Options

S.Darko (2009) - Yes, a Donnie Darko sequel. Oh god.

2»

Posts

  • Options
    Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    theSquid wrote: »
    MrMonroe wrote: »
    I hated how understanding Donnie Darko was dependent on external information, but it was still a fun picture.

    It was? I thought it was complete as a piece of art the way it was. I don't understand why people can't deal with something being ambiguous.

    I like when things are left up to the viewer, and that's precisely why I was put off by the existence of supplementary material that goes on to explain everything and reveal an understanding of the film's events that would be impossible to arrive at simply by watching the picture.

    The film gives you the opportunity to come to your own conclusion, and then the bonus stuff tells you your conclusion was wrong.

    Then ignore the bonus stuff.

    A film (or rather, art) is meant to make you think. Some people just want literal explanations for what they saw, just wanting to see a complete story, so they whipped up an explanation for those guys.

    Did the film make you think? About what exactly it was about? DId it make you think about what it was trying to say? If it did, then it's a good film.

    What makes you think the explanation of the film's events was just whipped up, almost as an afterthought? It's pretty clear to me that that's what Richard Kelly had in mind all along based on the information found in the Director's Cut and the fact that he even bothered to write pages from The Philosophy of Time Travel, which he simply wouldn't have done if he just wanted things to remain open-ended.

    Robos A Go Go on
  • Options
    ElJeffeElJeffe Not actually a mod. Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited July 2008
    This is the second saddest thing I've seen all morning.

    ElJeffe on
    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • Options
    Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Anyway, want to bet that S. Darko ends with the protagonist letting the meteorite land on her?

    Robos A Go Go on
  • Options
    DynagripDynagrip Break me a million hearts HoustonRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    edited July 2008
    it's a decent 80s homage type movie with all the music and whatnot. the extras really turned me off the movie.

    Dynagrip on
  • Options
    Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    jothki wrote: »
    At least they aren't making a sequel to Being John Malkovich.

    Three of my favorite movies, Being John Malkovich, The Truman Show, and Stranger than Fiction are, I think, immune to the sequel treatment.

    Loren Michael on
    a7iea7nzewtq.jpg
  • Options
    BamaBama Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    jothki wrote: »
    At least they aren't making a sequel to Being John Malkovich.

    Three of my favorite movies, Being John Malkovich, The Truman Show, and Stranger than Fiction are, I think, immune to the sequel treatment.
    Why must you tempt fate?

    Bama on
  • Options
    OlivawOlivaw good name, isn't it? the foot of mt fujiRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    jothki wrote: »
    At least they aren't making a sequel to Being John Malkovich.

    Man, if they did it'd be something terrible.

    Like, Being Nicolas Cage.


    Everyone loves Nicolas Cage, right?

    I would watch the ever loving shit out of that movie

    There could be a dimension populated entirely by Nicolas Cages from the Wicker Man

    It would be hilarious

    Olivaw on
    signature-deffo.jpg
    PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | STEAM ID | NEVER FORGET
  • Options
    Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Bama wrote: »
    jothki wrote: »
    At least they aren't making a sequel to Being John Malkovich.

    Three of my favorite movies, Being John Malkovich, The Truman Show, and Stranger than Fiction are, I think, immune to the sequel treatment.
    Why must you tempt fate?

    Also, Mulholland Drive.

    Come get some, Hollywood. I fucking dare you.

    Loren Michael on
    a7iea7nzewtq.jpg
  • Options
    QuazarQuazar Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    To me Donnie Darko is like a philosophy conversation at Starbucks with friends.

    It's relaxed, funny, makes you think, makes you smile, but ultimately you reach your own conclusion.

    I loved it.

    Also, the music is awesome.

    Quazar on
    Your sig is too tall. -Thanatos
    atl7hahahazo7.png
    XBL: QuazarX
  • Options
    ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    On the bright side, maybe this movie will be something so terrible that every time someone brings up Donnie Darko, I can mention it and they'll shut the hell up.

    Thanatos on
  • Options
    Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Maybe it'll be great.

    Loren Michael on
    a7iea7nzewtq.jpg
  • Options
    ElJeffeElJeffe Not actually a mod. Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited July 2008
    If it was great they wouldn't be trying to tie it to Donnie Darko. Donnie Darko was a cult movie, anyway. Tying S. Darko to the same universe isn't going to cause people to flock to it, because most people have either never heard of DD or barely remember it. If this was a going to be great, they would make it a stand-alone and market the hell out of it using some sort of cryptic "what the fuck is this film about?" ad campaign.

    But they're not. They're taking a movie that need not have any tie to DD and creating one anyway, just si they can latch on to the fairly meager fan-base of a ten year old semi-obscure film. That does not inspire confidence.

