Post a Reply
Back to the Forum
i've heard the name but it hasnt been released in scotland yet.
Posted: 10:29 Nov 02 2002
Donnie Darko (possible spoilers)
Has anyone seen this film? I saw it last night and absolutely loved it, but am desperate to talk to some other people about it as it's a film that is crying out to be discussed. What did it all mean? I'll save my theory until I see whether anyone else has actually been to watch it and knows what the hell I'm on about!
If you've not seen it yet - go! It's a movie that requires your full attention, but is well worth the effort (unless you hate weird shit).
If you've not seen it yet - go! It's a movie that requires your full attention, but is well worth the effort (unless you hate weird shit).
13 Replies and 3766 Views in Total.
Mates from uni saw it the other night and didn't really understand it! The reviews that I have seen of it say that it 'has the ptoential to become a cult classic'
Hmmmm...not too sure about that one!
Hmmmm...not too sure about that one!
Posted: 22:52 Nov 13 2002 
It hasn't been widely released up here and as a cheer up pressie to myself i got it on R1 it arrived on Monday and I have to say I love it and Im gonna go watch it again. so weird and twisted and i really enjoyed it and I gotta add Jake Gyllenhaal is a cutie with that evil cheeky grin.
Posted: 16:32 Dec 11 2002 
I've seen it and I thought it was great.
Not sure about the end though - I thought one thing and the person I saw it with thought another.
It's taken ages to be released here though, it was a US import DVD that I saw it on rather than at the cinema.
Not sure about the end though - I thought one thing and the person I saw it with thought another.
It's taken ages to be released here though, it was a US import DVD that I saw it on rather than at the cinema.
Posted: 20:21 Dec 13 2002
I would love to give a proper film review of it but its done in such a way that I couldn't talk about anything in the film without giving stuff away and it's too good a film to ruin like that 
the commentery is funny too to hear the writer richard kelly and jake gyllenhaal bickering about whats happening and what inspired jake for certain scenes.
the commentery is funny too to hear the writer richard kelly and jake gyllenhaal bickering about whats happening and what inspired jake for certain scenes.
Posted: 21:42 Dec 13 2002 Yeah, it's a tricky one. That's why I labelled this thread the way I did as I figured, if anyone else had seen it, we'd never be able to discuss it without spoiling it for some.
by EvilWillow
I would love to give a proper film review of it but its done in such a way that I couldn't talk about anything in the film without giving stuff away
If you have seen the film though, check out this link (it explains a lot)...
www.ruinedeye.com/cd/time1.htm
Posted: 00:04 Dec 14 2002
*CONTAINS SPOILERS*
Just seen this film (twice now, plus a blast past on the Actors commentary), and I have to say its pretty awful on the whole. Before I slate it though, here are some good things about it:
It generally pretty well acted, with some exceptions, and the dreamy suburban 80s setting is pulled off brilliantly. The soundtrack is excellent, and sets the tone of the movie beautifully. The film has a pretty creepy feeling a lot of the way, less so when you watch it again.
So what is wrong with it? Well its up itself basically. The plot of the film is difficult to untangle mainly because key information is left from the film that is in the book 'Philosophy of Time Travel' that Lori provided the link to. That information is on the website, and smacks of being a bit of a marketing ploy to try and make the film cool - that you need the supplement or the extra on the DVD for it to make sense.
Once you understand the time travel aspect though, it doesnt get much better. What you're left with isn't a deep film, just a plot which needs to be unravelled and lots of references dropped in for film geeks. What's more the time travel plot still makes no sense, or none ive seen anyone explain.
We're led to believe that a 'tangent universe' has occurred by a plane's engine falling through a time rift of some sort. The engine doesn't land in its rightful place, instead it creates a 'tangent' universe. The engine is known as the artifact. The tangent universe will only last a month and if he doesnt guide the artifact back to the real universe, then the tangent universe will implode and cause a blackhole destroying the real universe. To make him do this, he is guided by the manipulated Living (friends, teachers, etc), and manipulated Dead (Frank, and Gretchen).
Phew.
But these questions are waiting to be answered:
At the end of the movie, how does Donnie travel back in time?
Donnies actions lead to his mum + sister being on the plane, yet why does that matter? I think its supposed to convince him that he must sacrafice himself at the end, because he knows it will be them that are killed in the accident after the engine falls off in the timestorm, yet there is no indiciation he really understands the idea that the plane engine that hit his house is in fact the plane his mother is getting on. (Plus a plane can fly with a missing engine)
If travelling back in time so that Donnie is killed rather than escaping the house is the key to returning the plane's engine to the real world (because the tangent world doesn't occur?) then why did Frank (the guide), lure him out of the house in the first place, (thus creating the tangent universe)?
There are many other problems, and ideas explored that don't quite seem to go anywhere.
