I'll be there for the world premiere at the Seattle International FF tomorrow. Should be cool. Richard Kelly and Drew Barrymore will be there. I'll let you know how it goes.
Thanks
Greg
www.ptanderson.com
www.theuncool.com
Effin' A, DP!
That's awesome... mos def let us know how it goes
what brave soul will redirect this.
Quote from: Pubrickwhat brave soul will redirect this.
To which thread? There are about 11 threads devoted to this one film and this director of one film.
Ahoy Quint,
I'm a long time reader, a first time contributer, a part-time video store employee and, for the three weeks that started last Friday, the 21st, a full-time SIFF moviegoer.
I've been in movie theaters for more hours this last week that I've been at home, so now seemed like a good time to pause and take accounts of just what I've seen.
For now, I give you my reactions to "Donnie Darko-The Director's Cut." I saw this yesterday at the press screening (which was open to full-series passholders), and I must first apologize to the Seattle Times revewer who was sitting directly behind me and was sprayed with pieces of grey matter when my mind was completely blown all over again.
It seemed unlikely that Richard Kelly would be able to improve on the stunning mix of regan-era teenage angst, superheros and hard sci-fi. And in fact the changes he did make are, for the most part, only cosmetic in nature. We do not learn anything that was not already in the movie or in the deleted scenes and other features on the DVD. Nor are the events as they occured in the original movie any different in the director's cut (no upbeat alternative ending, thank god.) *Nonetheless, spoilers below(?)*
The obvious changes are as follows: Pretty much all deleted and extended scenes have been reintegrated into the film. Also, some of Donnie's visions have been recut with better articulated editing and visual effects including a "Requium for a Dream"-style dialating eyeball that reacurrs several times. Likewise, our final trip through the wormhole is almost completely redone with a video-screen motif and a liquid tunnel effect replacing the "movie in rewind" sequence of the original. The video-monitor look of this sequence for some reason seemed to signal to me a more sinister involvement by the "FAA" guys than I had previously thought.
Some scenes are now preceded by glimpses of pages of the "Philosophy of Time travel" book that is given to Donnie and explains some of the things that are happening. All of this text is on the DVD and the movie's official web site, but now new viewers can hopefully understand the ins and outs of Kelly's "Tangential Universe" concepts more deeply upon their first viewing of the film.
*Spoilers End*
Like many people, I watched this movie when it came out on DVD in 2002 and was quickly becoming a legitimate cult hit. Since then the film has made up for its disapointing theatrical run (the weekends before and after 9/11/01) by grossing over $10 Million on video with no marketing to speak of. Even so, for the vast majoriety of its fans, "Donnie Darko" has been an exclusively home video experience.
Amazingly, Kelly has accomplished quite a feat, making his movie more accessible while still bringing it closer to his original vision. Still, the greatest thing about a theatrical release for DD-DC is that it would provide both fans of the movie and new viewers a chance to see a six-foot bunnyrabbit, projected thirty-feet high, looming over us as if accusing us of all the apathy, ignorance, and "negative energy" we have ever been responsible for in our miserable little lives. Boo-Ya! I say, and bring on the "Fuck-Ass!"
Call me Gooter The Bad Mamma-Jamma.
http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=4&start=75
mine was redirected. why not him? because he's from ptanderson.com?
Quote from: El Duderinowhy not him? because he's from ptanderson.com?
because he IS ptanderson.com
Quote from: themodernage02Quote from: El Duderinowhy not him? because he's from ptanderson.com?
because he IS ptanderson.com
and....
...and that's something you just don't fuck with.
my bad. please redirect. I missed the other threads :)
Directors Cut Trailer: http://www.donniedarko.com/
Quote from: ®edlumDirectors Cut Trailer: http://www.donniedarko.com/
If you can even get to the trailer. What the hell is THIS site? Levels? What? Someone had too much damn time on their hands.
It's making me mad.
There's a window that pops up when you first go to the site that gives you imediate links to the trailers. Do you have a pop-up blocker on? That might be preventing you from seeing it.
That site is awesome, if you have the time for it. That and the Summerland site are both great.
Although i'm expecting much much more from the actual movie...
that was one of the crappiest trailers i've ever seen.
