Skip to main content

The Light Between Oceans

Image result for light between oceans movie


I'm thinking about The Light Between Oceans, a movie in the historical romance genre. It opened on September 2, which is called a "fall release" in Hollywood marketing terms, though sticklers will point to the calendar and say it was released in the summer.

It was not a huge commercial success. I saw it, in a less-than-packed theater, that first weekend. It was sixth at the box office that weekend.

SPOILER ALERT. Don't read further if you plan to see the movie and may want to be surprised by the plot twists, such as they are.

But commercial success isn't what I'm thinking about this morning. I'm thinking about the "compare and contrast" the movie makers set up between their story and the classic Bible story about Solomon and a baby.

Much of the film takes place on a small island off the coast of northwestern Australia, where the protagonist couple tend a lighthouse. There is talk about how critical the lighthouse is, as the Indian and Pacific Oceans meet there. Thus the resonant title of the movie.

We're in the 1920s, and Tom Sherbourne has served honorably in war, but has become morose and withdrawn, which renders him perfect for the lighthouse post. The courtship of Tom and the woman who joins him on that island as his wife, Isabel, nee Graysmark, is sketched in quickly.

Their married life on the island is painted idyllically, but for two miscarriages. After the second of these, by marvelous synchronicity, a dinghy washes up on shore with a grown man's dead body and a still-living baby girl. Since the outside world knows only of Isabel's second pregnancy -- it doesn't yet know of the miscarriage -- the couple decides upon a deception. They tell the world that Isabel has given birth (somewhat prematurely) to the expected baby. Then they raise this child, Lucy, as their own.

Four years pass, and we see Lucy Sherbourne happily walking, talking, fully adapted to life on an island and devoted to the parents she knows. At this point, the biological parents enter the picture, because they've finally managed to get the authorities curious about the disappearance of their child and of its uncle -- the dead fellow on that dinghy.

Now at this point you, my educated reader, will see the point of my mention of Solomon above. He hit upon a happy decision to another dilemma involving two women both of whom claimed to be the mother of one baby: threaten the baby's life! The one mother willing to give up her claim, for the baby's sake, is the true mother.

This novel differs from the bible story in a number of ways. One of these is that there is no Wise Authority called upon to make a decision. The authorities are more interested in a murder mystery than in a custody issue. We, the viewers, know there was no murder, but the authorities don't know that and the question of the manner of the uncle's death distracts them.

The question of who will raise the child for the rest of her childhood, and whether she will come to see herself as "Lucy" or as "Grace," -- these matters are decided by happenstance with a lot of bumbling along and muddling through. BUT the parallel to the Solomon case holds. The mother willing to give up her claim is in the end the mother more fit to care for Lucy-Grace. The right choice makes itself, in the absence of a King to make it.

Not just a weepy, then. Superior, I think, to the Nicholas Sparks stuff with which it has been compared.
 


Comments

  1. If you need your ex-girlfriend or ex-boyfriend to come crawling back to you on their knees (even if they're dating somebody else now) you need to watch this video
    right away...

    (VIDEO) Why your ex will NEVER get back...

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.



We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majestic wate…

Hume's Cutlery

David Hume is renowned for two pieces of cutlery, the guillotine and the fork.

Hume's guillotine is the sharp cut he makes between "is" statements and "ought" statements, to make the point that the former never ground the latter.

His "fork" is the division between what later came to be called "analytic" and "synthetic" statements, with the ominous observation that any books containing statements that cannot be assigned to one or the other prong should be burnt.

Actually, I should acknowledge that there is some dispute as to how well or poorly the dichotomy Hume outlines really maps onto the analytic/synthetic dichotomy. Some writers maintain that Hume meant something quite different and has been hijacked. Personally, I've never seen the alleged difference however hard they've worked to point it out to me.

The guillotine makes for a more dramatic graphic than a mere fork, hence the bit of clip art above.

I'm curious whe…

Cancer Breakthrough

Hopeful news in recent days about an old and dear desideratum: a cure for cancer. Or at least for a cancer, and a nasty one at that.

The news comes about because investors in GlaxoSmithKline are greedy for profits, and has already inspired a bit of deregulation to boot. 

The FDA has paved the road for a speedy review of a new BCMA drug for multiple myeloma, essentially cancer of the bone marrow. This means that the US govt has removed some of the hurdles that would otherwise (by decision of the same govt) face a company trying to proceed with these trials expeditiously. 

This has been done because the Phase I clinical trial results have been very promising. The report I've seen indicates that details of these results will be shared with the world on Dec. 11 at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology. 

The European Medicines Agency has also given priority treatment to the drug in question. 

GSK's website identifies the drug at issue as "GSK2857916," althou…