So thats the Sci-Fi. It doesnt really work as anything other than that, because when you try to put meaning to any of the actions in the film, you then remember that they are then all being manipulated in order for donnie to save the world, so what they do doesnt really mean anything.
One summary would be that, god has a set channel for us to travel in, our fate. Somehow, Donnie jumped out of his channel. He then has to be guided back into his rightful channel (to his death).
I find it very difficult to draw many other conclusions that hold up, if anyone can, i'd welcome hearing them.
Overall then, a convoluted mess that aspires to the 'if people dont understand then its art' school of thought.
4/10
(The actors commentary is really annoying btw - they all prattle on showing how little they understand themselves, giggling like they've been in the bar all day, and evangelising about how great the film and the director is)
EDIT: Oh yeah, and what the hell was the point of the chinese girl who fancied him? Just didnt sit right that one.
(Edited by Funky Monkey 23/04/2003 14:39)
Just seen this film (twice now, plus a blast past on the Actors commentary), and I have to say its pretty awful on the whole. Before I slate it though, here are some good things about it:
It generally pretty well acted, with some exceptions, and the dreamy suburban 80s setting is pulled off brilliantly. The soundtrack is excellent, and sets the tone of the movie beautifully. The film has a pretty creepy feeling a lot of the way, less so when you watch it again.
So what is wrong with it? Well its up itself basically. The plot of the film is difficult to untangle mainly because key information is left from the film that is in the book 'Philosophy of Time Travel' that Lori provided the link to. That information is on the website, and smacks of being a bit of a marketing ploy to try and make the film cool - that you need the supplement or the extra on the DVD for it to make sense.
Once you understand the time travel aspect though, it doesnt get much better. What you're left with isn't a deep film, just a plot which needs to be unravelled and lots of references dropped in for film geeks. What's more the time travel plot still makes no sense, or none ive seen anyone explain.
We're led to believe that a 'tangent universe' has occurred by a plane's engine falling through a time rift of some sort. The engine doesn't land in its rightful place, instead it creates a 'tangent' universe. The engine is known as the artifact. The tangent universe will only last a month and if he doesnt guide the artifact back to the real universe, then the tangent universe will implode and cause a blackhole destroying the real universe. To make him do this, he is guided by the manipulated Living (friends, teachers, etc), and manipulated Dead (Frank, and Gretchen).
Phew.
But these questions are waiting to be answered:
At the end of the movie, how does Donnie travel back in time?
Donnies actions lead to his mum + sister being on the plane, yet why does that matter? I think its supposed to convince him that he must sacrafice himself at the end, because he knows it will be them that are killed in the accident after the engine falls off in the timestorm, yet there is no indiciation he really understands the idea that the plane engine that hit his house is in fact the plane his mother is getting on. (Plus a plane can fly with a missing engine)
If travelling back in time so that Donnie is killed rather than escaping the house is the key to returning the plane's engine to the real world (because the tangent world doesn't occur?) then why did Frank (the guide), lure him out of the house in the first place, (thus creating the tangent universe)?
There are many other problems, and ideas explored that don't quite seem to go anywhere.
So thats the Sci-Fi. It doesnt really work as anything other than that, because when you try to put meaning to any of the actions in the film, you then remember that they are then all being manipulated in order for donnie to save the world, so what they do doesnt really mean anything.
One summary would be that, god has a set channel for us to travel in, our fate. Somehow, Donnie jumped out of his channel. He then has to be guided back into his rightful channel (to his death).
I find it very difficult to draw many other conclusions that hold up, if anyone can, i'd welcome hearing them.
Overall then, a convoluted mess that aspires to the 'if people dont understand then its art' school of thought.
4/10
(The actors commentary is really annoying btw - they all prattle on showing how little they understand themselves, giggling like they've been in the bar all day, and evangelising about how great the film and the director is)
EDIT: Oh yeah, and what the hell was the point of the chinese girl who fancied him? Just didnt sit right that one.
(Edited by Funky Monkey 23/04/2003 14:39)
Posted: 14:27 Apr 23 2003 I'll have a bash. This is all my understanding of it so don't take it as fact whatever you do
by Funky Monkey
*CONTAINS SPOILERS*
At the end of the movie, how does Donnie travel back in time?
Donnies actions lead to his mum + sister being on the plane, yet why does that matter? I think its supposed to convince him that he must sacrafice himself at the end, because he knows it will be them that are killed in the accident after the engine falls off in the timestorm, yet there is no indiciation he really understands the idea that the plane engine that hit his house is in fact the plane his mother is getting on. (Plus a plane can fly with a missing engine)
If travelling back in time so that Donnie is killed rather than escaping the house is the key to returning the plane's engine to the real world (because the tangent world doesn't occur?) then why did Frank (the guide), lure him out of the house in the first place, (thus creating the tangent universe)?
