Spoiler alert. Please watch "Lights Out" before you read. It’s a good movie, and I don’t want to spoil anything. Also if you haven’t watched "The Babadook" go watch that too – it’s excellent and also on Netflix (hurray!) If you haven’t read "The Shining" by now that’s your own fault... also read "The Shining"because that’s good too.

I tried to write my last article without quotation marks around "Star Wars"but my editors wouldn’t let me - for good reason too. I tried to write this article without using italics and things got really confusing when I started talking about "The Babadook." Try it. It’s weird.

Anyway…

"Lights Out" and "The Babadook" are very similar films, with almost the same premise. By observing and analyzing the key difference between these movies, important distinctions become clear. These distinctions give light (get it?) to the wonderful aesthetics that lies within the writing of these movies – and that "Lights Out" might actually just be a sellout Americanized version of "The Babadook." I sincerely hope that is not the case.

"Lights Out" is a movie that came out recently about a light sensitive ghost (named Diana) that haunts a middle aged mother named Sophie. Sophie suffers from severe depression, and requires treatment to function normally. Diana feeds off of Sophie’s mental instability to maintain her presence in the realm of the living. Those who aid Sophie in finding her lost fragments of sanity are met with Diana, who has a few things to object to regarding such a quest. Sophie’s son (Martin), daughter (Rebecca), and a "Mary Sue" (Bret) work together to fight back against Diana, and help Sophie find a stable state of mind. This movie was advertised pretty well because it was advertised as a monster movie because that is what it is.

"The Babadook" is an Australian film that came out in 2014. Amelia is a single mother who carries complex feelings of hatred toward her son (Samuel), as well as unresolved grief for the death of her husband (Oskar). She conjures these unusual feelings toward her son because her son’s birth indirectly causes the death of her beloved husband. Amelia ignores these feelings for almost seven years which gives way to the monster – "The Babadook." The Babadook terrorizes Amelia. Her son fights back to preclude the Babadook and help Amelia find a stable state of mind. This movie was not advertised particularly well because it was advertised as a monster movie and that is not what this movie is.

I know that was a bunch of plot summary, but I found it necessary context for the rest of the article. I suppose it is rather awkward to assign required watching and reading in a spoiler warning, and then give multiple plot summaries.

Ignoring my previous comment, the primary difference between the writing in these films is the nature of the monsters the Babadook and Diana.

Diana is a literal being like every other character in the writing. Diana exists as a symptom of Sophie’s mental sickness. Her behavior remains pretty consistent throughout the movie, and does not appear to be influenced for symbolic or metaphorical purposes, other than to progress the plot so the story can express already existing themes.

The Babadook is not a literal being – the Babadook is the metaphor for Amelia’s complex emotions, as well as the antagonist. The Babadook does not exist as a symptom of Amelia's unresolved emotions; the Babadook is the metaphorical representation her unresolved emotions. "The Babadook" is not a monster movie – it acts more as a piece of magical realism, although even that is still not entirely accurate. The fight that Samuel, and later Amelia, endure against the Babadook is a fight against (forgive me for the phrasing – I cringe when I read it but it is too appropriate to disregard in this instance) the elephant in the room that is Amelia’s hatred toward her son, and the sadness for her husband.

The contrast in the consequences caused by the design differences between these two monsters is enormous. The greatest effect these differences have on the writing is the Aesthetic Exhilaration (Aesthetic Exhilaration, AE for short, is an unofficial term I use to describe the idea that a piece of art is projecting that usually insights pleasure for the interpreter on an intellectual nature as appose to catharsis which insights an emotional response. My research on the internet has yet to present me with an official term).

"The Babadook" is about the dangers of denial. Amelia ignores her feelings and her sorrow. At first, the Babadook is not a particularly powerful creature. However, Amelia continues to deny it, regardless of its presence. The Babadook’s power comes from her denial, thus empowering its ability to manipulate Amelia to the point where she is completely under its influence. Samuel’s courage and faith in his mother is what brings her back. Amelia finally confronts the creature, acknowledging it in its full presence. She faces her feelings head forth, and understands that she needs to come to terms with them. By doing this, the Babadook can no longer control her, she controls it. The Babadook never goes away – it never will. It remains in the basement, buried in the memories of sentimentally held by Oskar’s old possessions. True Grief can never disappear - it can only be handled.

This is the AE of "The Babadook:" denying our emotions, and where those emotions come from, will only make those feelings stronger. The cause for such emotions will remain locked away. Such denial is dangerous, and can hurt us. We must come to terms with something we feel inside ourselves regardless of how difficult, and how terrifying those feelings are. We have to understand where those feelings come from despite the scary implications. We must not allow our unresolved thoughts and emotions to control us. We must control them, lest they destroy us, and all that we love.

Diana is not a metaphor – she is a plot mechanic (specifically the antagonist) and the root cause for the entire plot (quite the plot mechanic). Her motivation is clear: ensure Sophie remains sick so she (Diana) can continue to exist and catalase (that’s the verb for catalyst [yes I know that’s not how that word is supposed to be used]) death and terror. When Diana kills Sophie’s first husband (or at least his death is implied), leaving Rebecca to think that her father ran away, a theme of abandonment is established as the aesthetic foundation. Rebecca reinforces this foundation when she abandons her mother. Sophie reinforces this theme as well when she claims she abandoned Diana. Sophie adds neglect to the theme when she fails as a mother due to her illness. Abandonment and neglect act as the thematic foundation of the movie’s AE – the characters’ actions in the plot are reflexive of redemption, the active theme of the writing. Rebecca tries to redeem herself by helping her mother rid of Diana. Sophie redeems herself as a mother by taking her own life, thus taking Diana with her. Her suicide also demonstrates that a mother’s love for her children is greater than the influence Diana has on her, as well as her own desire to live.

If that last part sounds familiar, it is because that is almost the exact same AE as was illustrated in "The Shining:" A parent’s love and protective instincts for his/her child(ren) are stronger than any other will by any other being (or at least the will of a bunch of antagonistic ghosts).

Regardless of that, the AE of Lights Out stands as follows: if a family works together, they can overcome any obstacle. It is a family’s responsibility to take care of one another because abandonment and neglect can cause harm that, when left alone, results in permanent damage. The other stuff I said about "The Shining" is applicable here as well.

The true value in "Lights Out" lies in its catharsis and the design of the villain as appose to the AE. Diana’s visual layout is very well thought out. She is a terrifying and imposing force coupled with really cool and thrilling aspects regarding her presence in the darkness, and her absence in the light.

I fear that "Lights Out" is a more simplistic version of "The Babadook" - designed in such a way that it would be easier to sell. Although Lights Out is a good movie, the writing lacks depth and meaning in comparison to "The Babadook." "Lights Out" features a monster that acts as a typical character, and does not diverge this monster’s behavior based on the metaphorical meaning of that monster – should a meaning be present at all. Because of this factor, "Lights Out" is easier to sell as a monster movie in comparison to, "The Babadook." Cool effects and a simpler AE replaces artistic vision because of money and a lack of original ideas. I understand that this claim is based on the assumption that "Lights Out" is a moneymaking remake of "The Babadook," so it has the potential to be completely irrelevant. I sincerely hope that it is.

My name is Syto.

I talk about writing.