    ElJeffe on
    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • Options
    yakulyakul Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Perhaps the producer has a fifteen year old soon who just saw the first one.

    yakul on
  • Options
    Whiniest Man On EarthWhiniest Man On Earth Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Has anyone pointed out that there's a character in this named "Iraq Jack"?

    dot x3

    Whiniest Man On Earth on
  • Options
    PbPb Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Variable wrote: »
    Kagera wrote: »
    I don't know about hear but on a forum I used to frequent a few years back it got annoying how every freaking week some douche would make a "I just saw Donnie Darko OMG" thread which made people hate the movie.

    yeah that happened here, basically. I think for a while we weren't even supposed to talk about it.

    still, that's not at all an actual reason to hate a movie though I obviously see why it could leave a bad taste in your mouth.

    Yeah, we once had a rule against Donnie Darko threads in SE. I think I actually temp banned a few people for it.

    Pb on
  • Options
    ufoufo Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    for everyone who didnt understand or like donnie darko i highly reccomend you check out the directors cut. its like night and day from the theatrical release being a convoluted mess leaving me with only a grasp of what just happaned, to finally fully understanding kelly's intent with the film.

    with that said, donnie darko would have been a great thought provoking movie (not amazing but still great) had it not been hyped to death. by the time i saw it years ago everyone revered it as the best movie ever and that definitely ruined it for me.

    a sequel not even done by richard kelly is truly a joke and i feel bad for everyone who will think this actually has any real connections to donnie darko.

    ufo on
  • Options
    LawndartLawndart Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    jothki wrote: »
    At least they aren't making a sequel to Being John Malkovich.

    Man, if they did it'd be something terrible.

    Like, Being Nicolas Cage.


    Everyone loves Nicolas Cage, right?

    Nope, it would be Being Edward Norton. And everyone would fucking watch it even though he's lame.

    We're talking about Direct to DVD sequels, so the correct answer is Being Christian Slater.

    The actual correct answer is Being Ron Jeremy:

    Being-Ron-Jeremy.jpg

    And I'm trying to think of any "sequels that are only tangentally related to the preceding movies and feature none of the original creative talent" that don't suck, and can't think of a single one.

    Well, I guess Halloween III: Season Of The Witch had some potential as a halfway decent Hammer Studios tribute, but other than that, I'm drawing a blank.

    Lawndart on
  • Options
    UpfishUpfish Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Anyway, want to bet that S. Darko ends with the protagonist letting the meteorite land on her?

    I just realized that if the film ends with Samantha hitting the meteorite back into space with a baseball bat a la FLCL I think it would become one of my favorite movies.

    Upfish on
  • Options
    NocturneNocturne Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    So I read the OP and think to myself "Man, that sounds horrible. I don't know if there could be anything worse than what I just read."

    And then I read a thread where people were arguing over "getting" Donnie Darko.

    Nocturne on
  • Options
    JebuJebu Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    I'm starting to doubt this thread's commitment to Sparkle Motion.

    Jebu on
  • Options
    TehSpectreTehSpectre Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    A lot of people who didn't understand the movie didn't have much of a chance.

    The original DVD release was terribly edited and made the movie damn-near impossible to get. There was a director's cut released a year or two ago and it is much better, like adding scenes between Darko and his science teacher, so that it doesn't just go from:
    Donnie Darko: Do you know anything about time travel?

    Science Teacher: Yeah, gramma death stuff. Check out this book. Blah.

    LATER!

    Darko: Hey can you explain some more?

    Teacher: Look, I can't talk about this anymore. I could get fired.

    TehSpectre on
    9u72nmv0y64e.jpg
  • Options
    projectmayhemprojectmayhem Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    defrag wrote: »
    Has anyone pointed out that there's a character in this named "Iraq Jack"?

    dot x3


    I am so seeing this movie.

    projectmayhem on
  • Options
    DoodmannDoodmann Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    ufo wrote: »
    for everyone who didnt understand or like donnie darko i highly reccomend you check out the directors cut. its like night and day from the theatrical release being a convoluted mess leaving me with only a grasp of what just happaned, to finally fully understanding kelly's intent with the film.

    with that said, donnie darko would have been a great thought provoking movie (not amazing but still great) had it not been hyped to death. by the time i saw it years ago everyone revered it as the best movie ever and that definitely ruined it for me.

    a sequel not even done by richard kelly is truly a joke and i feel bad for everyone who will think this actually has any real connections to donnie darko.

    From what I've read I think I would have hated the movie if I had seen the theatrical cut at release. Instead, I rented the directors cut last summer with low expectations since I hated everyone that was a rabid fan. Now it's one of my favorite movies.

