I really didn't think about it yet, somehow I prefer to stick with the visual impression of this movie without thinking too much about its meanings. The movie is brilliantly shot, the cinematographer Jarin Blaschke did phenomenal work on this, the movie is absolutely stunning visually.

The deeper meanings are always getting symbolic in such type of movies, very similar to Aronofsky's "mother!", only without the biblical symbolism. Well, here we go, I'll try to scramble something. I guess this is more political under-theme in this movie. The island represents an Earth, or maybe a human civilization. Both keepers represent different generations, the Lighthouse is some kind of symbol of power, political or religious. Older keeper that represents a generation that actually controls the world wants to keep the power and doesn't want to share it with the young generation. And the young is being tormented by hallucinations in the world he doesn't understand and his actions cause the world to get worse, eventually leading to a chaos and to the annihilation of the old. While being unprepared for the power the inexperienced young keeper suffers the consequences and ends up being eaten alive piece by piece by birds, a punishment similar to what Prometheus received from Zeus.

I guess it is possible to interpret this movie as Zeus and Prometheus story, a bit loose comparison. But the thematic subject is similar, old conservatism against young progressiveness, political ideologies at battle. The young keeper wanted the light to himself, was not concerned sharing it with someone else, at least not in the story of the film. But I guess his attempt to see the light was towards removing restrictions so everyone will have access.

The ending is ambiguous, it is not clear why the light rejected him and why he suffered the punishment. Could be that he was not ready, he was a murderer and didn't care about others but himself, so he couldn't handle the light. The light is probably not a hint to something mysterious or religious, I doubt that. It is just a source of power, and someone ambitious that is not prepared cannot handle it and will suffer the consequences.

Anyway, just my few cents. Don't think they were trying to show a coherent meaning, just a bunch of ideas mixed together with various influences. Sometimes it is best when you don't get to exact interpretation of the movie. Reminds me of what Lynch did in his prime, and it's a good thing.

@D-magic said:

Anyway, just my few cents. Don't think they were trying to show a coherent meaning, just a bunch of ideas mixed together with various influences. Sometimes it is best when you don't get to exact interpretation of the movie. Reminds me of what Lynch did in his prime, and it's a good thing.

That was quite an effort and well stated for simply giving it a scramble. The only thing I can't quite buy is your closing comment above...I don't think an artist makes a film such as this, nor recruits and gets the likes of Willem Dafoe, nor painstakingly crafts the final product, all without having a coherent meaning. I do agree that sometimes it's best left unsaid, and as you rightly point out, overall it's a good thing.

@D-magic said:

I really didn't think about it yet, somehow I prefer to stick with the visual impression of this movie without thinking too much about its meanings. The movie is brilliantly shot, the cinematographer Jarin Blaschke did phenomenal work on this, the movie is absolutely stunning visually.

The deeper meanings are always getting symbolic in such type of movies, very similar to Aronofsky's "mother!", only without the biblical symbolism. Well, here we go, I'll try to scramble something. I guess this is more political under-theme in this movie. The island represents an Earth, or maybe a human civilization. Both keepers represent different generations, the Lighthouse is some kind of symbol of power, political or religious. Older keeper that represents a generation that actually controls the world wants to keep the power and doesn't want to share it with the young generation. And the young is being tormented by hallucinations in the world he doesn't understand and his actions cause the world to get worse, eventually leading to a chaos and to the annihilation of the old. While being unprepared for the power the inexperienced young keeper suffers the consequences and ends up being eaten alive piece by piece by birds, a punishment similar to what Prometheus received from Zeus.

I guess it is possible to interpret this movie as Zeus and Prometheus story, a bit loose comparison. But the thematic subject is similar, old conservatism against young progressiveness, political ideologies at battle. The young keeper wanted the light to himself, was not concerned sharing it with someone else, at least not in the story of the film. But I guess his attempt to see the light was towards removing restrictions so everyone will have access.

The ending is ambiguous, it is not clear why the light rejected him and why he suffered the punishment. Could be that he was not ready, he was a murderer and didn't care about others but himself, so he couldn't handle the light. The light is probably not a hint to something mysterious or religious, I doubt that. It is just a source of power, and someone ambitious that is not prepared cannot handle it and will suffer the consequences.

Anyway, just my few cents. Don't think they were trying to show a coherent meaning, just a bunch of ideas mixed together with various influences. Sometimes it is best when you don't get to exact interpretation of the movie. Reminds me of what Lynch did in his prime, and it's a good thing.

Great interpretation. I don't think it's what Eggers intended but it all totally fits.

In today's culture wars I don't think a filmmaker would be brave enough to portray the "progressive" generation in any kind of negative light. And there is no way the critics would then shower the film with praise as they have done.

But art like this in intended for personal interpretation and in that sense your version is correct.