That has to be one of the wierdest website I've been to.
Quote from: Chest RockwellThat has to be one of the wierdest website I've been to.
what about requiem for a dream? (http://www.requiemforadream.com) (flash only)
Time-traveling to success
The science fiction film 'Donnie Darko' flopped in its 2001 release but has won a huge cult following on DVD.
Source: Los Angeles Times
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.calendarlive.com%2Fmedia%2Fphoto%2F2004-07%2F13401182.jpg&hash=a42898f24d7642137e82df8217d3cfd862153a87)
A dense hybrid of teen angst and science fiction, a metaphysical meditation on the nature of being and time travel aided by the presence of a 6-foot-tall bunny rabbit, "Donnie Darko" hit theaters in the fall of 2001 with a resounding thud of indifference. The disastrous initial release of the debut feature from then 26-year-old writer-director Richard Kelly should have been the beginning of a rapid descent into movie-land oblivion. Then a funny thing happened on the way to being forgotten.
Beginning with a series of feverishly attended midnight screenings around the country, followed by a surprisingly successful theatrical success in Britain and capped off by its release on DVD, "Donnie Darko" has grown into perhaps the preeminent cult film of this decade. The transformation from bomb to breakthrough is now beginning a new phase with the release of an extended director's cut, which has its Los Angeles premiere Thursday at the American Cinematheque and which opens in theaters July 23. Featuring more than 20 minutes of footage not included in the initial theatrical cut (including shots not even available among the extensive outtakes on the DVD), as well as a new sound mix, additional songs and visual effects, the re-release is unprecedented for a first-time filmmaker.
Kelly, now 29, seems philosophical about the film's curious fate. "In hindsight, I'm kind of grateful because it's being seen now as a success entirely on its own merits. Honestly, if it hadn't failed I wouldn't be getting this re-release and the opportunity to finish my movie as I'd always wanted to. Everything happens for a reason."
From its inception, "Donnie" had always been a problem child. Kelly and producer Sean McKittrick struggled for more than a year to get the film financed, eventually raising their modest budget through the involvement of Drew Barrymore as producer and costar. They assembled a cast that appears all the more impressive in hindsight, including as it does such rising talent as Jake Gyllenhaal, Jena Malone and Maggie Gyllenhaal, as well as established actors Patrick Swayze, Noah Wyle and Katharine Ross. Heading into the requisite acquisitions frenzy of the 2001 Sundance Film Festival, "Donnie Darko" was considered a definite buzz item. The tale of a troubled teenager who may be mentally ill or just as possibly may have been transported to a parallel universe, the dark and challenging film did not have the feel-good spark that usually inspires festival bidding wars.
"It was such a weird movie," says Marc Valen, a programmer with the Landmark Theatres chain who attended the film's premier Sundance screening. "Everybody afterward, you could sense a feeling of general disappointment. The film is so many different things, it's very ambitious, and people just didn't know what to make of it." A months-long process of failed negotiations and disappointment followed. Kelly trimmed seven minutes in hopes that certain distributors would give the film a second look. He wrote the script for "Southland Tales," the film he will begin shooting this fall, simply to cheer himself up. Newmarket Films, a relative upstart distributor then riding high on its success with "Memento," eventually picked up the picture, only to release it in the ill-fated months after Sept. 11. Though disappointed, Kelly was simply happy the film hadn't been summarily dispatched to cable and video. "After Sundance the film was seen as inaccessible, uncommercial and at best an impressive failure," he says. "There was such a negative energy around the film at the time, the fact that Newmarket even gave it a release at all, I don't hold any ill will."
Bob Berney, president of Newmarket Films and famed for his marketing savvy in selling such films as "Y Tu Mamá También," "Monster" and most recently "The Passion of the Christ," was at the time working for IFC Films but nevertheless oversaw the initial release of "Donnie" as part of his transition from an earlier stint at Newmarket. Though it earned something less than $600,000 at the time, Berney is reluctant to point fingers for the film's spectacular disappointment at the box office. "I think it was really just a classic case of tough timing. It opened essentially right after Sept. 11, and I think it really was just the general mood of the country, and people just couldn't even deal with it."
