There are many, and I'm here to shed light on an unpopular opinion.
Check out my merch!:
www.bonfire.com/store/spikima/
///
Music download: spikima.wixsite.com/spikima
Patreon: / spikima
Instagram: @ spikima
Your support helps with keeping the channel running.
Love.
///
#Movie
#Video
#TheLighthouse
Thanks for checking out my video! Check out my non-spoiler review for The Lighthouse here : kzhead.info/sun/hqWqpK2bmoaOe3k/bejne.html Your support helps keep this channel running! Please like, subscribe, and turn that notification on! :)
Just a detail, they probably didn't drink kerosene but "camphine" (not to be mistaken for camphene), which is a mix of ethanol and turpentine. Kerosene is much more toxic and drinking it would most likely kill them.
@@atropa6053 awesome- knew kerosene would be way too toxic but didn't quite know what else there is. Thanks for that!
This is a great analysis, but I'll admit that you freaked me out when you started talking about the Holy of Holies and Old Thomas as the High Priest. I used those exact same words in an analysis I posted yesterday under the FoundFlix video about The Lighthouse. I swear I worked out my version of the analysis on my own, and I didn't see your video until today. ;-) I even took my explanation in a slightly different direction than you. I focused more on Young Thomas' unworthiness sending him to a doom that looks a lot like the first stage of the curse Old Thomas laid on him earlier in the movie. The way I see it, the god of the story - whom Old Thomas half-literally or maybe even totally literally worships - is a classical pagan sea god like Poseidon or Triton. Old Thomas dedicates himself sincerely to this god by paying homage to all the old traditions and superstitions, so he's rewarded. Meanwhile, Young Thomas only lusts after a power he doesn't understand or submit to; and depending on how literally you take the supernatural elements of the movie, he might be in for an eternity of suffering. I did notice one thing that supports a supernatural interpretation: Thomas fell down the stairs fully clothed and was so close to death that the next time we see him, he can barely even twitch. But the fall injured him that badly, then how did he get outside the lighthouse - and how did he get undressed? Anyway, I missed most of the other themes you pointed out, and I'm very glad that you *did* point them out! This is the first time I've run across your channel, but you can bet I'll keep coming back. :-)
@@Karin_Allen thats interesting i didnt think anyone would use the tabernacle example - tho for me it was only just to illustrate the 'power' the light embodies! Glad you enjoyed the vid either way :)
This film is so very good to me. Atmosphere and the cinematography is outstanding. The characters are really well done and the time period is perfect. It gave me anxiety the first time I watched it...
I think he went crazy after the shit flew back in his face
😂 im laughing but you have a salient point!!!
clearly never watched the big lebowski
Can't blame him though
100% lmaoo
Am I the only one who was reminded of Filthy Frank's Pink Guy with the way he reacted after that.
My take on the movie is that it's all about cycles and repetitions. Winslow tries to run away from his past, but it always comes back to him. Tom killed the last guy in order to get control of the light, but someone did the same to him. Tom coherced and dehumanized Winslow because he was in a position of power, but the tables turned and Winslow did the same to him. Even the island is damned to repeat its story, as we see someone had already been stranded there before. Just like Prometheus is damned to have his liver eaten by a bird every day and then regenerate only in order for the torture to start again.
uow way too clever.
Brilliant - love this one!
That ties in nicely with the duplicated names, the "what? what? what?" scene, and repetitions of many events but with critical details changed.
You know what they say, "Time is a flat circle".
It all cycles like...a lighthouse.
The aspect ratio, for me, added to the claustrophobia big time.
...well...that was the point 😂 Sorry 😘
@@Silvercentipede I'm aware. Just stared that it worked well.
Sorry; was only playing :) Glad you enjoyed it; it was awesome wasn’t it!!
@@Silvercentipedeit was fantastic!
😀
Very great analysis but for some weird reason I felt scared after the movie while not feeling scared while watching the movie.
100% agreed
Yeah I watched it and was very entertained. Then I’m trying to go to sleep afterwards and felt mad creeped out
same here, I was creeped out after I finished the film.
Because humans are scared of the unknown and the ending was so inconclusive
Nina Nina Simone 100% the same. I watched it last night and I didn’t sleep well because I felt so unsettled and kept trying to make sense of it all haha.
The laser beams out of his eyes is the light that Pattinson can’t hide from anymore now that his beans are spilled.
Looks also like a reference to Hypnose by Sascha Schneider so it could imply that Willems character is manipulationg Winslow and playing tricks on him, twisting his mind and perception of reality
@@Lollemaster That's possible! Or else that, like the lighthouse light, Pattinson is revealed by the light (much like the ending!) and found wanting. The motif of light, the doppelgänger resemblance of master/servant that Winslow/Howard are all in echo as a motif as well.
Its proven to be true that the light has some significance to another world or god
That shot (even though it is based off of a painting) is one of my favorite shots of all time.
