The Lightkeepers

Plot from an old novel

Author: dsgrundy from United States 14 May 2013

I probably enjoyed this movie so much, because I'm an avid reader of old books and recognized this story the minute I saw it. This movie plot was taken almost verbatim, including most of the character names and main events from an old Cape Cod story by author Joseph C. Lincoln. The book was titled "The Women Haters" and the original copy-write was 1904.

* * * * * *

A cut-down (novella length) version with the same title was also published in Ainslee's Magazine, v. 27, May, 1911, pp. 1-37. (Dr. Charles G. Waugh)

What a relief to see a movie that was actually "made," not "digitally processed," although Blythe Danner still looks so terrific, it's tempting to believe she had help. Maybe Richard Dreyfuss puts on a "Kap'n Karl" growl a little more than necessary as an irascible woman-hater lighthouse keeper; but Tom Wisdom as his assistant-with-a-secret, with a Michael York voice coming out of a Keanu Reeves face, keeps up with him. The film manages--no easy feat in this day and age--to be a charming, sweet (maybe a tad too much), simple story about people, not special effects, without descending to the TV movie level. It's not an action-packed roller coaster ride, nobody farts or masturbates, nobody's naked, and nobody explodes, so it may confuse modern moviegoers (at least the ones under 30). But "The Lightkeepers," in its own modest way, has its own rewards, not the least of which being a rare--if short--screen appearance by Julie Harris toward the end.

A few minutes into this film I became interested in it's origin. Lo and behold it dates back over a decade before the Great war. A somewhat simpler time to the century following that conflict.

This story is a novelization of an earlier short story perhaps a decade it's junior. I feel this an important fact to remember. Darwin is but a few years in the past and Orwell decades in the future... A simpler time. (Perhaps I give the era less respect than I should?)

It seems to me the original author enjoyed writing while wearing rose glasses. Certainly he enjoyed himself and the place in which his stories are portrayed...

But to the film you dolt, this is IMDB!!!

The film reflects it's origin. Ben Hur it is not. Nor does it want or intend to be. This is light entertainment. It does indeed call to mind actual people and events that can and do happen. It is not as unrealistic as some in this later age may think.

Bottom line. If you are relaxed, happen to simply wish to be entertained with a simple tale involving enjoyable characters, you may enjoy this. If however you expect the earth to shake and experience a life changing revelation, this is not for you.

I enjoyed it, was mildly surprised at times, and happy for the characters.

The cast is great. Bruce Dern is in it!!! More like a play than a film in many ways.

Nice.

My wife and I really enjoyed this simple movie. No CGI, no swearing, drug use or gratuitous pandering. It's a fun look at the battle of the sexes and also the fencing among men when they get together. I loved the dialogue and the back and forth between the two men. For older audiences this would be a welcome entertainment. I could see how this movie would transfer easily onto the stage as well.

virtue - the cast. but it is not a great virtue. Richard ZDreyfuss is a kind of Santa in a strange story. the script is a tunnel without beginning or end.the Hallmark atmosphere and the slices of Summer dream are not convincing. it is a nice film. but expectations are not very small. and the result is an easy - amusing tale about love as turkey in which ingredients are too many.an ordinary ring with a precious stone. is it enough ? not exactly. in fact, it is a yellow picture , with few nostalgic words, in which faces, houses, light are absent. and imagination is the instrument to create reality of that time. sure, details are good thing. but a bath costume or a happy end are not reasonable price.