For this period drama, you do have to suspend reality and accept the parameters required for the film to work. We are asked to believe that, way back in the first half of the nineteenth century, a comatose woman, seemingly unable even to blink, would have survived for years, and still have significant life expectancy. Medical science makes such a thing possible in our time, but how would the patient have been fed in those days? Don't let such considerations put you off. For other titles, we accept time travel, real people living inside computer memory, oriental gentlemen waving scimitars who run up vertical walls and jump over tall buildings, and still enjoy the show.
Sophie Marceau's acting was outstanding. Who would have thought that Elisabeth Laurier in 'Firelight' and Lila Dubois in 'Lost & Found' were played by the same person? Stephen Dillane, playing Charles Godwin, was more than adequate as the other main lead. The rest of the characters were well cast, each contributing significantly to this very moving tale. 'Firelight' covers part of the lives of two essentially principled people trying to find a way through the distressing circumstances with which each was faced. If they took a wrong turn, which of us is going to throw the first stone? Judgment of every individual is God's prerogative. If this film does nothing else, it does show why there is a debate about euthanasia. I had two special adult friends outside our immediate family early in life, one as a child and one as a youth. Both had flaws in their characters, but were excellent mentors. I chose to adopt some of their traits, but not others. A couple of years past retirement age, I bought my first television, and have since discovered films. I find these very instructive, giving me insights into the human condition which I would not have otherwise. As with my mentors, I am using my discrimination when assessing any messages suggested by each movie. I found 'Firelight' emotionally stimulating, its characters eminently admirable in many respects, but used my beliefs and discretion in determining the validity of any moral that may be inferred from its plot. Isn't this what we all do?
Some review comments seem to be denigrating Charles Godwin unfairly. It was Lord Clare who ruined the estate by his profligacy. Charles, on the other hand, was trying to keep the boat afloat as a sheep farmer. To suggest that Charles viewed Elisabeth as little more than a chattel doesn't ring true with me. I gained the impression that he was considering her as well as himself right from the beginning. I also felt that their motives tended towards the welfare of others rather than their own selfish ends. The firelight allegory might also be less simplistic than is being suggested. If I am recalling events correctly, I thought the initial use was to introduce a plot continuity. This was progressed to a vehicle used by Elisabeth to allow her daughter the opportunity to break free of her antagonistic attitudes. At some point, the firelight rekindled a significant memory. Finally, for Amy, the firelight was conspicuous by its
absence. Were the words, "May God have mercy on us", just a common expression, or were they spoken from the heart? Judge for yourself.
I looked for the DVD, hoping that it would have an audio commentary. Guess what? Buena Vista has allowed the title to become currently 'out of print', so I couldn't even buy the film itself (!) That surprised me, considering the number of reviewers and the high average rating. I'm looking forward to seeing this film again, but will have to wait for it to come around once more on TV. Do keep an eye open for it in your programme guides. If and when it appears, it's well worth watching.
