MovieChat Forums > The Lighthouse (2019) Discussion > Was there actually any substance?

Was there actually any substance?

posted 3 years ago by Drooch (5333)
9 replies | jump to latest

This was reminiscent of a David Lynch film, it certainly had the texture of Eraserhead, but whereas Lynch taps into deep psychological and spiritual experiences, this felt rather empty.

I might be wrong, and if anyone has a profound reading of the film I’d be fascinated to hear it.

It seemed to me that Robert Eggers was inspired by a true story of three lighthouse keepers who vanished and made an abstract film musing on what happened to them.

The performances are good but it doesn’t lead up to much. The two go mad and there’s a huge build-up to what is in the lighthouse, but it turns out to just be a light which represents the divine.

Pattinson sees this and it’s too much for him, so he falls down the stairs and ends up getting his guts pecked out by seagulls the same way Prometheus was strung up and had his guts pecked out by massive birds every morning.

It just seems a mish-mash of ideas without anything profound to say, no real point, no insight.

When you watch a Cronenberg film you're left with a philosophical conundrum that haunts your mind, because he’s tapping into something deep about the human condition.

This didn’t seem to offer more than watching two fuck ups go mad, with some seafood imagery along the way and an allusion to a Greek myth at the end. I guess it’s an effective ‘mood poem’ but it ultimately felt shallow to me.

Am I missing something..?

[–] cyberbob (3488) 3 years ago

Robert Eggers is a lame-o

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

It was a weird movie. I don't remember much of the movie, but I remember it was weird.

[–] Drooch (5333) 3 years ago

Weird’s good, bring on the weird, it just needed to bring the substance and as far as I can tell there wasn’t much 🤷🏻‍♂️

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

Maybe you should cut down on the substance...

[–] joej2923 (3141) 3 years ago

I watched about fifteen minutes before turning it off. It was really dark so I couldn't see anything. They also both had weird accents so I couldn't understand much of what they were saying. It's the effing 21st century... why would I want to watch a black and white film on my bigass fancy TV?

[–] Drooch (5333) 3 years ago

Black & white has its own unique beauty, and the 4:3 framing was also used to help give the film an aged feeling, add to the claustrophobic vibe, and worked well with the central ‘character’ which was the tall, thin lighthouse.

I watched it on a big TV too and throughly enjoyed the visual (and auditory) experience.

The visuals weren’t an issue for me, I liked them, I just found that the film lacked any real substance.

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 3 years ago

It's actually much more coherent film that your typical lynch film (which are admittedly mainly to be psychological and emotional experiences as you described), but unfortunately, the substance that it deals with is beyond most people's understanding, including myself. After we finished the movie, I was like, I feel like I'm lacking the proper educational lens through which to understand this, and after digging around, I realized that my joke had weight to it after all. There's a lot going on here (that's actually there, and not just what people made up after-the-fact). Unfortunately, I don't remember much of it, but there's plenty of analyses floating around if you google about.

For instance, the "allusion to a Greek myth at the end" wasn't just a random detail thrown in. As I recall, the entire film is closely linked to both mythological tropes. The movie also deals quite a bit with Freudian and Jungian approaches to psychology.

[–] Drooch (5333) 3 years ago

It makes references to other art… but doesn’t feel like a substantial work of art in itself. Lynch’s films are bizarre but they ring true on a deep level, they are primarily emotional and psychological experiences, not intellectual.

Lynch films usually have a somewhat sympathetic main character going through some form of trauma, but this had no character to latch onto, just two drunken assholes who go mad and die, and I’m not convinced the filmmaker even knows what the light represents.

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 3 years ago

That's fair. And I agree totally with your writeup of Lynch's style. This movie does not have that semblance of deeply embedded human truth, not in the same way anyways.

For the record, I've got no stake in this, because I actually don't like this movie :D But you seem to be considering it seriously, and I do want to suggest that I've seen compelling discussion on the film. But again, it's above my pay grade which is why I'm not giving you anything of substance.

One thing that stuck to me was a throwaway comment (but it helped consolidate at the time other things that I'd read) is that this movie is basically a surreal depiction of when a man fails to integrate his shadow.