DONNIE DARKO -- Disussion Thread
04-02-02, 12:59 PM
#26
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Texas, our Texas! All hail the mighty state!
Posts: 12,842
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally posted by scoopydoo
I was lost at the end of this one too. can someone tell me how to unblacken the blacked out parts to this thread?
I was lost at the end of this one too. can someone tell me how to unblacken the blacked out parts to this thread?
04-03-02, 01:05 PM
#30
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally posted by Scot1458
what was up with the first scene?
when the camera runs up on donnie when he fell off his bike?
what was up with the first scene?
when the camera runs up on donnie when he fell off his bike?
04-03-02, 05:59 PM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Denton, TX
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you think Donnie chooses things to end that way, or it just does end that way? Because we never actually see him travel through time on his own...
I'm not a huge fan of the Waking Life theory, but it's plausible.
I'm not a huge fan of the Waking Life theory, but it's plausible.
04-03-02, 06:11 PM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Denton, TX
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm. Having read the book now, here's my thoughts:
Just a theory. This movie definitely has a lot going on besides being the ultimate 80s film that could not have been made in the 80s. I really wish I had seen it in 2001, it deserves a spot on my best of 01 list. There's a lot of stuff in there to be thought about.
And I have to love the Magnolia lift at the end of the book - confirms my thinking that the movie was trying for the slightest bit of that. Aren't a lot of movies doing that lately? It even seems like foreign films are reaching for it.
Spoiler:
Just a theory. This movie definitely has a lot going on besides being the ultimate 80s film that could not have been made in the 80s. I really wish I had seen it in 2001, it deserves a spot on my best of 01 list. There's a lot of stuff in there to be thought about.
And I have to love the Magnolia lift at the end of the book - confirms my thinking that the movie was trying for the slightest bit of that. Aren't a lot of movies doing that lately? It even seems like foreign films are reaching for it.
04-03-02, 08:42 PM
#33
Banned
I don't know this for sure, but I would guess the director set it in 1988 only to use the soundtrack, and interwind it with the story.
Somehow kid rock raps probally wouldn't have worked.
Somehow kid rock raps probally wouldn't have worked.
04-04-02, 10:57 AM
#34
New Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Set in the 80's
The movie was set in 1988 for a variety of reasons, among them:
1. That's the era that the director grew up in.
2. Not many movies have been made recently that look back at that era (both to poke fun and try and recreate the attitudes).
3. 1988 was a significant year, as we saw Regan's time in office end (and really saw the 80's end as well).
The decision to use the music in the film was a result of picking 1988 as the timeframe, not the other way around.
1. That's the era that the director grew up in.
2. Not many movies have been made recently that look back at that era (both to poke fun and try and recreate the attitudes).
3. 1988 was a significant year, as we saw Regan's time in office end (and really saw the 80's end as well).
The decision to use the music in the film was a result of picking 1988 as the timeframe, not the other way around.
04-04-02, 12:42 PM
#36
Banned
Re: Set in the 80's
Originally posted by lkelly
The movie was set in 1988 for a variety of reasons, among them:
1. That's the era that the director grew up in.
2. Not many movies have been made recently that look back at that era (both to poke fun and try and recreate the attitudes).
3. 1988 was a significant year, as we saw Regan's time in office end (and really saw the 80's end as well).
The decision to use the music in the film was a result of picking 1988 as the timeframe, not the other way around.
The movie was set in 1988 for a variety of reasons, among them:
1. That's the era that the director grew up in.
2. Not many movies have been made recently that look back at that era (both to poke fun and try and recreate the attitudes).
3. 1988 was a significant year, as we saw Regan's time in office end (and really saw the 80's end as well).
The decision to use the music in the film was a result of picking 1988 as the timeframe, not the other way around.
I was 18 at that time...hearing some of those tracks brings back alot of memories....(especially the Church song).
and kudos for not overdoing the style of the 80's, like that horrible 80's show.
04-11-02, 04:02 PM
#37
DVD Talk Hero
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Not necessarily Formerly known as Solid Snake
Posts: 29,250
Received 1,243 Likes
on
854 Posts
I had seen the cover and read the blurbs about this movie for a few months now. I've never heard of it before, and now that I've seen it: HOW DID THIS GET OVERLOOKED! Where did this movie come from? (and the first person who says a tangent universe gets smacked!) This is probably the most original movie that I have seen in some time. It was not at all what I expected.
Here are some random thoughts and answers:
Grandma Death, AKA Ann Sparrow: Besides the observations already made, without her, Donnie would never have figured out what was happening. She is integral in telling Donnie (when he and his dad almost run her over), and through her book. As for the letter, maybe without it she wouldn't have kept checking the mailbox. As we see at the end, the characters do have some form of residual memory from the tangent universe (waving).