MrGuy Productions same here
thx for not titling this “tHe LiGhtHoUse EnDiNg ExPlAinEd” - very thoughtful analysis, glad I found this
Mike Johns this man just dissed foundflix lmaooo
Angry bc you've watched a foundflix video, are you? 😏
HisNeverland foundflix is dumb lmao
foundflix yells alot
@@HisNeverland Yes, he had a one minute explanation and a 15 minute or narration of the film I'd just watched.
Genuinely laughing throughout the movie but pretty scared after finishing it.
especially when he had green goblin barking like a cihuahua istfg...
Yea it’s one of those horror comedies that both entertain but chill me
I said they saved a lot of $$$ on crafty. 😂. The MST3K bits were easy... lol....
This is the scariest Comedy Horror I've seen. I'd pair it with Scream in how scream is both hilarious but also gripping and intense. The Lighthouse just does it simultaneously while Scream has a very noticeable shift. The Lighthouse is funny throughout, but the intensity and anxiety just keeps growing and never stops until the movie ends.
@@apothecurio The scariest movie I'd ever seen the first time, and all funny the second. It's as though I saw two different movies.
Finally! After like 10 bullshit videos claiming to explain the ending, one that finally has some substance. And no other video talks about Winslow changing accents. I thought I was the only one who noticed it.
You noticed too! Happy to meet someone who also noticed it
I knew I wasn’t crazy!!!
Yes he had like an English accent and east coast accent...midwestern
Boston to NY to even a touch of southern accent all in one line
Wait, I didn’t even notice that...I feel rather silly now.
"...as one can guess from his farts, thomas was gaslighting winslow the whole time..." lol this interpretation is my favourite
Thomas's monologue could support him being Proteus. He tells Triton to, "hark", which means to listen closely. He calls Neptune father aswell.
Its cus the movie is about heaven and judgement, the script basically confirms who he is(proteus
I thought the story was very Sisyphean. Winslow, seeing as the duties of the lighthouse were almost solely dependent on him, could not "win". His carrying of the enormous barrel of oil up the stairs of the lighthouse and then being forced to bring it back down, along his fall down the stairs at the end (following the brutal struggle with Wake beforehand) strongly compare to Sisyphus' task to push a great boulder up a hill only for it to roll down on top of him, forcing him to push from the start again. Winslow's tasks on the island also drive this theme of unwinnable challenges in -- emptying chamberpots against a headwind or pushing a charcoal wheelbarrow in the slick mud of a tempest. The gulls as well serve this metaphor, as Sisyphus was feasted upon by a murder of crows at the end of his tale. Another notable Greek plagued by the corvid horde was Prometheus, who granted man the knowledge of flame's creation from the heavens. After betraying Zeus and the Titans, Prometheus was cursed to a fate of being tied to a boulder (mirroring Winslow's fate of being stuck on the island, often referred to as a rock) while crows or eagles pecked at his organs. This could compare strongly to the end, where Winslow is feasted upon by the gulls, naked and blind, his Sisyphean task failed for the final time. The Sisyphus metaphor goes deeper, as well. Even in his relationship with Wake, Winslow could not "win". Nothing he did pleased his so-called better, and even the praise he received at being a "wickie in the making" only led to immediate scorn the moment he asked about the light. This also mirrors Prometheus, whose curiosity about the light and eagerness to learn ultimately led to be his own downfall. Take it or leave it.
I'll take it! This movie is full of mythical beings and stories, and yeah, the Sisyphus metaphor fits right in!
Sisyphus wasnt eaten by crows
My perspective of the ending was that there was nothing special in the lighthouse. Winslow expected something out of the ordinary from the very beginning since Thomas was very overprotective of the lighthouse and it was always on Winslow's mind and the curiosity kept growing inside him throughout the film. The supernatural things he saw was just the result of this his imagination affected by his growing curiosity and anticipation. After he killed Thomas to get up there, he painted his face to prepare for something special. When he got up there, he noticed that the hatch wasn't even locked and the light-bulb door wasn't even closed. When he finally stood there and looked directly into the light, there was nothing there, just pure light and when he realized this, he went completely mad as he realized that all the struggle and anticipation that he had was for absolutely nothing and thus started to laugh hysterically and accidentally falling backwards and down the stairs.
This makes sense 👍👍
My interpretation was kinda similar to yours as well, while I was watching the movie, but then several people highlighted the symbolism and significance of Greek philosophy in it. Nevertheless, it's open to interpretation.
Fantastic analysis I really think this one fits I’ll be think about this
I actually like this interpretation much more
I like this interpretation
“Ye like me lobster, don’t Ye?”
This point 🦞 is historically inaccurate. Lobsters were considered trash & only fed to prison inmates or estate servants(maids butlers groundskeepers). Lobsters were cheap & plentiful. Many poor people ate lobsters as a last resort, desperate. Historical accounts showed some maids, servant workers had contracts saying exact amounts of 🦞 they will eat. This lobster dinner scene seemed off to me.
@@DavidLLambertmobile Yeah, I'm not buying it. While what you say is true in polite society back in the day, that lobsters were basically considered bugs of the sea because they are bottom feeders, not unlike carp, and just like carp, people still ate them out of necessity. And a sailor or lighthouse keeper would be all too familiar with necessity given the finite supplies that would be available to them. Additionally, it is considered dirty and low for a man to lay with a prostitute, and we know sailors partook in that particular activity when it was available for the partaking.
