Let's Talk About 'S. Darko'

I definitely agree with your assessment of S. Darko. But for me, there's another reason: I disliked the Director's Cut, and now see Donnie Darko as a wonderful accident. To me, it's the movie that became amazing because Kelly had to remove a lot, and the one time I give studios the thumbs up.

Seeing Southland Tales confirmed it. I didn't mind the film, but it's not great, even post-editing, which leads me to believe that it was luck that made Darko's editing so perfect.

That being said, if you never saw the Director's Cut before, I imagine you never saw the #1 fan bonus feature. Check it out, it's one of the funniest special features I've ever seen.

Reply

This is probably how I would've felt if I had been alive when 2010 was released.

There are just some films that you should leave alone.

I, for one, will disregard S. Darko's entire existence.

Reply

I agree with Monika, the Director's cut is a far lesser version of the movie.

But the time travel aspect, while largely a MacGuffin, was a pretty unique spin on an overdone sci-fi motif.

That said, if S. Darko is all about Sparkle Motion and one mother's dedication to it, then it could all be okay. :)

Just don't follow the lifeline to the side of fear.

Reply

I agree, but I would also add that another reason why Donnie Darko holds up is because it is one of the few movies that entertains multiple interpretations without fully arriving at any of them. For instance, you can analyze what happens in terms of Donnie's paranoid schizophrenia (if he has that condition), or in terms of the time travel abilities that Donnie gradually discovers as the film goes on. At any rate, Donnie Darko never fully makes sense no matter how many times you watch it, but it still rewards interpretation. I wish that more films were written in this open-ended way. As for the "sequel," may it die a quick death.

Reply

"Here's the problem: Nobody cares about Donnie Darko's time travel mythology. Well, that might not be fair. I don't care about its time travel mythology. "

No, no, you are right; the time travel element is bunk. What made the film great was the portrayal of teenage angst. People may go on about how 'emo' the film is, but the fact is this: the teenage blues are a very real part of growing up. To ignore it like an unwelcome relative would be to repressive a part of our lives which is essential to us becoming adults.

Reply

Let's not forget one of the most important aspects of Donnie Darko - its set in the 80's. And the 80's, as we all know, rule.

Reply

Lets face it, the acting from the supporting cast couldn't be any worse in S. Darko. Hate to say it, but you all know Drew Barrymore ruined nearly every scene she was in in DD.

Reply

I know this is a bit off topic, but when you link to an actor or movie is theyre anyway you can link to IMDB instead of the utterly useless moviefone pages.

Reply

"The movie's not about time travel, or God, or Frank the bunny. That stuff is essentially a red herring, an oblique metaphor for the fact that Donnie's not an ordinary teenager, content to live an ordinary, oblivious high school existence. It's the character that's interesting -- his sadness, his desperation, and finally his gift to the few people he loves."

Completely disagree. It's about time travel AND an extraordinary teenager. Who needs another damn movie about a sad, desperate kid? I prefer character exploration AND time travel, God, and Frank the Bunny. The Director's Cut is infinitely better because it proves the movie is science fiction, and genre-hopping. I love Donnie, straight up, but I love him with. time. travel.

Reply

"Similarly, Donnie Darko's "cult classic" status has been drilled into our heads to such an extent that to place it among one's favorite films seems like a faux pas."

Maybe in some locales, but definitely not around here. I know very, very few people who have heard of this movie. They all love it, though, which is why it's called a cult classic, I suppose. I'm also going to partly agree with Ann...it's about Donnie, sure, but it's also about Time Travel. His desire to learn more about it is one of the major driving forces behind the film. The only bigger one would be Frank. So how can you say it's not about Frank and Time Travel? It's about those just as much as it's about Donnie himself.

"Hate to say it, but you all know Drew Barrymore ruined nearly every scene she was in in DD." Wunderbred, amusing to me that you feel this way. In my opinion, this is not only about the only movie Ms. Barrymore has not totally ruined, but the only movie in which she is actually good.

Reply

"Hate to say it, but you all know Drew Barrymore ruined nearly every scene she was in in DD." I wouldn't say "ruined" her scenes, but there is something rather off about watching her in this movie.

When i first saw donnie darko i was probably 17 or 18, and at the time i enjoyed it more for the whole teen angst part of it cause i related to that. What drove me to watch so many times more was the movie was so good, but it left you confused. now that im older and a bit wiser, i do care about the time travel, and god parts. caring about that is what helped me fully make sense of that movie.
as for s. darko, that can go straight to the toilet instead of straight to dvd.