    Doodmann on
    Whippy wrote: »
    nope nope nope nope abort abort talk about anime
    I like to ART
  • Options
    VariableVariable Mouth Congress Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    anything I ever read in supplements pretty much gelled with what I got out of the movie after seeing it three or four times.

    and if anyone can be specific just to make sure we're talking about the right supplements... all that info was included in the director's cut of the film. also, anything external to the film shouldn't affect your enjoyment of the film. it's its own piece.

    Variable on
    BNet-Vari#1998 | Switch-SW 6960 6688 8388 | Steam | Twitch
  • Options
    MuddBuddMuddBudd Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Upfish wrote: »
    Anyway, want to bet that S. Darko ends with the protagonist letting the meteorite land on her?

    I just realized that if the film ends with Samantha hitting the meteorite back into space with a baseball bat a la FLCL I think it would become one of my favorite movies.

    http://www.kiwisbybeat.com/minus37.html

    MuddBudd on
    There's no plan, there's no race to be run
    The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
  • Options
    Raybies666Raybies666 Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Variable wrote: »
    anything I ever read in supplements pretty much gelled with what I got out of the movie after seeing it three or four times.

    and if anyone can be specific just to make sure we're talking about the right supplements... all that info was included in the director's cut of the film. also, anything external to the film shouldn't affect your enjoyment of the film. it's its own piece.

    I thought Donnie Darko was great the first time I saw it, but the more I watched it, the less I liked it. It seemed to be a deep movie with lots of room for interpretation, but the DVD special features (this is before the director's cut) removed the ambiguity and flatly told you what the missing pieces were. The director's cut apparently backed the ideas presented in the DVD features.

    In my case, these features were supplements which told you what you were missing. The film was not it's own piece after all, they just cut out explanations.

    Also, can anybody answer if the director's cut gives any real closure to the PARADOX PARADOX?
    Donnie is the centre of the separate timeline/universe. He caused it because he got out of bed instead of dying. He got out of bed because Frank woke him. Frank is a message sent back to him by his future self, pushing him towards certain decisions. If frank had not been sent back, there would be no future Donnie to send Frank back.

    I'm sure some people will see my question as "why is this movie making me think?", but it's really "seeing as dvd features and then apparently, the director's cut, tells you what to think in respect to certain parts of the film, do they explain this also?"

    Raybies666 on
    Beat me on Wii U: Raybies
    Beat me on 360: Raybies666

    I remember when I had time to be good at games.
  • Options
    Darius BlackDarius Black Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    I don't know if the tangent universe was created because Donnie got out of bed. Was it? Gawd, this plot does confuse me a bit.

    Darius Black on
    Quick, quiet, confident
    Comfortable, permanent
    Undisputed, every tense
    Not a trace of what went left
    More equal than the best
    Unparalleled success
    Everybody, V-impressed
  • Options
    skyknytskyknyt Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited July 2008
    Raybies666 wrote: »
    I thought Donnie Darko was great the first time I saw it, but the more I watched it, the less I liked it. It seemed to be a deep movie with lots of room for interpretation, but the DVD special features (this is before the director's cut) removed the ambiguity and flatly told you what the missing pieces were. The director's cut apparently backed the ideas presented in the DVD features.

    In my case, these features were supplements which told you what you were missing. The film was not it's own piece after all, they just cut out explanations.

    Also, can anybody answer if the director's cut gives any real closure to the PARADOX PARADOX?
    Donnie is the centre of the separate timeline/universe. He caused it because he got out of bed instead of dying. He got out of bed because Frank woke him. Frank is a message sent back to him by his future self, pushing him towards certain decisions. If frank had not been sent back, there would be no future Donnie to send Frank back.

    I'm sure some people will see my question as "why is this movie making me think?", but it's really "seeing as dvd features and then apparently, the director's cut, tells you what to think in respect to certain parts of the film, do they explain this also?"


    I think it's best to just ignore the bonus material.

    The PARADOX PARADOX, as explained by the bonus material/director, is
    The people that died in the Tangent Universe (mostly Frank, but also the girl) were unstuck in time by their deaths, and thus were able to influence the guy at the center of it all (Donnie), in Frank's case by sort of manifesting his 'ghost.' In order to seal the tangent universe before its collapse, they had to convince Donnie to die via the jet engine falling on him, and close the time loop.

    I always thought that was a pretty shitty explanation, though. I much preferred to view the entire thing as a parrallel with The Last Temptation of Christ.

    skyknyt on
    Tycho wrote:
    [skyknyt's writing] is like come kind of code that, when comprehended, unfolds into madness in the mind of the reader.
    PSN: skyknyt, Steam: skyknyt, Blizz: skyknyt#1160
Sign In or Register to comment.