacles that I'm aware of, he was more part human and part a big fish.
Ye're fond of me lobster, ain't ye?
I like movies that forgo having a definite thesis in order to just sort of meditate on certain subjects. It's like the filmmaker's saying they don't have all the answers but that they're still going to try to communicate their observations in a way that will help people to think about things themselves, perhaps from a new point of view. Ideally I feel like each person's reaction to the movie will reflect their own unique perspective on the subjects that are explored.
one of my favorite movies of last year!
The line that went, "Upon learning that the bird was Team Jacob..." pretty much floored me!