Tall tales.
What Defoe and Pattinson did here was true acting! Great performance by both! Only a deep and credible acting can turn a two character movie into a masterpiece!
I agree 💯. Mostly Dafoe but both main actors are excellent. This film will be studied in film schools, acting programs for decades. I take issue with a few points but overall the film is great.
The is closest to my own interpretation. After the end of the film, I came to the conclusion that none of what happened was real. The Island was purgatory, and the Light House was God, when Thomas ascended to the top, he was judged and cast down, because he did not repent for murder in his actual life. Thomas Wake, Willem Defoes character was simply another aspect of Toms psyche, that he chose to reject and ultimately kill. What led me to believe they were the same character is Wake also had a broken leg, the same very leg Pattison broke on his fall.
If we also analyse the names of the characters both characters were named Thomas or some derivative spelling. The name means Twin. Wake means vigilant, and Howard if we take the Germanic origin can mean Brave Spirit. Obviously this theory is also imperfect, if this Island isn't purgatory. Did Defoe also kill the past Lighthouse Tender and suffer the same fall as Patterson, only he managed to the insanity level low enough to function? If all the things Patterson saw were hallucinations, was the head in the basket also a hallucination just as the Mermaid on the shore? Were they hallucinations at all? The messy, unreliable nature is why I chose to go with a form of hell Pattison was going through for failing to atone for the death of the real Ephraim.
@@BaneClandestine This theory is my favorite. I completely agree
@BaneClandenstine This is the best, makes perfect sense and not overly complicated
I had the same thought about purgatory. he is sent there to do the repetitive, grueling tasks as a cleansing punishment for his previous sins, but when he admits he is not sorry at all for what he did (spills his beans scene), he basically spoils the chance of going to heaven. Plus it really does feel like purgatory for the viewer, the gray scale, the repetitiveness, the miserable state, no concept of time, etc. In the end, he is given the hellish torture he ends up deserving.
I would like to know, how do you explain the seagulls and mermaid?
Just an idea, I kind of got the impression that Thomas (older man) was Ephraim's past self, the one he left behind to start new. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember a scene when Thomas was chasing Ephrim with an axe but then after (Thomas) said something along the lines of "you ran at me trying to kill me with that axe just now" it kind if seemed like they were the same person. When ephraim was treating Thomas like a dog, it was him trying to dominate his past, and burying him, of course, meaning he was burying his past. All the times when Thomas was aggravating Ephraim it was his past nagging at him, digging into him. Also, they kind of adopted the same name, and even the fact that the old man had killed his lighthouse hand was like how Ephrim killed his old boss. Idk, I feel like a lot of it was him fighting with his past, just one interpretation among many though :)
Dafoe always put words in Winslow’s mouth the entire movie.
Unique interpretation and one I haven’t heard before “from the professional critics”. Excellent thoughts.
I feel like that was more symbolic of the idea of people in power being the same, or history repeating itself with issues surrounding power imbalance. You live long enough to see yourself become the villain etc
No I agree, it's heavily implied that it's one man alone on an island. And went mad after being alone for so long
Despite Winslow being the quiet one with something to hide, it was actually Thomas who remains the mystery to us.
True
For me the movie is a wonderful dissecation and analyses of masculinity in all aspects, good and bad. Being laconic, fighting for dominance, reaffirmation, wrath, desire and madness. Is a great duo with "the witch" that kinda explores female energy. But the lighthouse goes in way deeper
In a very well-known and influential poem called 'The Rime of the Ancient Mariner', written by Samuel Coleridge, the killing of a seabird also brings about the wrath of God.
Oh shit you're right! The albatross!
Gotta love that Maiden song
We studied that in school and this reminded me of it too
I guess this movie is a subtle nod to the ‘Lighthouse keeper syndrome’ or mercury poisoning that drove many lighthouse keepers in 18 and 19th century mad. Hence, all the hallucinations and the slow poisoning was shown in the movie, they overtime got weirder and more mad. It also fits the time period the film is set in.
The part where they're about to kiss and then they start fighting, I'm guessing that's the sexuality power dynamic at play
*why d'ya spill yer beans*
Yer fond of me lobster ain't ya
Ye’ve a way with words winslow
*farts*
I'm still trying to figure out who chased who with the axe
My theory is that Thomas lied to Winslow about the day when they were expecting to be collected by the ship. The whole film takes place before the month is even over.
In my opinion this was a clever retelling of the story of Prometheus.
Oh...do pray tell
I don't think it actually works as a retelling of that myth
It absolutely has some similarities to the Prometheus story.
@@crookedletterrecovery I mean, yes. He goes up to the divine fire and for it he ends up with a bird eating his guts, but it stops there. The Prometheus myth is much different, in that Prometheus basically steals the fire to give knowledge to humanity. Winslow goes to the light because of his own obsession and lust, he's not worthy of looking at it and he gets killed as a result.