Likewise, Kelly prefers not to blame the marketing, as is often the fashion when a film performs poorly. "You can second-guess yourself, but that's how it happened. Not to beat a dead horse here, but it was initially released on 58 screens in eight cities. Every theater outside L.A. and New York was empty. There was a complete lack of awareness in other cities. The film just kind of disappeared."
By the end of the year, however, "Donnie Darko" had been booked as a midnight movie at the Two Boots Pioneer Theater, a 100-seat venue attached to a pizza parlor in New York City's East Village. The film would play there every weekend for more than two years. Landmark's Valen first booked the picture as a midnight screening in the spring of 2002 because of patron requests passed on through theater managers. "I thought, 'That's really interesting,' because it certainly didn't do any business initially," Valen said. "But I like to sometimes give something a try. That's how cult films are born. So I tried Denver, which is kind of a neutral area, and it did very well. I thought, 'Wow, I'd like to see how that does somewhere else.' We started playing it other places, and it just kept growing."
The enigmatic "Donnie Darko" website, supervised by Kelly, contained additional information not included in the film, most notably pages from a book titled "The Philosophy of Time Travel," which Kelly had written while editing the picture as a way of explaining it to himself. (Images of those pages mark one of the major additions to the director's cut.) A strong Web-based following began to emerge, with multiple message boards and chat rooms popping up full of people discussing their own theories on the film's meaning.
Things approached fever pitch with the release of the DVD in early 2003. Kelly had made certain to cram the disc full of hidden information and arcana because, he says, "I knew the DVD was going to be my day in court, the thing that saved me. Ultimately the DVD was what the film would be judged on, because no one saw it in theaters."
The disc has gone on to make, according to Berney, "somewhere around $7 million, which is approximate, but that's really good considering theatrical was around $600,000." Kelly says he has even more extras up his sleeve for the eventual DVD release of the director's cut.
"At well over 750,000 copies sold, it far outperformed anything we've seen with that level of box office," said Steve Feldstein, senior vice president of 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, which distributed the video. "Like many films that didn't find an audience in theaters, this one certainly did in DVD — and it continues to sell."
Having done a small test release in Seattle following the world premiere of the director's cut at this year's Seattle International Film Festival, Berney is optimistic about the film's prospects in theaters the second time around. "I think the main goal is to have fun with the theatrical release, show audiences what Richard has done and see how it goes. In my mind, it's sort of a success that we've done it, and we feel like it's a completed circle. Business-wise, I feel like there's a real shot for this to work in terms of the money and time we've invested in this new version. I think it will be a great payoff.
"The whole thing with 'Donnie,' it just fits. I almost feel like we at Newmarket are going backwards to go forwards, like the film somehow. It is unusual, but nothing about the re-release, or anything about 'Donnie,' is usual or makes any real sense. I look at it like this was the path. For whatever reason, it took a certain path to success and it took a while, but it's made it."
Kelly is currently busy prepping "Southland Tales," which he reluctantly describes as 30% a musical, while also seeing a number of scripts he has written for other directors, including Tony Scott and Jonathan Mostow, move toward production. For the moment he is happy as well to revisit the strange saga, both on screen and off, that is "Donnie Darko."
"I look forward to the day I can talk about something else," he says, "but I feel obliged to talk about this as long as people want to hear it. I get tired of hearing myself talk about this movie, but I'd never want to appear ungrateful that people are curious and interested. So I'm happy to do so as long as I'm not overstaying my welcome. I just don't want people to think I'm a one-hit wonder."
I just got back from seeing The Director's Cut, and it's phenomenal. I can't believe how much better it is with the new material. A much more epic and timeless sense is achieved, and things make more sense without being in any way expository. I was pretty stunned. And I'll have to go back to the DVD and see how many deleted scenes it has, because I don't remember seeing most of the new material in this cut. All of the character's relationships are strenghtened to wonderful effect. Also, the sound design will blow your mind.
where do you live Ghostboy, because i heard they showed it in Seattle, but that was like a few months ago. are they gonna do wide release? probably not, but i hope so.
I think he lives
Location: Dallas, TX
I think the release will be nationwide, on a limited scale (i.e. arthouses only).
