Skip to main content

Bad luck to kill a seabird.

The Lighthouse
(2019)

(SPOILERS) Robert Eggers’ acclaimed – and Oscar-nominated – second feature is, in some respects, a similar beast to his previous The Witch, whereby isolated individuals of bygone eras are subjected to the unsparing attentions of nature. In his scheme of things, nature becomes an active, embodied force, one that has no respect for the line between imaginings and reality and which proceeds to test its targets’ sanity by means of both elements and elementals. All helped along by unhealthy doses of superstition. But where The Witch sustained itself, and the gradual unravelling of the family unit led to a germane climax, The Lighthouse becomes, well, rather silly.

Is that a somewhat glib verdict? I don’t think so. As noted, Eggers (with his brother Robert sharing screenplay duties) is venturing back into the territory of the mind overwhelmed by the natural world, with all the evils, fantasies and unchecked emotions that can be set loose in the absence of civilisation to distract or suppress it. But The Lighthouse’s framework authorises too much unearned escalation into unhinged states too soon, and without enough consistency to be convincing.

Ephraim Winslow/Thomas Howard (Robert Pattison) doesn’t drink a drop of spirits for his first four weeks on the rock, but very soon during that time he’s hallucinating visions of enticing mermaids. Thomas Wake (Willem Dafoe) is already on the antic side, a (highly enjoyable) caricature of the salty old seadog complete with gammy leg, who strips off in the lightroom – which he exclusively occupies as his own ("Take your duties. The light is mine") – as if he’s experiencing a nightly rite of religious ecstasy (complete with ejaculate). But he’s just crusty, not kill happy.

Essentially, the insanity that takes a hold – essentially of Howard – is insufficiently motivated. Eggers creates a great visual sense, with the black and white, 1:19:1, 35mm frame, but he fails to muster the claustrophobic encroachment on the mind that gripped Roman Polanski’s Repulsion, or even the pervasive, creeping paranoia of his previous film. Howard flips back and forth, once he is storm stranded, between getting pissed out of his gourd and performing the mundane menial chores. His state isn’t sustained, so his breaking point doesn’t convince when it comes.

At which point, The Lighthouse leaps off the deep end, with Howard’s confused perspective fracturing the timeframe and causing the confusion of little details such as who’s doing what to whom (Wake claims weeks have passed, and tells Howard the axe attack on the boat by the elder keeper actually occurred the other way round). All culminating in Wake on a leash, buried alive – before returning for some gratuitous violence – and Howard finally venturing up to the lightroom as if re-enacting Danny Boyle’s Sunshine. But that isn’t quite the end of it: he takes a tumble, and is finished off by gulls risibly pecking him to bits. I mean, it’s very silly, isn’t it?

I was put in mind of Midsommar several times, where a lot of good work is done in establishing mood and aesthetic sense, but the filmmaker ultimately appears exhausted of inspiration for how to bring matters to a satisfying head. And so he proceeds incautiously; so much easier just to get very messy. There’s a point where The Lighthouse’s perpetual, storm-tossed drunken abandon begins to test the patience, and it’s the sure sign of desperation that Eggers reroutes his existential character study into full-blown art gore.

There’s also that the director, despite his keen visual instincts, falls back on geek-pleasing standard visual tropes – tentacle monsters, seductive sirens, the admittedly perfectly-captured Dafoe as Triton – so doubling down on the sense that, despite the laudable focus on two actors, The Lighthouse is almost all about the visuals and the authenticity of setting rather than the content.

I’d suggest the atmosphere is a major achievement, except that I think Eggers fails to imbue the piece with a real sense of madness borne of isolation, or even a proper sense of setting (we have no idea of the isle’s geography, and surely the first thing Howard would do would be to explore it). Eggers relishes the dirt, filth, depravity, the lack of hygiene, the farting, the wanking, the excrement (full in the face), the cold and the damp, the storms and desolation of the spot, but none of this actually amounts to very much. This most certainly isn’t a haunting tale, one that stays with you. It is, despite its palate, garish and grotesque, too large and lurid and obsessed with its viscera to be affecting or convincing. When its protagonists descend into drinking turps, I was put more in mind of The Goodies (who also made a memorable lighthouse episode, Lighthouse Keeping Loonies), than anything dramatically cogent.

Then there are the characters. Dafoe’s great – he always is – as the sometimes-incomprehensible Wake, mighty of beard and given to voicing his myriad superstitions, curses and tall tales. He also delivers the overwhelming majority of the picture’s laughs. But Wake isn’t allowed a soul; he’s much too much a reflection of Howard’s impression of him, his fear, hatred and, to some extent, awe. And Pattison is reliable in his sullen intensity as Howard, but Howard only really engages as a character when he’s the subject of Wake’s tyranny. He isn’t interesting, even when he’s revealing his dark secrets. There’s an extent to which this is germane – Wake mocks Howard for being nothing special, for being just like anyone else feeling life owes them something – but it makes the lurch into more extreme territory in the final twenty minutes banal, for all its intensity. Indeed, the reverse dynamic reveal borders on, dare I say it, trite.