Drew Berrymore: Who cares why she's in any movie? I love her! Seriously, she also helps Donnie to realize what is happening. She connects to him through the short story "The Destructors" which helps to lead into the whole spiral of events. As she is leaving she also provides Donnie with the final clue in the most beautiful phrase in the English language.
IMDB: Why is Planet of the Apes (2001) listed as an "If you liked this one . . . " I would compare this more to "Frequency" than any other movie.
04-15-02, 12:35 PM
#39
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 4,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting points some of you made.
I just watched this movie and I never thought any part of it was Donnie's dream. Also, at the end, I didn't think (and still refuse to believe) that Donnie went back in time. Anyway, I think we all agree on that. But what did he do? And why did the tangent universe/black hole/whatever look like a tornado? Was it a tornado?
This certainly was an interesting film with some genuinely creepy and thoughtful ideas, but all in all, it had so much that led nowhere that it became quite unfulfilling, especially at the end. Basically a case of being less than the sum of its parts...
I just watched this movie and I never thought any part of it was Donnie's dream. Also, at the end, I didn't think (and still refuse to believe) that Donnie went back in time. Anyway, I think we all agree on that. But what did he do? And why did the tangent universe/black hole/whatever look like a tornado? Was it a tornado?
This certainly was an interesting film with some genuinely creepy and thoughtful ideas, but all in all, it had so much that led nowhere that it became quite unfulfilling, especially at the end. Basically a case of being less than the sum of its parts...
04-15-02, 03:07 PM
#40
DVD Talk Hero
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Not necessarily Formerly known as Solid Snake
Posts: 29,250
Received 1,243 Likes
on
854 Posts
Originally posted by Tyler_Durden
I just watched this movie and I never thought any part of it was Donnie's dream. Also, at the end, I didn't think (and still refuse to believe) that Donnie went back in time. Anyway, I think we all agree on that.
This certainly was an interesting film with some genuinely creepy and thoughtful ideas, but all in all, it had so much that led nowhere that it became quite unfulfilling, especially at the end. Basically a case of being less than the sum of its parts...
I just watched this movie and I never thought any part of it was Donnie's dream. Also, at the end, I didn't think (and still refuse to believe) that Donnie went back in time. Anyway, I think we all agree on that.
This certainly was an interesting film with some genuinely creepy and thoughtful ideas, but all in all, it had so much that led nowhere that it became quite unfulfilling, especially at the end. Basically a case of being less than the sum of its parts...
Without one small part at the end, I may have had the same opinion as you (that it was build up to nothing). You think that we just went through this whole scenario for no reason since we end up negating everything that happened. But this isn't so. The meaningful bit at the end was his girlfriend and his mom waving at eachother with some bizarre sort of recognition. This shows that even though we have returned to a universe (as opposed to a multiverse), he had still impacted these peoples lives somehow, even though they don't know it and never will understand it.
04-15-02, 04:50 PM
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This movie was well shot and very interesting scene by scene, but it trips all over itself and falls very flat on it's face.
After watching it with a friend we discussed how it was interesting but didn't "work." Then we listened to the director's commentary and discovered that he had no idea what he was doing.
After watching it with a friend we discussed how it was interesting but didn't "work." Then we listened to the director's commentary and discovered that he had no idea what he was doing.
Spoiler:
Last edited by Christo; 04-15-02 at 07:26 PM.
04-16-02, 12:25 AM
#42
Suspended Pending Vaild Email
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cristo, did you read the rest of the thread? apparently you have to know about the book and the rules in contains to really understand the movie and its "tangent" universe. the movies mistake is not being able to show these rules byitself really:P
04-16-02, 01:13 AM
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aihyah, I'll go along with that. I'll admit that I read the first few posts than skipped to the end to throw in my $0.02. In various spots of the commentary the director would say what the scene was about or point out something "relevant" and I did not see it at all in the scene. So, it's easy to believe that he didn't convey what he wanted.
But I have to say, if you need a book to understand the movie, the movie has failed.
But I have to say, if you need a book to understand the movie, the movie has failed.
04-16-02, 01:44 AM
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sugar Grove, IL
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Christo, I have to agree with you here - for the most part. I enjoyed the film, but didn't think it really held up in the end (or fully explained itself). The movie should stand on it's own - if you have to read the time travel book to understand what's going on, the movie has not given you enough information. I, for one, wasn't able to figure out exactly what the time travel stuff meant - I got more of a "dream before death" vibe.
To compare with another "puzzle" film: In "Memento", all of the extra information in the website was interesting, and useful to figure out the details of the back-story, but you didn't NEED it to appreciate the basic gist of the movie.