I looked through the DVD, and most of the new scenes are indeed on there -- I guess I just never watched them all. I'm glad I didn't -- as good as they may be, they work much better in the context of the film. It must have been truly painful for Kelly to cut some of this stuff the first time around.
Yep... I'm waiting for the Miami release... they usually show these films only in the South Beach Regal... where they show all the foreign films as well...
Quote from: GhostboyI just got back from seeing The Director's Cut, and it's phenomenal. I can't believe how much better it is with the new material. A much more epic and timeless sense is achieved, and things make more sense without being in any way expository. I was pretty stunned. And I'll have to go back to the DVD and see how many deleted scenes it has, because I don't remember seeing most of the new material in this cut. All of the character's relationships are strenghtened to wonderful effect. Also, the sound design will blow your mind.
Wow. I couldn't disagree more.
*SPOILERS*
1. Those "Chapter Break" style pages from Sparrow's book are terrible, useless garbage, especially considering the fact that no one, not even someone familiar with the mythos behind that book/the whole plot could possibly read everything presented. Turns all that extraneous info into gobbledeegook.
2. On the topic of extraneous shit: Those awful, awful digitally rendered flashes with the inset video and the close up eye and the "subliminal" bunny rabbit drawings? They were terrible. Once was OK, maybe, but like 7 times, each increasingly long and useless? Good God, what crap that was! (The most heinous crime there was the inset video game "OutRun!", which Kelly says "foreshadows the sports car death at the end." That's just lame.)
3. Yes, several of the reintroduced "deleted scenes" deserved a place in the film. Here are some of the mediocre to bad ones, though:
a. The hotel scene became long, dull, and unfunny where before it was short and unfunny.
b. The Watership Down inclusion: Way too obvious, bashing you over the head with the Bunny/Destruction theme. C'mon...... OK, at best.
I've got more to say but I'll let you guys respond and see what more you want to/don't want to know. In short, I have no desire to ever see the Director's Cut ever again.
Where the original seduced you into its confusing, intriguing ultimately unfathomable world, the Director's Cut slaps you repeatedly in the face with it's now-far-too-obvious Savior/Jesus/God's Plan mythos/subtext (which is now so blindingly brought to the fore, it can't really be considered subtext). Donnie's God's agent, everyone else is a pawn. Big deal.
apparently its playing here in DC which i didnt know. i thought it was still the regular one which has been on the midnite circuit forEVER but according to moviefone i have plans this weekend. i guess i should call to confirm....
Quote from: Mesh
b. The Watership Down inclusion: Way too obvious, bashing you over the head with the Bunny/Destruction theme. C'mon...... OK, at best.
Ah, that was my favorite one!
I didn't feel there was anything slapping you over the head; but I'm one of the people who only completely figured out the film after listening to the commentary track, and what I felt was great about this version was that, while the answers are still not clear, all the necessary pieces to the puzzle are now in place throughout the film.
i thought the "chapter breaks" worked very well.
Quote from: GhostboyQuote from: Mesh
b. The Watership Down inclusion: Way too obvious, bashing you over the head with the Bunny/Destruction theme. C'mon...... OK, at best.
Ah, that was my favorite one!
I didn't feel there was anything slapping you over the head; but I'm one of the people who only completely figured out the film after listening to the commentary track, and what I felt was great about this version was that, while the answers are still not clear, all the necessary pieces to the puzzle are now in place throughout the film.
If I were to choose my favorite additions, both would be scenes involving Donnie's dad, the one in which he tells Donnie about saying "Fuck you" to the world's asshole liars and the scene between Dad and Mom: "I say we buy him a moped." Both so real, such good establishers of character.....
Several of the commentary tracks from the original DVD's deleted scenes have Kelly admitting that "the decision was made" not to [quoting roughly here] "beat the audience over the head with the God's stuff". This D'sC reverses that wise decision in basically every conceivable way.
1. What were the circumstances of this re-release? Did they give Kelly carte blanche? Did they demand he use all that web/DVD extras only content?
2. Were the chapter breaks eliminated from the original or added just for the D'sC?
QuoteI'm one of the people who only completely figured out the film after listening to the commentary track
So then my question would be: Which movie did you actually enjoy most? Donnie Darko (original), Donnie Darko (original w/Kelly's commentary), or Donnie Darko Director's Cut?