Although it doesn’t parallel Prometheus directly, I’d say that they do have a similarity in taking(or trying to take) something that they definitely shouldn’t have. Idk
You know something is good when there are multiple ways to interpret it, and all of those ways hold their own against each other. Nice work!
The true definition of art.
Dafoe is literally Proteus. Winslow is no deity but a Prometheus (or as someone else mentioned, a Sisyphus) figure. Wake shapeshifts and possess knowledge of things he shouldn't know (he knows Winslow's past, knows he has a knife in his pocket despite never seeing it, can call literally call upon Triton to punish Winslow ect..) The shapeshift into the mermaid during the fight, and then into his deity form, also suggests Wake knows of Winslow's past, as every time we see the mermaid (Wake), it is preceded by Winslow contemplating the murder he committed. The light is just what Wake said it was after he was beaten and "captured", thus being forced to tell the truth (aspect of Proteus' mythology). Essentially a Lovecraft-esque mindfuck for any man who dares look upon it. I actually think of the Lighthouse itself as a character. It keeps Proteus bound to it and attracts men seeking penance. I think Wake is lonely, though a nutjob, and knows if Winslow goes up to the light he'll lose his company just like the last time. Hence why he cried out "don't leave me!" at the end and talks of boredom being mans worst enemy.
david davidson what’s great about this film is it can be viewed, obviously intentionally, from a psychological, fruedian, allegorical or realistic perspective.
God fuck that makes it all the more disturbing
Honestly, I think this theory is the one most easily arrived to, besides the movie being about two wacko wickies that hallucinate. Wake, as you said, literally shapeshifts, he knows what he shouldn't know, and he reveals the "truth" only when captured and subjected to the same humiliation he put Winslow through; all this can conceivably come to mean that Wake is Proteus based on what we know about Proteus in the mythology. Winslow tries through the whole movie damn near to get up to the light, and the end shot of the movie really drives home the idea that Winslow could be Prometheus. Love this theory, man, it's probably the one I've clung to most.
@@TJMisfit Me too, my support on this theory is that during the supposed four weeks work is where robert's character was still sane. Also, during that week he saw a glimpse of Wake who what seems to be masterbatin then turned into his true form. Then in the last day he finally accepts Wake offer to drink with him like the drink that supposed to make people insane, just like what he gives to his former assistant then the rest is where basically all the mindfuckery happens.
Eggers confirmed the Proteus/Prometheus inspiration, the movie simbolism is clearly derived from the two mythological figures...
They drink the kerosene which powers the light. Light gas in other words. Another hint toward gas lighting.
Something dawned on me watching this video with the symbolism of the mermaid. When the mermaid figure broke, it broke perfectly in half separating the mystical bottom half from the realistic upper half. I’m bad at tying things together, so that’s all I got.
The tie and line between fiction and reality broke in a sense inside of The mind of tommy and now he can’t tell the difference since this might be the starting point of him going mad. Maybe I’m right idk🤷♂️
winslow had an attraction to his old coworker, and he did not know how to deal with it since it is evil in his eyes which is why he killed him, and is why the back of his coworkers head flashes during the same times they show the siren, a symbol that is associated with something both sexual and evil
Did Winslow have a big case of the "not-gays"?
@@EyeShotFirst This would make sense, although keep in mind that the homosexual part doesnt have much to do with it. Its more the work place power dynamic part. Keep in mind that even if Thomas Wake was a woman a relationship between the two would still be VERY wrong and inappropriate given the positions and circumstances. In other words, straight or gay, Winslow would be coping with his feelings the same surppressive fashion
I think another big theme is around labor, bosses, and employment. I think that's all pretty self-evident, but I do like the bit at the beginning of "spill your beans" : After everything else we've seen, and how cosmically this job has sucked, Pattinson describes coldly letting a man die and stealing his identity, looks directly into the camera, and says "How else am I gonna find respectable work?"
Cant wait for the sequel, called lighthouse 2 mermaid mclovin
Lighthouse 2 electric boogaloo
Weekend at Tommys....
I recommended this movie to one of my friends and her brother. Their analysis after watching it went something like this: Winslow is actually drowning during the whole movie (the way they´re drinking the alcohol. Gulping it up and spewing it out indicate this), because he got in a shipwreck. He is now in limbo, and unaware that he is getting tested for his approval to get into heaven; the lighthouse.
Very interesting analysis. Actually a really really interesting analysis.
This is a great rendition of the theory. Although the first half of what you said is up for debate, I think the part about limbo and approval to get into heaven is not up for debate, thats what Edgars intended, reading the script makes this make a lot of sense
Just noticed by looking at the thumbnail that both of them have captain hats, so the theory of them being the same person seems v possible
Actually, the DVD includes a featurette about the costumes, and those hats are totally accurate. The costumer said that the chief lighthouse keeper would have a lighter colored, shinier version of the emblem than his second - but they *would* both have caps with the emblem, and they'd have basically the same other gear.