There are elements here, the brooding paranoia, the sexual undercurrents and over-currents felt by the men – in response to the environment (events go south, via the onset of the storm, after Howard kills a seagull in a frenzied rage), directed at each other, fantasised mermaids or an all-consuming lifeforce (or lightforce), the anarchic abandon that comes with intoxication – that Eggers handles extremely deftly. And he’s an expert at suggesting man’s fragility in the face of nature and myth. Plus, his depiction of insane seagulls is every bit as memorable as his goat in The Witch. And yet, The Lighthouse is a film that only seems to be saying a lot, until it boils down to saying very little.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We live in a twilight world.

Tenet (2020)
(SPOILERS) I’ve endured a fair few confusingly-executed action sequences in movies – more than enough, actually – but I don’t think I’ve previously had the odd experience of being on the edge of my seat during one while simultaneously failing to understand its objectives and how those objectives are being attempted. Which happened a few times during Tenet. If I stroll over to the Wiki page and read the plot synopsis, it is fairly explicable (fairly) but as a first dive into this Christopher Nolan film, I frequently found it, if not impenetrable, then most definitely opaque.

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds. Juno and the Paycock, set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.

Anything can happen in Little Storping. Anything at all.

The Avengers 2.22: Murdersville
Brian Clemens' witty take on village life gone bad is one of the highlights of the fifth season. Inspired by Bad Day at Black Rock, one wonders how much Murdersville's premise of unsettling impulses lurking beneath an idyllic surface were set to influence both Straw Dogs and The Wicker Mana few years later (one could also suggest it premeditates the brand of backwoods horrors soon to be found in American cinema from the likes of Wes Craven and Tobe Hooper).

The protocol actually says that most Tersies will say this has to be a dream.

Jupiter Ascending (2015)
(SPOILERS) The Wachowski siblings’ wildly patchy career continues apace. They bespoiled a great thing with The Matrix sequels (I liked the first, not the second), misfired with Speed Racer (bubble-gum visuals aside, hijinks and comedy ain’t their forte) and recently delivered the Marmite Sense8 for Netflix (I was somewhere in between on it). Their only slam-dunk since The Matrix put them on the movie map is Cloud Atlas, and even that’s a case of rising above its limitations (mostly prosthetic-based). Jupiter Ascending, their latest cinema outing and first stab at space opera, elevates their lesser works by default, however. It manages to be tone deaf in all the areas that count, and sadly fetches up at the bottom of their filmography pile.

This is a case where the roundly damning verdicts have sadly been largely on the ball. What’s most baffling about the picture is that, after a reasonably engaging set-up, it determinedly bores the pants off you. I haven’t enco…

James Bond. You appear with the tedious inevitability of an unloved season.

Moonraker (1979)
Depending upon your disposition, and quite possibly age, Moonraker is either the Bond film that finally jumped the shark or the one that is most gloriously redolent of Roger Moore’s knowing take on the character. Many Bond aficionados will no doubt utter its name with thinly disguised contempt, just as they will extol with gravity how Timothy Dalton represented a masterful return to the core values of the series. If you regard For Your Eyes Only as a refreshing return to basics after the excesses of the previous two entries, and particularly the space opera grandstanding of this one, it’s probably fair to say you don’t much like Roger Moore’s take on Bond.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991)
(SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

My dear, sweet brother Numsie!

The Golden Child (1986)
Post-Beverly Hills Cop, Eddie Murphy could have filmed himself washing the dishes and it would have been a huge hit. Which might not have been a bad idea, since he chose to make this misconceived stinker.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

When I barked, I was enormous.

Dean Spanley (2008)
(SPOILERS) There is such a profusion of average, respectable – but immaculately made – British period drama held up for instant adulation, it’s hardly surprising that, when something truly worthy of acclaim comes along, it should be singularly ignored. To be fair, Dean Spanleywas well liked by critics upon its release, but its subsequent impact has proved disappointingly slight. Based on Lord Dunsany’s 1939 novella, My Talks with Dean Spanley, our narrator relates how the titular Dean’s imbibification of a moderate quantity of Imperial Tokay (“too syrupy”, is the conclusion reached by both members of the Fisk family regarding this Hungarian wine) precludes his recollection of a past life as a dog. 

Inevitably, reviews pounced on the chance to reference Dean Spanley as a literal shaggy dog story, so I shall get that out of the way now. While the phrase is more than fitting, it serves to underrepresent how affecting the picture is when it has cause to be, as does any re…