I just don't see how the third improves on either of the 1st two.
To me, this is as if Kubrick's zombie came back and explained in detail every nuance and symolism in 2001. Yeah, sure, it'd be interesting.... But would it make the movie any better/more enjoyable/fun to dialogue with? I vote "No" every time.
Quote from: Mesh
So then my question would be: Which movie did you actually enjoy most? Donnie Darko (original), Donnie Darko (original w/Kelly's commentary), or Donnie Darko Director's Cut?
The third, no doubt about it.
Your Kubrick comparison doesn't work for me because I, personally, was able to follow 2001 just fine -- it requires some cerebral work, but all the pieces fall into place. Mulholland Drive, too, works this way. The original cut of Donnie Darko, on the other hand, didn't seem to have all the elements necessary for the story to make complete sense in any but the most extenuating sense; the commentary track filled in some of the holes, but I think the new cut fills in those holes even better. I mean, I'd rather see the film answer its own questions than have to rely on the director to do so. Again, I don't think there's anything overbearingly obvious in the new cut, but that's just me.
From what I understand, this is pretty much the cut that played at Sundance, minus the new FX and sound design.
Quote from: GhostboyYour Kubrick comparison doesn't work for me because I, personally, was able to follow 2001 just fine -- it requires some cerebral work, but all the pieces fall into place.
You do realize how much bullshit that sounds like, right?
NO ONE HAS ADEQUATELY ACCOUNTED FOR WHAT GOES ON IN THE LAST, OH, SAY, QUARTER OF THE FILM. NO ONE. People have their theories, sure, but Donnie Darko has been rendered utterly transparent, more a less a confabulation of two well-trod film cliches: "It was all a dream! :shock: " and "He's Jesus." :yabbse-thumbdown:
Is that Salon.com explication of the movie all over this board yet? It should be.
http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/2004/07/23/darko/print.html
Quote.....once again an extremely complicated film can be basically explained as being a representation of the dream a troubled character has just before death.
Quote from: MeshYou do realize how much bullshit that sounds like, right? NO ONE HAS ADEQUATELY ACCOUNTED FOR WHAT GOES ON IN THE LAST, OH, SAY, QUARTER OF THE FILM. NO ONE.
No, it doesn't sound like bullshit, and I don't think it is. 2001 makes sense to me. Personally. I feel my understanding of the last quarter of the film is valid. I imagine many studied film critics and theorists would agree with me, just as they'd also agree that Kubrick crafted the ending so that it would be open to such interpretation on a personal level.
Quote
Donnie Darko has been rendered utterly transparent, more a less a confabulation of two well-trod film cliches: "It was all a dream! :shock: " and "He's Jesus."
It didn't seem that simple to me, but again, that's just me.
Quote from: GhostboyI imagine many studied film critics and theorists would agree with me, just as they'd also agree that Kubrick crafted the ending so that it would be open to such interpretation on a personal level.
You're not this dense. This is exactly my point. Kubrick left it open to interpretation. Kelly/Pandora/whoever has not. One film's an enduring classic of cinema, one will soon become a "Donnie Darko Midnight Screening Yeah!" cult classic fanclub footnote. The thrill is officially gone and you're applauding its departure. :cry:
MEGA-ULTRA-SPOILAHZZZZZ GALORE FROM SALON.COM; SERIOUSLY, DO NOT READ THE REST OF THIS POST!!!!Quote
What the hell just happened?
The vast majority of "Donnie Darko" takes place in a parallel universe. From the moment the clock in the Darko house strikes midnight, 10 minutes into the film, right up to Donnie's hysterical laughter in bed, the setting of the film is Tangent Middlesex, a parallel dimension, spontaneously created, which exists only during the 28 days that cover the majority of the film's action. The through-line of the film is Donnie Darko's quest to erase the Tangent Universe before it destroys the world.
To understand what actually occurs in "Donnie Darko," it helps to have read "The Philosophy of Time Travel," by Roberta Sparrow. This is difficult in that the book is an imaginary one, written by a fictional character. Luckily, much of the book's text is included on the film's Web site and DVD and is now incorporated into the director's cut.