In the screenplay, there is a scene that is not in the movie. Dafoe actually controls and calms the violent waves while saying an old curse/prayer and throwing alcohol into the ocean. Dafoe was pretty much the ocean god and I can see why Eggers took that scene out, so it isn’t so obvious.
Dafoe's 'hark' speech still implies similar idea i thought ! :)
@@SpikimaMovies that and the scene where he is literally the sea god haha
One of the better youtube comments threads I've some across. Some interesting and very different interpretations of the film, and all equally valid.
Agreed~👍
Yes, it's about judgement. Watch the burial scene again with the subtitles on. Tom explains what's in the light and what's going to happen. Eggers did this in The Witch too when by the brook Thomasin explains the film's end. Maybe Tom the elder is protecting Tom the younger from the light, but once he "spills his beans", i.e. confesses, it's too late. The light from Tom's eyes symbolizes that Ephram is in the spotlight - being judged. Tom judges Ephrams' work, a symbol for judging his life. When he kills the bird, the wind changes, and the barometer shifts - the scales of justice have tipped, and he's found guilty.
why should confession bring about judgement when it should bring redemption
Great video! There isn't enough 'actual' discussion about this film, just overview's and very baseline ideas. I don't fully buy into your analysis, but this film is as you said, interpretive. So, you very well could be spot on. I was leaning more towards mans struggle against nature is useless when man looses the struggle with himself. I'm on of the people that lean into the idea they may be the same person. I never got the religious vibe from the film, but I've hear a few people take that approach to it. I'll take that in to consideration next time I get a chance to watch this. Thumbs up!
Excellent! Yes there are so many possibilities that I wished to talk about- I'm definitely going to rewatch this many times and hope more ppl watch it :) glad you liked it!
I have the same opinion, that they're the same person with the timeline memory broken for madness... Now,after watching this video, I feel the mystic side too, I believe the movie shows what happens to someone who looks for spiritual relief to get over regret but in a very dark way that ends in tearing up his mind and identity..
I think that there is some truth to this film, a lot of it is still open to interpretation but the light does represent heaven and the movie describes the idea of “judging ones soul” on multiple occasions
I just found your channel today and I am obsessed! You talk about all of my favorite directors and your analysis is so brilliantly done.
The one eyed seagull was Dafoes old assistant reincarnated.
Yeah but did it hate Winslow? Shouldnt it hate Wake?
Eirik it took his job , or could be ineffectively warning him
Yeah I think he was warning him
I know for a fact that the lighr represents heaven but this is one thing I still havent figured out
The one eyed seagull could be a reference to Odin, in much the same way Dafoe's character was meant to be Prometheus. In the eda, Odin had sacrificed one of his eyes to gain wisdom or clairvoyance, but more generally, it means exchanging one perception for another. In mythology, being one-eyed denotes wisdom or clairvoyance. It also makes me think of the Cyclops.
Go back and watch the scene where Winslow gets to the top in the end. The lights door opens itself. It’s pulling him to it
oh so he didn't even put the key in huh?! Even better then! Can't wait to rewatch it.
He did put the key in the lock, but the lightbulb opend itself
This adds to the idea of the light representating heaven, thats why there is stairs leading right up to it (it’s literally a reference to stairway to heaven)
He opened it himself but because he’s lost his sanity that’s how it looks to him
They are the same person. It’s in the script: “old” and “young”.
Amanda Pimenta da Silva , yes. Even both are called Thomas. Winslow’s real name is Thomas Howard. Sounds a bit like coward... And the “old” one is Thomas Wake. Like awake? Like “saw” the light?
Like that one part in the film when Winslow is called Tommy a few times.
bravo. easily the best analysis video i've seen on this movie out of about seven. i look forward to checking out your other work. take care.
Thanks a lot!
@@SpikimaMovies just a quick thought. prometheus' rival was zeus. zeus is the ruler of weather, specifically rain. he is also the ruler of the skies and the lighthouse gives him a great vantage point for such. also, the sascha scheinder hypnose reference in the film depicts thomas kind of like zeus. i'm going to guess not only has this parallel been touched on before but that you've probably thought about it already. take care.
I really like your analysis on this one. It can be hard to find film theorists whose ideas you can relate to or agree with, but this was spot on for me. It elaborated on a lot of the things I took away from the film and shed some new insight into others I had missed. Great job, thank you
I did not know what to expect from this movie, but I was totally thrilled at an educated and well written film. William Dafoe was absolutely amazing. Definitely an Oscar performance.
I really just wanted to say how greatful i am to watch an explanation of this movie not being only a video pointing about how it relates with the greek mitology ....I really got some minor interpretations and Im glad to see that you could relate that movie with what looks really important in it, not only the simbolism they used
Just found your channel. I LOVE your content. Thank you for the deep dives into the artistry that makes these movies/scenes so compelling.
I’ve watched three videos on this movie to understand it better, this is BY FAR the best one. This is despite the others having millions of views. I truly hope your channel grows! Liked and subbed
Okay just found you. I’m impressed , you’re a brilliant film essayist. So many “creators” just tell what happens in a film- something I just don’t understand the allure of. Simply put, anyone can do that. Like Stuckman, or the guy with 90’s haircut dude with a high voice who just explains the ending (I lOVE when someone tells me how to think about Art). Anyways, subscribed, going through your work now. Thank you again.