That said, I will probably check out "Donnie Darko" again in the future, with the additional information in mind. Then again, maybe I just like Jake Gyllenhaal - not to mention his sister Maggie! (In best Homer Simpson voice: mmmm... Maggie-roni....)
To compare with another "puzzle" film: In "Memento", all of the extra information in the website was interesting, and useful to figure out the details of the back-story, but you didn't NEED it to appreciate the basic gist of the movie.
That said, I will probably check out "Donnie Darko" again in the future, with the additional information in mind. Then again, maybe I just like Jake Gyllenhaal - not to mention his sister Maggie! (In best Homer Simpson voice: mmmm... Maggie-roni....)
04-16-02, 12:21 PM
#45
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 4,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Abob Teff
Without one small part at the end, I may have had the same opinion as you (that it was build up to nothing). You think that we just went through this whole scenario for no reason since we end up negating everything that happened. But this isn't so. The meaningful bit at the end was his girlfriend and his mom waving at eachother with some bizarre sort of recognition.
Without one small part at the end, I may have had the same opinion as you (that it was build up to nothing). You think that we just went through this whole scenario for no reason since we end up negating everything that happened. But this isn't so. The meaningful bit at the end was his girlfriend and his mom waving at eachother with some bizarre sort of recognition.
So, my question still stands: Donnie was obviously a Christ-like savior who dies to save others, but what is it that he did (other than being "The One", of course
) that brought about the end of the tangent universe?
originally posted by berseker37
The movie should stand on it's own - if you have to read the time travel book to understand what's going on, the movie has not given you enough information
The movie should stand on it's own - if you have to read the time travel book to understand what's going on, the movie has not given you enough information
Imagine, for example, if one were to read Animal Farm without ever having heard of the Russian Revolution - wouldn't you say that the novel, while indeed "standing on its own", would not be able to reach its proper "heights" for the reader?
By the way, who wrote the "book" Donnie Darko bases its internal logic on? If it was somebody involved in the production (which I assume it was), it kind of loses its impact. Anybody could just come up with their own mythology and apply it to a film. It's a different matter entirely to cover existing themes and rules in a completely new setting/context (e.g. Baz Luhrmann's Romeo And Juliet).
Last edited by Tyler_Durden; 04-16-02 at 12:23 PM.
04-16-02, 03:32 PM
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Tyler_Durden
Imagine, for example, if one were to read Animal Farm without ever having heard of the Russian Revolution - wouldn't you say that the novel, while indeed "standing on its own", would not be able to reach its proper "heights" for the reader?
Imagine, for example, if one were to read Animal Farm without ever having heard of the Russian Revolution - wouldn't you say that the novel, while indeed "standing on its own", would not be able to reach its proper "heights" for the reader?
04-18-02, 12:20 PM
#48
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 4,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Christo
You're equating a major historic event with an esoteric book.
You're equating a major historic event with an esoteric book.
05-02-02, 01:46 AM
#49
Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Home.
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I loved the film. And I gathered my own interpretation of the film from it's first viewing. Maybe because my mind is slightly warped.
I'm trying this SPOILER thing for the first time, so if it doesn't work, forgive me.
Anyway, that's my two cents. Enjoyable film, I say.
Selina
*Just fixed the tags. Gotta act blonde sometimes.
I'm trying this SPOILER thing for the first time, so if it doesn't work, forgive me.
Spoiler:
Anyway, that's my two cents. Enjoyable film, I say.
Selina
*Just fixed the tags. Gotta act blonde sometimes.
Last edited by BlondScrnwriter; 05-02-02 at 01:49 AM.
05-02-02, 04:00 AM
#50
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I totally agree with Christo. Any movie is, or should be, a self-contained unit. If you have to release a "clue book" along with the movie, this is the unmistakeable evidence that the movie doesn't hold together.
And no, a historic or cultural reference is not the same thing as basing the plot on a non-existent book on time travel, not by a long shot.
For example, Magnolia makes a very obvious reference to the Bible. More specifically, the book of Exodus and the "rain of frogs". That's a cultural/religious/historical reference which maybe not all of the movie's viewers will be familiar with, but is totally valid, as it was available to the public by the time the movie was shown.
This is not the case with Donnie Darko. It's too bad that a movie that started off so nicely ends up so ham-handedly.
Regards.
And no, a historic or cultural reference is not the same thing as basing the plot on a non-existent book on time travel, not by a long shot.
For example, Magnolia makes a very obvious reference to the Bible. More specifically, the book of Exodus and the "rain of frogs". That's a cultural/religious/historical reference which maybe not all of the movie's viewers will be familiar with, but is totally valid, as it was available to the public by the time the movie was shown.
This is not the case with Donnie Darko. It's too bad that a movie that started off so nicely ends up so ham-handedly.
Regards.