"The Philosophy of Time Travel" explains that time, while usually stable, will occasionally become corrupted for reasons unknown to all. When this happens, a Tangent Universe is created -- an alternate reality parallel to the primary universe in which we all live. "If a Tangent Universe occurs," Sparrow writes, "it will be highly unstable, sustaining itself for no longer than several weeks. Eventually it will collapse upon itself, forming a black hole within the Primary Universe capable of destroying all existence." During that collapse, a time-space vortex will form that leads back to the birth of the Tangent Universe.
In a nutshell, this is precisely what the hell happens in "Donnie Darko." At midnight on Oct. 2, 1988, a Tangent Universe is spontaneously created, centered in Middlesex, Va. This Tangent Universe threatens the existence of life as we know it; it falls to one person to do whatever necessary to put the world back in order and keep the Tangent Universe from destroying the real world when it collapses in 28 days. That person -- that superhero -- is, of course, Donnie Darko: a 16-year-old with emotional problems, a history of arson, and bedroom eyes.
The Artifact
Hand in hand with the creation of a Tangent Universe, writes Roberta Sparrow, is the spontaneous appearance of an Artifact. Made out of metal, this artifact will inexplicably show up near the epicenter of the Tangent Universe; in order for disaster to be averted, the Artifact must be sent through the time vortex back to the Primary Universe -- back to before the split in dimensions occurred. The Artifact in Tangent Middlesex, of course, is a gigantic freaking jet engine that falls out of the sky.
The Living Receiver
That's Donnie, in the words of "The Philosophy of Time Travel": the Living Receiver. He's the chosen one, picked (seemingly at random) to return the Artifact to the Primary Universe in order to avert catastrophe. Being the Living Receiver has advantages and disadvantages: You get superpowers, like strength, telekinesis and the ability to see into the future, but you also get horrifying hallucinations and the people around you tend to fear and attack you.
The Manipulated
This refers to pretty much everyone else in the movie. "They are prone to irrational, bizarre and often violent behavior," writes Roberta Sparrow, because their entire raison d'être is to help the Chosen One fulfill his task. Which is to say that every other character in the movie has been set up like a piece on a chessboard, ready to behave in the exact perfect way necessary to push Donnie toward his eventual destiny -- returning that jet engine to its proper time and place in the Primary Universe. Nearly every event in the film, when viewed in this way, has a specific purpose; together the events create an inexorable chain of coincidence and consequence designed to make Donnie's fate inescapable.
All this mumbo-jumbo, of course, skirts the big question: Chosen by whom? Manipulated by whom? The movie leaves that ambiguous, but it seems clear from comments Kelly makes during the DVD commentary that the person in charge here is, basically, God. When the Middlesex Tangent Universe is spontaneously created, God arranges the people in that Tangent Universe around Donnie Darko in such a manner that their actions lead inevitably to Donnie's delivering the jet engine back through time.
Deep breath.
Questions?
-----------------------------
Yeah, how the hell am I supposed to know all this? Hardly any of that stuff was in the movie.
That's true. Many of my friends complain that to understand "Donnie Darko," a viewer needs to watch the movie and listen to the DVD commentary and crack the Web site. In an interview, Kelly has said that he created the pages from "The Philosophy of Time Travel" as an exercise in interpretation and that they are not intended to be read as canon; nonetheless, his inclusion of many book excerpts in his director's cut suggests that his feelings on the matter have changed and he intends them to be definitive. (Incidentally, this might be the first time that a director's cut includes large chunks of material lifted directly from the film's Web site.)
Couldn't you interpret this whole movie in another way, without any sci-fi stuff at all? As sort of a subjective rendition of Donnie's descent into paranoid schizophrenia?
Absolutely. A number of my friends read the film this way and feel it is a far more interesting interpretation of the events of "Donnie Darko" than the dominant sci-fi narrative. Certainly aspects of the film -- the flatness of affect in Donnie's meetings with Frank, Donnie's increasing menace and the way the mechanics of the plot revolve so explicitly around typical teenage sexual hang-ups -- support a reading of the film as Donnie's Descent, shown from inside his head. Even the careful tying-together of the plot doesn't necessarily negate this read; one trait of the budding schizophrenic is the creation of coherent, if unlikely, narratives tying together the hallucinations and paranoia often manifested as part of the illness.