This was by far the best analysis I have found so far. Thank you for making the video! All of these other "explained" videos just restate the plot without giving any explanation.
Everytime they showed a shot of the lighthouse from outside, I wondered why the hell they have a enclosed tunnel linking the tower. Why didn't they just build the house at the base of the tower like other lighthouses do? Did they build the lighthouse first and add a house years later? Did they add the tunnel later when they found out the seas were sometimes too rough to even go outside? What does it all mean if anything?
INCREDIBLE analysis, you REALLY earned my sub... I’m gonna go binge your videos now.
I think I’ll have a smoke!!
The cinematography and shot composition of this movie reminds me so much of Sven Nykvist's work with Ingmar Bergman, particularly Through a Glass Darkly and Hour of the Wolf.
You are literally the only one who made an actual analysis video. The rest were all just giving literal summaries of the movie. You're very thorough! Instantly subscribed.
So impressed was I with this commentary that I listened to it twice: smart, observant, insightful. I am much impressed.
Saw this film for the first time today and was dumbstruck. Amazing picture. I noticed that accent change too, and have been looking around all over the 'net to see what peoples thoughts were. You're the first person I've seen to even mention it. It's one of the creepiest scenes in the movie and a stellar performance by Pattinson. It suggested to me, along with the reveal that they both have the same first name, that it might some Jungian/Freudian mashup of the psyche of one person losing his mind, or at least an indicator to the role-reversal that slowly starts happening between the two. But anyway, I think the accent thing is really a big deal even if I don't quite understand it.
"Hell" Yeah, actually, as it drew to a close, I very well thought the island could have been a metaphor for hell. It's only source of light is at the top, but both men spend most of their time at the bottom. Both are killers (In my opinion), and both try to act superior at several points. Neither want to admit their faults, Winslow spills his beans; but the truth behind his actions and motives are open to interpretation. And both try to claim light that really, they don't own. As much as the light can be a symbol of power, it can also be a symbol of redemption. A clean mental slate can be the ultimate source of personal power, the ability to sleep well, to fit in, and not be haunted by your past crimes. That is very desirable However, they never earned it, so they lay claim to the light hoping for purity; but it can never be theirs as both men never addressed their problems. So they became each other's demise, and cast the other into eternal darkness with no light whatsoever now. I love that this movie can inspire so many PoV's. All of them could be correct, or none, or we all touch upon Eggers' main idea at the same time. And like others, I was on edge during, but I felt creeped out after too. No movie has done that to me ever!
I'm loving all of your videos, I adore your analysis, I really need to re-watch the movie already, even if I watched it 4 hours ago.
Well thank you for saying that- i truly enjoyed working on this, despite not being able to talk about everything I wished to talk about. I certainly want to watch it again to see how I feel on my second viewing!
Just checked this movie tonight, behind the curve (I know). I really enjoyed your analysis and explanation. You earned another sub my friend, keep up the great work!
Hey dude, just wanted to let you know I just discovered your channel after watching Kairo and looking for video analysis's. I really enjoy your content. You got a subscribe from me.
The best analysis I've seen on this movie yet. Keep making these.
Whenever I look back at these types of movies I always see them as masterpieces and realize all the choices that were made, but I have to honest as I was absolutely mortified while watching it and would not say it is an enjoyable experience. Nevertheless, you raised excellent points and made a great analysis of the film.
Good job on this video! I just watched this movie tonight and really really didn't like it, but I was quite curious if maybe I was just missing something or if it was just mindless symbolism that really leads nowhere for the sake of "art". Your video shined a light (hehe) on some stuff that I didn't pick up on. I might give the movie another chance with your analysis in mind. Really good job!
Nice pun there. I'm glad you'll give it abother chance! It's a great film I find!
Well, if this didn’t scream, “Men-turn your back for two seconds and look what happens”, I don’t know what does…Thanks for a genuine in-depth look at a new favorite. So much here that it takes longer to deconstruct than watch, but the agoraphobia/claustrophobia of the B&W landscape was a great start-like they’d already moved to some timeless dimension. Dafoe and Pattinson were beyond great. Pattinson has made a string of these “art house” films, like GOOD TIME and HIGH LIFE, and he’s riveting. Willem Dafoe is pure legend. He sure doesn’t work with Eggers to look pretty. I can’t remember the last time lighting made humans so monstrous. This should have taken home a mantle of statues.
Great work, man! Keep it up, you'll have thousands of subs in no time.
A real fine, lucid and honest approach to the film! Congratulations!
Just watched The Lighthouse last night for the first time. Wow. Superb vid/analysis brother, very thought-provoking like the movie is.
Bruv I LOVE ur mind. Brilliant parallels. Instant sub. 👌
Subscribed. Excellent insight. Keep it up. Off to watch everything ye got, say I!
Love your videos ! Have you considered making a analysis for Under the silver lake?