There are many other problems, and ideas explored that don't quite seem to go anywhere.
So thats the Sci-Fi. It doesnt really work as anything other than that, because when you try to put meaning to any of the actions in the film, you then remember that they are then all being manipulated in order for donnie to save the world, so what they do doesnt really mean anything.
One summary would be that, god has a set channel for us to travel in, our fate. Somehow, Donnie jumped out of his channel. He then has to be guided back into his rightful channel (to his death)
*ALSO CONTAINS SPOILERS*
Right, at the end of the film he doesn't travel back in time, as such. The engine going through the portal corrects the imbalance or whatever you wish to call it caused by the first engine (Donnie avoiding death does NOT create the tangent universe, at that point it is already in existance), order is restored and the tangent universe is for lack of a better word erased and things are returned to the point where it was created. So it's not as if Donnie jumped back, it's as if he never went forward.
I *THINK* what was being shot for was a sort of 'infinite parallel universes' idea, where the engine *was* meant to fall through the portal (for some reason, Donnie's destiny I guess but WHY I don't know, that part is frustratingly ambiguous) but for whatever reason the engine that ended up falling through came from the wrong parallel universe, creating a disturbance in the space/time fabric and so the tangent universe was created (yes I know, tangent/parallel, I should've thought how to word this better
Oh well)I'm pretty sure that's why the events unfold and lead to his mother and sister being on the plane, as only an engine from the tangent universe can repair the breach that has created it in the first place.
Does that help?
Oh, and the destiny theme is something I would agree on, the director referenced it heavily when he was (trying) to explain it on the commentary so I'd guess so. At first viewing of the movie I took the Christianity undertones a bit far (they are there, honest guv) and came to the conclusion Donnie was a vessel of God, so to speak (maybe even the second coming)...it's not quite that extreme but that does play a part too.
...I need to lie down now.
Posted: 22:40 Apr 29 2003
Yes it is a film that makes you need to lie down a lot!
Thanks for the reply, but i'm not entirely certain I follow your version either. What role does frank play? In the tangent universe that plane would have taken off with or without his parents on it, and erasing everything etc..so in that case you could have just had a film about donnie relaxing on a beach for a 28 days or something...
I havent heard the director's commentary, onlt the actors commentary which was really banal. Does it make things any clearer? From your response i'm guessing it doesnt!
I agree with you now, that he didnt have to die to fix the problem, I think he had to die because it was his destiny. This is my current take on the story:
In God's great plan, one day a plane lands on someone's house and kills them. End of story. BUT, something went wrong, the engine landed in the wrong dimension. Before it could hit Donnie (the Donnie in the tangent dimension), he is saved by Frank (someone working on behalf of God, he is 'manipulated'). This is done because accoridng to God's plan Donnie should have died by an engine hitting him in the real world. Something went wrong, and an unstable tangent universe that will eventually cause a black hole that will destroy our universe has been created.
Now God has two things on his hand's. He has to get somebody to save our universe (Donnie), and Donnie must still die (because it was his destiny). This definately makes sense with the Last Temptation of Christ References, he saves the world (like Jesus apparently did), and dies for it.
Now that works great for me. What doesnt work great is HOW he saved the world!! I think what the director has done is like an inventor coming up with some absolutely marvelous sounding idea, but then not having a clue how to actually build it.
Thanks for the reply, but i'm not entirely certain I follow your version either. What role does frank play? In the tangent universe that plane would have taken off with or without his parents on it, and erasing everything etc..so in that case you could have just had a film about donnie relaxing on a beach for a 28 days or something...
I havent heard the director's commentary, onlt the actors commentary which was really banal. Does it make things any clearer? From your response i'm guessing it doesnt!
I agree with you now, that he didnt have to die to fix the problem, I think he had to die because it was his destiny. This is my current take on the story:
In God's great plan, one day a plane lands on someone's house and kills them. End of story. BUT, something went wrong, the engine landed in the wrong dimension. Before it could hit Donnie (the Donnie in the tangent dimension), he is saved by Frank (someone working on behalf of God, he is 'manipulated'). This is done because accoridng to God's plan Donnie should have died by an engine hitting him in the real world. Something went wrong, and an unstable tangent universe that will eventually cause a black hole that will destroy our universe has been created.
Now God has two things on his hand's. He has to get somebody to save our universe (Donnie), and Donnie must still die (because it was his destiny). This definately makes sense with the Last Temptation of Christ References, he saves the world (like Jesus apparently did), and dies for it.
Now that works great for me. What doesnt work great is HOW he saved the world!! I think what the director has done is like an inventor coming up with some absolutely marvelous sounding idea, but then not having a clue how to actually build it.
Posted: 13:42 May 01 2003