That said, I'm not dealing too much with this read in these Cliffs Notes because it seems to me that through his supplementary materials and his director's cut, Richard Kelly is pushing viewers to accept the primary narrative -- the sci-fi, Tangent Universe narrative -- as the "proper" way to interpret the film. We can argue all day about whether Kelly's decision is clarifying or foolishly reductive. Many of my friends think that the film is far richer as an exploration of madness than as an "Escher thriller about freaking wormhole bullshit," as one friend so succinctly put it. Conversely, I myself am much more interested in watching a clever sci-fi flick with good '80s tunes than another inside-the-nutcase's-head movie, and so I'm perfectly happy to have Kelly attempt to clarify the intentions of his plot a bit. Kelly himself has spent years crowing about his film's careful ambiguity, so I'm interested in why he made the additions he did to the director's cut, additions that serve primarily to make the film far less ambiguous.
I still think that my interpretation is valid, man.
Of course it's valid. Don't take it personally. We're all relativists here.
What's with the 6-foot-tall rabbit?
Well, that's as good a place to start as any. Frank (played, in fur coat and out, by James Duval) is the boyfriend of Donnie's sister Elizabeth. (It's he who drops her off just before the jet engine fiasco.) Frank himself never meets Donnie until their fateful encounter on Halloween eve. The Frank who speaks to Donnie on the golf course and elsewhere is a kind of ghost Frank -- a remnant of Frank who, because Donnie shoots him in the eye within the Tangent Universe's 28 days, can move freely in time throughout the Tangent Universe. Frank's purpose -- for he's been chosen, as surely as Donnie has -- is to serve as Donnie's guide through the Tangent Universe, leading him toward clues and offering tasks that will smooth Donnie's way toward his goal.
According to Roberta Sparrow's book, Frank is an example of the Manipulated Dead. Apparently, those who die within the confines of the Tangent Universe are given some level of knowledge of the catastrophe to come and serve to some extent as the Chosen One's guide. There seems to be some variation in the level of understanding given to the Manipulated Dead; Gretchen, for example, the other Manipulated Dead, seems to have an inkling that something terrible is going to happen but clearly doesn't have the detailed comprehension Frank does. Nor does Gretchen's spirit appear to Donnie behind any kind of watery barrier. Nor does she dress up in a bunny suit.
Yeah, what's up with that bunny suit?
Donnie meets the real Frank -- not his Manipulated Dead specter -- for the first time on Halloween eve, with Frank in costume. But it's also an allusion to "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" -- just as the White Rabbit leads Alice down the hole into her great adventure, so does Frank lead Donnie into his own. Rabbit imagery abounds in "Donnie Darko," from a VW Rabbit driving down the streets of Middlesex to stuffed bunnies to a photograph of toddler Maggie Gyllenhaal next to a kid in a rabbit suit to (in the director's cut) an extended subplot revolving around Richard Adams' rabbits-in-peril novel "Watership Down."
OK, I still don't get it. How exactly does Donnie deliver the jet engine back through time? I get that there's a time portal or whatever above his house, and the jet engine falls through it, but it seems like it just falls off his mom's plane for no reason.
I couldn't figure this out at all, but, thank God, Kelly explains it on the DVD commentary. In addition to his super strength and super future-sight and super sulking power, Donnie has the power of telekinesis. He rips the engine off the plane himself.
Oh. I didn't get that.
I don't know anyone who did.
Why does he do that?
Well, he's basically railroaded into it. Previous events -- his conversations with Dr. Monnitoff, his reading of Roberta Sparrow's book -- have made it clear to Donnie what is going on, and he pretty much knows what he is supposed to do. But he's spurred on most directly by the events of the previous evening. Once he has killed a person and seen his girlfriend die before his eyes, he feels he has no choice but to send time backward -- to telekinetically rip off the engine, send it through the time vortex, and fulfill his destiny as the Living Receiver. (Sparrow's book refers to this as an Ensurance Trap, a snare created by the Manipulated Dead -- in this case, Frank and Gretchen -- to make absolutely sure that the Chosen One does his job.) Donnie believes that if he does what he's supposed to, this Tangent Universe he's in will disappear and it will be as if the past 28 days never happened -- Gretchen and Frank will still be alive.