Thanks! Is that from the director of 'it follows'? I actually haven't watched it! I'll def give it a watch soon and see how it flows :)
@@SpikimaMovies Yes they are from the same director
Appreciating this analysis, this is great. 👏🏻
This movie scared me and i didnt even know what it is i was scared of until i found this very well put together video. Nice job mate.
It's just so eerie- cant quite put a finger on what makes it that way while watching!
Maybe it's because I'm Scandinavian, but I didn't see an octopus, I saw Kraken (one of many old Scandinavian sea monsters)
this movie was wild!! i loved it. thanks for the analysis. was wondering about that nude scene on the shore haha.
Wauw this was very insightful. Even in life itself, well done man.
Great video. Excited for more. Subscribed
A common interpretation I've seen, is that in the end, Winslow is punished for his crime. My question though--is he punished for killing the seagull or for his past? When they brought up Winslow's previous job, it seems he was responsible for the death of a man. I would argue that his punishment started as soon as he got onto the island though. Right away Wake put him to work like a slave. It gets confusing. Next, there's speculation saying that there was never anything in the lighthouse. I find that hard to believe. Why would Wake be so protective of it? The only reason I can think of is for his own ego. He needed to assert himself. There has to be something within the light otherwise why would Winslow react the way he did after he encountered it? I thought it was pretty clear that Winslow was punished after contact with the light--a direct correlation. The Bible interpretation is a little difficult for me to accept since Wake might be wise, but would not consider him to be a saint worthy of God's light. He cursed Winslow with eternal torture after getting offended over his cooking skills.
That was a very concise analysis of this film. You just got subd.
Great analysis of a very interesting movie. Thanks.
Since Eggers said it's open to interpretation and the movie is clearly inspired by Lovecraft and I'm a huge fan of his work I'll choose this approach: Everything is real and Thomas can be in the presence of the entity because he has gone mad long ago and worships it. Ephraim is just a guy starting to work there, slowly going mad and getting attracted to the light. To me when he finally gets there he isn't judged or sent anywhere, he just couldn't handle it. Also I can't say for sure that the light revealed itself to Thomas to begin with, by that I mean, didn't open that door thing and let him directly look at it. Maybe he was just close enough to be in ecstasy but stay alive. And taking a page from your interpretation maybe the entity decided to give a glimpse of it's true existence to Ephraim because he was uncontrollably obsessed with it, kinda like "you want it so bad? Here, have a taste". While in my interpretation Thomas just stumbled across it, accepted and adapted to the madness and lived there as a worshiper. I mean, it's really cool that it can be whatever we want, really. Your interpretation is great.
Loved the video and love the film. My favorite of last year. Subscribed.
I’m a film student and have fallen in love with your videos!!
Thanks that's great to hear :) glad you like em!
Just saw it and came here first. Just so you know how much I appreciate your ideas on films.
What do you think is the meaning behind Winslow having one eye missing like the seagull he killed during the end scene? (EDIT): after reading the script, it turns out Thomas (young) is laying broken with both his eye sockets burned out (images from the light having done so). The one-eyes gull returns to pull at his liver, referring to the dead sailor who tried to warn him earlier in the movie. The camera purposely (as explained in the script) does not pull out far enough to show the lighthouse or other buildings, only Thomas laying on “Pilot Rock”. This could indicate to us the lighthouse itself not being true to what we see but rather a means of causing the inevitable; the punishment Thomas must receive for trying to reach sanctuary after all the evil he has committed.
I feel like it rlly could be anything from a simple revenge/nod by the seagull, to hinting that ones before him has met the same fate and he too will follow their steps as the 'dead sailor/pirate' and become a seagull himself :) what did you think?
Hey man, for me all that happened in the lighthouse was on Thomas (Pattinson) mind as he was unconscious on the rocky shore (as we see on the final shot). Like a psycotic agonizing trip, where Thomas (Dafoe) was a manifestation of his own regret and guilt, like a judge/punisher archetype.. And the seagull having one eye and being annoying is how his subconcsious mind picked information his body was getting and show it to him, (like when you fell asleep watching a movie and your dream mix with it). My grandfather was a Psychologist and he liked Freud a lot (he would have love this movie), and i get that Freudian vibe of symbolism and dreams on the movie. The inner fight of a man as he is dying slowly, painfully and lonely.
I wish this video was 1 hour long. Seriously, I loved hearing your thoughts on the movie and I think you expressed some really interesting ideas. I don't know if you agree with me, but watching this movie I was reminded of The Master by Paul Thomas Anderson in the way the relationship between the two male protagonists is played out, with all the power dynamics and sexual tensions between them. It's also interesting that in both movies the man who is more submissive in the relationship is compared to an animal: in this movie Robert Pattinson is literally called a dog, but in The Master you can argue that Joaquin Phoenix is treated like a dog by his Master, although I feel like the relationships in both films are very ambivalent and there is some sort of twisted love that seems to be happening (just think about the scene in the Lighthouse where the protagonists almost kiss after tenderly dancing together, or in The Master when Lancaster Dodd at the end sings to Freddie bringing him to tears). Anyway, I would love to hear your thoughts on this and thank you for your amazing work.
