This is submission has perfect timing, since I finally got around to watching this (most anticipated) film a few nights ago! It felt a bit jarring watching it in the 1.19:1 aspect ratio at first,...
This is submission has perfect timing, since I finally got around to watching this (mostanticipated) film a few nights ago!
It felt a bit jarring watching it in the 1.19:1 aspect ratio at first, but I was actually surprised at how quickly I completely stopped consciously noticing it and was totally drawn by the story/setting/acting. And I 100% agree that it was a great decision, since it did feel like it added a subconscious anxiety (and claustrophobia) to the viewing experience. It also allowed for some absolutely beautiful shot composition, as shown in the article.
The only thing I disagree with is that I felt like the running time of 1h49m was near perfect, and I think that cutting even the suggested 19 minutes out would have potentially undermined the slow build up of tension before the climax. However, it should be noted that I rarely ever experience boredom during even incredibly long, painfully slow movies like Stalker... so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
SpoilersAnd speaking of the climax. The complete mental breakdown both characters experienced at the end was heavily foreshadowed so not really surprising, but was still kept interesting due to the absolutely phenomenal acting and the bizarre hallucinatory scenes mixed into it. The final shot with the Prometheus reference was a nice touch, but it felt somewhat unsatisfactory to me. I would have liked it better if instead it had ended with the light enveloping Pattinson's character as he continued screaming in agony.
Thanks for reading! I actually watched many films by Andrei Tarkovski and Ingmar Bergman, with similar pacing and content, and did not find them excessively long. The Lighthouse seems to reenact a...
Thanks for reading!
I actually watched many films by Andrei Tarkovski and Ingmar Bergman, with similar pacing and content, and did not find them excessively long.
The Lighthouse seems to reenact a few of its dialogues, which are repeated (in terms of content and narrative function) with little to no development. There could have been a lot more "hallucinatory" scenes (we actually don't know if they're hallucinations). This might have fixed the pacing quite easily.
spoiler
I would have liked it better if instead it had ended with the light enveloping Pattinson's character as he continued screaming in agony.
This would have been better indeed. But the filmmaker's choice was clearly referential. I'm not sure, but I believe the last shot is straight from Buñuel. Or maybe Godard. My memory fails me.
spoiler
It also has the purpose of just fucking with our heads, forcing us to create a hypothesis that explains how the character ended up at that place.
Agree to disagree about the pacing I guess... but I too wish they had amped up the hallucinations, and explored that aspect a lot more too, instead of focusing so much on just the dialogue between...
Agree to disagree about the pacing I guess... but I too wish they had amped up the hallucinations, and explored that aspect a lot more too, instead of focusing so much on just the dialogue between the two characters.
edit: hidden now, since this is kinda spoilery tooIn fact, when I originally saw the trailer, I assumed that Pattinson and Dafoe were actually the same character, or if not that, one was still entirely a figment of the other's imagination, and in essence the whole movie would be hallucinatory. So I was kinda hoping for something even more mind-bending than what it turned out to be.
I still thoroughly enjoyed it though. :)
But the filmmaker's choice was clearly referential.
Lovely. The final image of the movie is … something. It’s clearly a Prometheus reference, but it’s brutal, and my audience seemed stunned. Did you always know it would end there?
My brother really thought that the final image was stupid. And when I had revised the third draft and sent him that, he said, “We can’t possibly do that. That’s really over the top and ridiculous.”
Look, the mythological imagery in this movie, where it is, is very on the nose, and I acknowledge that, but I’ll still try my best to be elusive in answering your question. So basically, my brother found Act One and Act Two fairly easily, but Act Three was a continuing challenge. And once we had finally found it, we understood, because of aspects that were influenced by Melville, that there were going to be allusions to classical mythology. We thought rather than saying “What folk tale or fairy tale narrative did we accidentally stumble upon?” we’d say, “What classical mythology story or stories did we stumble upon?” Once we figured what we were doing, where those parallels existed, that’s when the final shot came into existence.
Yeah... that's the part of film analysis I find less interesting, to be frank. Delving in symbology and references feel like you're learning something secret and profound, but the reality is that...
Yeah... that's the part of film analysis I find less interesting, to be frank. Delving in symbology and references feel like you're learning something secret and profound, but the reality is that most films make it look like they're deep but it's all smoke and mirrors. This is not something I consider negative, I just find the formal aspects way more approachable, consistent and enticing.
Besides, when it comes to formal analysis, you can say things with a greater degree of certainty.
Yeah, I'm not particularly keen on dissecting the ssssssymbolism ;) in movies (or literature, or art) either, and am more of a cinematography fan myself. Give me a series of beautiful,...
Yeah, I'm not particularly keen on dissecting the symbology ssssssymbolism;) in movies (or literature, or art) either, and am more of a cinematography fan myself. Give me a series of beautiful, interesting, and well composed scenes with a great score backing them, and I am happy as a clam. Heck, I don't even need dialogue or any semblance of a story half the time.... hence my love of Koyaanisqatsi/Powaqqatsi/Naqoyqatsi, Baraka, The Holy Mountain, etc...
Thanks for mentioning Stalker. I just watched it and had a great time. Not sure how many viewings it would take to find a framework of meaning in it, though.
Thanks for mentioning Stalker. I just watched it and had a great time. Not sure how many viewings it would take to find a framework of meaning in it, though.