Reply

I think DD is awesomely random but it captures the confusing theories of an intellectual yet very troubled teenager. In my opinion, the time travel and religious aspects of the film directly correlate to each other. Also it displays the hypocricy of the church which younger adults and teens see more clearly because of creativity/imagination and education playing a part in the confusion that comes with science and religion. However I'm interested in seeing S.D. just because... I mean I had to watch DD about 3 times before I could come to my own realizations about the film so I'll give it the benefit of doubt. BTW did anyone else think Jake looked way bigger than the other students at first I thought he was left back or something... and yes I love love Drew but they could've had a plain jane play that part she was too much for the role.

Reply

Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion.

Reply

Well firstly, in my opinion the time travel aspect of Donnie Darko is just as important as Donnie himself, I found it really interesting, and the Director's cut brought this out even further. Donnie Darko is my all time favourite movie ever because it has so many different interpretations and you can watch it over and over and still find something new and fascinating about it.
Secondly, I've just watched S. Darko - I didn't want to completely disregard it - I thought I'd see how it was - and I wouldn't say it's THAT bad as a film on its own. I just think its problem is that it has tried to recreate the mystery and the mythology seen in DD, but in trying to do so it has focused on all the wrong aspects of Donnie Darko.
I can't say I liked it that much though. To be honest it didn't make that much sense, and I don't mean that in a good way like Donnie Darko didn't make sense at first, I mean it fit together well and just doesn't really work that well.
I think DD was one of those films where you just shouldn't try to make a sequel because no matter how hard you try to relate it to the original it's just not going to work as well or be anywhere near as good. Also, what with Richard Kelly not writing it, it's obviously going to have major problems.
Also, I really don't think Devaigh Chase is that great, she was fine as Samantha Darko the 11 year old who loved Sparkle Motion and Ariel the unicorn, that's pretty much all she did, but now she's just a bit annoying.

"Let's not forget one of the most important aspects of Donnie Darko - its set in the 80's. And the 80's, as we all know, rule."
You know I kind of agree, I wasn't actually born in the 80's... but I think it was important in the film. All the 80's music was used brilliantly in DD and S.Darko doesn't really have that.. I mean the music isn't bad in it, but it just doesn't have the same sorta feel that the 80's music gave DD.

Reply

The movie was alright. But I think you really have to give it some thought on how it tributes to the Original Donnie Darko movie. If you understood the theories and what was going on with time travel and the end of the world in the first movie then your pretty much well off in understanding with what was going on with S. Darko.

Although there were some stuff that were so weird.(i.e. - like the guy with the meteorite and his freakish rashes from it.) But given to thought that in this very different setting of outside the perfect neighborhood that Sam lived in is that many horrible things tend to happen such as the missing kids. Which really in the world things like missing kids and such happen all the time. This is something shes never experienced before in her neighborhood.

Anyways the whole movie was under a different perspective view. Sam Darko wasn't the sacrificial lamb, but some guy named Jack who happens to be roberta sperrows grandchild. So basically he's suppose to be Donnie Darko trying to find his belonging in the world and how to time travel to save the world.

There are many interesting things about this movie in detail if you really understood the Donnie Darko movie. I dont really believe this movie is a sequel at all, but pays tribute to the Donnie Darko movie. Cover does say "A Donnie Darko Tale"

Reply

I have not seen the movie and will wait until it's released next week before I judge it, but I am excited to see it. I know the film was shot on the Red One and Marvin Rush was trying to achieve a similar look and feel that Steven Poster achieved in Donnie Darko. From the trailer the shots look amazing and I'm definitely looking forward to checking out the film when it's released.

Reply

It’s released today! I think I’m gonna have to pick it up today after work…

Reply

This movie was one of the worst I have ever seen. I did wait all the way to the end. Aside from just copying the old movie. Here is what it did not do. 1. The identity of the mystery kidnapper was not revealed. It was like a two hour mystery that gets interrupted by the weather man and keeps you from finding out who did it. 2. All of the donnie darko characters are dramatically compelling and draw you in to perceive their perspective and either empathize or despise them. There is not one character who is compelling: the characters are boring, their lines are boring, their acting is unconvincing. 3. The story line is stupid. Worse yet, the individual scenes have non dramatic non sequitur action. For instance, a girl lies dead at an unlikely location. One of the heros knocks at her door. After receiving no answer he seeks for her and moments later goes to a remote location where he finds her. Just then another one of the heros shows up. The first picks up her dead body, the two glance at each other and walk past each other on their merry ways. Very unlikely lines, body language, reactions, and exchanges throughout the film.

Conclusion: Dont let your curiosity tempt you to watch this. Again, there is a mystery left unsolved that will leave you feeling angry that you were teased by it. I was not crazy about the original Donnie Darko; however, after seeing this stinker, I really appreciate what good acting and character development went into the original. Minus Four Stars.

Reply