I'm glad you liked it! I have to rewatch The Master to be sure but from my memory alone, I think you're right! I'll give it a watch keeping that in mind ;)
love this guy's voice, subscribed!
I have to say, this is probably Willem's finest performance since maybe The Passion Of The Christ. Pattinson has proved his worth as an actor far beyond those awful days of Twighlight.
The Last Temptation of Christ. Sorry I don't want to be a correction A-Hole 😅
Hes great in Mississippi Burning, Platoon, To Live And Die in LA.
Yeah. Patterson is good!
It was Definately a twightlight zone vibe
First I thought this is just a lunatic story and weird overall but this explanation takes it on another level!!
7:50 I think its not that god had unbearable holiness. But unbearable truthfulness or divine knowledge. Imagine being exposed to the real truth of the world. You would personally come to understand the suffering of everyone. The truth of your smallness and insignificance. The joke that is your ego. Tomas can handle truth because wistom age and experience strengthens one to it. When we are younger we chose comfortable ideologies, where as when we get older we become more and more willing to accept the uncomfortable complexity and grayness of morality. We realize that reality never fit into our ideological boxes but that those boxes were actually there as defense mechanisms not real explanatory models. This is further reinforced by the idea that light is used as a symbol for truth an knowledge. And the parallels to the story of adam and eve where the apple represents knowledge seems to work here as well. Now what truth is winslow finally facing at the end of this film? Probably he is finally introspecting. Remember how when he let that man die all he could think of was that he wanted a smoke. He walled himself off and somehow managed to not introspect. When he finally does, and he confronts what a sinful person he is, he isnt widened enough to handle it, unlike thomas. Introspection can be a beautiful thing, even for a sinner, if one is strong enough to handle it. In that way the same light could be searingly destructive to winslow and orgasmic for thomas. I think this matches the symbology of Thomas having testicles up there in the lighhouse. Its not that he can handle the light of self knowledge because he is a good person, hes a sinner too, the tentacles are showing that hes a monster and he knows it, but we all are, and self knowledge is still a beautiful thing to those who can handle it.
Excellent insight and interpretation~
Wow your video explaining the symbolism of this movie is 1,000 times better than Paul Ager's on collative learning!!❤
That was a very good analysis my guy! Keep up the good work!
Thanks! Means a lot!
@@SpikimaMovies no problem!
honestly I think you were right on with the comparison to the tabernacle
Awesome analysis...masterful movie!
with the last question you posed and your answer, about what good is it for someone to reach the light without the work represented to get there... i think that's where it adds up, in my interpretation, that both thomas' are the same person at least in an abstract way. because you ask this about young Thomas, but what about old Thomas? did he do the "work"? He certainly makes a point to do little work in the movie, as is always inherent to the relationship between the boss and the employer, while Ephraim/young Thomas does the manual labor, which you described as feminine, which. Okay I could see that. I saw shots like the wide shot with him carrying the wheelbarrow as being about, yeah, the isolation, sure,,,, but the audience really has to sit with him while he's laboring. it's slow and hard. maybe young Thomas is genuinely being told he might get a chance at being a lightkeeper one day but I dunno. From a class struggle analysis which can't really be avoided with this movie, it sounds like the same false promises of capitalists. I'll tell you you can be strong like me, but at the same time, I'll tell you you're inferior, either through words or through actions. I think he basically calls young Thomas inferior in the script, actually. Part of the takeaway for me within this class struggle analysis is that they're basically the same person in that there is no essential difference between the boss and the employer, and the relationship is built on lies. Seeing them struggle on the floor and wrestle and such draws attention to the absurdity of the relationship - this is supported by the setting being the way it is, isolated and all. take their power struggle and give it to some other characters in some larger than life conflict between the "underdog" and the self imposed "owner" and it generally won't feel the same, the way in the Lighthouse, these two men's positions are so obviously not rigid or natural and even switch over the course of the movie. also,,,, wow I didn't know either of them were meant to be masturbating in that scene so maybe I'm not the best for film analysis tldr i got the impression maybe from my own ""bias"" (of being anticapitalist as a given) that the old man was in no way more qualified than winslow to his ""job"" which. wasn't a job, really, but power/ a fading monopoly on violence. my other takeaway was that they're both the same person at least in an abstract sense and timing and literal sense wise it doesn't matter which face or name is in which position here, the abuse will be inevitable in that relationship.
Not done with the video yet but you mention "the raven". Look at "The Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner".
Very interesting! Thanks for letting me know
i’ve been waiting for someone to pick that up!!!! it was the first thing that came to mind
I don’t know if this is a thing, but I noticed about 4 times in the movie Winslow is shown with something fallen past his waist (walking around with trousers half off, sitting with trousers pulled down his waist etc...) and it looked to me like it was mirroring a mermaid’s tail. I can’t figure out what signifance that would have haha, but for some reason it stood out to me as intentional...
Analyze Portrait of a Lady on Fire please!