NP... and awesome, I'm glad you enjoyed it! It's one of my all-time favs. Heh, I doubt I could help you there... I am absolutely terrible at sussing out hidden meaning in movies. My enjoyment of...
NP... and awesome, I'm glad you enjoyed it! It's one of my all-time favs.
find a framework of meaning in it
Heh, I doubt I could help you there... I am absolutely terrible at sussing out hidden meaning in movies. My enjoyment of Stalker, and other surreal/esoteric/abstract/absurd movies like it (e.g. Waiting for Godot, The Holy Mountain, Eraserhead, Dreams, Jacob's Ladder, Ninth Configuration, Zero Theorem, Mr. Nobody, etc.), stems from my appreciation of their beautiful cinematography, evocative imagery, the acting in them, and/or the almost hypnotic/meditative state they often put me in while watching them, rather than from any meaning I can discern from them (which I usually can't, TBH).
This is submission has perfect timing, since I finally got around to watching this (most anticipated) film a few nights ago!
It felt a bit jarring watching it in the 1.19:1 aspect ratio at first, but I was actually surprised at how quickly I completely stopped consciously noticing it and was totally drawn by the story/setting/acting. And I 100% agree that it was a great decision, since it did feel like it added a subconscious anxiety (and claustrophobia) to the viewing experience. It also allowed for some absolutely beautiful shot composition, as shown in the article.
The only thing I disagree with is that I felt like the running time of 1h49m was near perfect, and I think that cutting even the suggested 19 minutes out would have potentially undermined the slow build up of tension before the climax. However, it should be noted that I rarely ever experience boredom during even incredibly long, painfully slow movies like Stalker... so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Spoilers
And speaking of the climax. The complete mental breakdown both characters experienced at the end was heavily foreshadowed so not really surprising, but was still kept interesting due to the absolutely phenomenal acting and the bizarre hallucinatory scenes mixed into it. The final shot with the Prometheus reference was a nice touch, but it felt somewhat unsatisfactory to me. I would have liked it better if instead it had ended with the light enveloping Pattinson's character as he continued screaming in agony.Thanks for reading!
I actually watched many films by Andrei Tarkovski and Ingmar Bergman, with similar pacing and content, and did not find them excessively long.
The Lighthouse seems to reenact a few of its dialogues, which are repeated (in terms of content and narrative function) with little to no development. There could have been a lot more "hallucinatory" scenes (we actually don't know if they're hallucinations). This might have fixed the pacing quite easily.
spoiler
This would have been better indeed. But the filmmaker's choice was clearly referential. I'm not sure, but I believe the last shot is straight from Buñuel. Or maybe Godard. My memory fails me.
spoiler
It also has the purpose of just fucking with our heads, forcing us to create a hypothesis that explains how the character ended up at that place.
Agree to disagree about the pacing I guess... but I too wish they had amped up the hallucinations, and explored that aspect a lot more too, instead of focusing so much on just the dialogue between the two characters.
edit: hidden now, since this is kinda spoilery too
In fact, when I originally saw the trailer, I assumed that Pattinson and Dafoe were actually the same character, or if not that, one was still entirely a figment of the other's imagination, and in essence the whole movie would be hallucinatory. So I was kinda hoping for something even more mind-bending than what it turned out to be.I still thoroughly enjoyed it though. :)
I assumed it was just a standard Prometheus reference, but didn't recognize it as being a direct nod to any particular film or filmmaker. A quick google search seems to suggest that it might be inspired by Melville:
https://slate.com/culture/2019/10/the-lighthouse-ending-meaning-director-robert-eggers-interview.html
Yeah... that's the part of film analysis I find less interesting, to be frank. Delving in symbology and references feel like you're learning something secret and profound, but the reality is that most films make it look like they're deep but it's all smoke and mirrors. This is not something I consider negative, I just find the formal aspects way more approachable, consistent and enticing.
Besides, when it comes to formal analysis, you can say things with a greater degree of certainty.
Yeah, I'm not particularly keen on dissecting the
symbologyssssssymbolism ;) in movies (or literature, or art) either, and am more of a cinematography fan myself. Give me a series of beautiful, interesting, and well composed scenes with a great score backing them, and I am happy as a clam. Heck, I don't even need dialogue or any semblance of a story half the time.... hence my love of Koyaanisqatsi/Powaqqatsi/Naqoyqatsi, Baraka, The Holy Mountain, etc...Thanks for mentioning Stalker. I just watched it and had a great time. Not sure how many viewings it would take to find a framework of meaning in it, though.
It's not that hard, really. The key to understanding him is pre-twentieth-century Christian mysticism.
Okay, that may not be entirely trivial :P
NP... and awesome, I'm glad you enjoyed it! It's one of my all-time favs.
Heh, I doubt I could help you there... I am absolutely terrible at sussing out hidden meaning in movies. My enjoyment of Stalker, and other surreal/esoteric/abstract/absurd movies like it (e.g. Waiting for Godot, The Holy Mountain, Eraserhead, Dreams, Jacob's Ladder, Ninth Configuration, Zero Theorem, Mr. Nobody, etc.), stems from my appreciation of their beautiful cinematography, evocative imagery, the acting in them, and/or the almost hypnotic/meditative state they often put me in while watching them, rather than from any meaning I can discern from them (which I usually can't, TBH).
Same! It's definitely a gorgeous movie in pacing, tone, and imagery.