But doesn't he know that if he sends the jet engine back in time, and it lands on his house, but he's back there on Oct. 2 in a regular universe with no Frank calling him out of bed, he'll get squashed like a bug?
Impaled, actually, as seen in a gruesome deleted scene on the DVD. It's hard to tell whether he knows this or not. His hysterical laughter at the end of the movie suggests he knows something's up. Sparrow's book notes that many of the Manipulated will see the events of the Tangent Universe in their dreams. So we can assume that at midnight on Oct. 2 in the Primary Universe, Donnie Darko wakes up from an exceptionally detailed dream in which he developed superpowers, got lucky, burned down a pervert's house, and discussed the sexual habits of Smurfs with his friends. Whether he understands the dream is uncertain; I think he does but chooses, due to all he's seen and his worries about repeating the mistakes of the Tangent Universe, to stay in bed and take a jet engine right in the kisser.
Interestingly, Kelly suggests in the DVD commentary that the car horn we hear as Elizabeth comes in the door is Frank's -- that he's honking not as a message to Elizabeth, but as one to Donnie. Perhaps Frank at that second realizes everything that happened in the Tangent Universe, and knows what is about to happen, and attempts to wake Donnie up and get him out of bed before the sky falls?
Also interestingly, this means that once again an extremely complicated film can be basically explained as being a representation of the dream a troubled character has just before death.
People remember the Tangent Universe in dreams? Is that why we saw everyone looking sad in bed?
Yeah. And Jim Cunningham is crying because he realized what a total perv he is. According to the film's Web site, he shoots himself 10 days later. The Web site has all kinds of fun tidbits: The FAA never figures out where the engine came from. Roberta Sparrow finally dies in December 1988. And Dr. Monnitoff marries Ms. Pomeroy; when he dies under suspicious circumstances in 1999, she sends his copy of "The Philosophy of Time Travel" to the Library of Congress with a cryptic note. Check it out, but be warned it's one of those annoying mysterious Web sites that take a week to figure out; look here for a step-by-step walkthrough.
The sexual habits of Smurfs?
Yeah! Apparently Smurfs lack genitalia. According to the DVD commentary, the estate of Peyo, creator of the Smurfs, allowed Kelly to keep this very funny scene in the movie because Donnie's description of Smurf sexuality is perfectly accurate.
So how are all the Manipulated manipulated?
The Manipulated do irrational or unexpected things with consequences that inevitably push Donnie toward his fate. Consider the film's climax, the deaths of Gretchen and Frank. It's fascinating to see all the choices by various Manipulated that get Donnie outside Grandma Death's house on that fateful night -- and cause him to be so devastated by the deaths of Frank and Gretchen that he is willing to destroy the universe in which he finds himself just to undo those deaths.
How does Donnie meet Gretchen? Well, on Gretchen's first day of school, Ms. Pomeroy behaves strangely, giving Gretchen that not-approved-by-the-Board-of-Ed directive to sit next to the boy she finds the cutest. And then Frank helps them become better acquainted by getting Donnie to break that water main. Remember? "I'm really glad school was flooded today," Donnie says, because otherwise, "you and I would have never had this conversation."
How does Donnie know to communicate with Roberta Sparrow? Dr. Monnitoff talks time travel with him and gives him a not-approved-by-the-Board-of-Ed book to read.
How does Donnie know to look in Grandma Death's cellar? Ms. Pomeroy's out-of-left-field invocation of the phrase "cellar door."
The two thugs' weird idea to rob Grandma Death sends Donnie and Gretchen into the road. Mrs. Sparrow -- who'd refused to answer the door when Donnie previously called on her -- is reading Donnie's letter when Frank's Trans Am swerves around her and runs over Gretchen.
Why does Donnie love Gretchen so much that he's willing to shoot Frank in retaliation, willing to erase the universe to bring her back to life? Well, because of their deep emotional connection, sure, but also because they just made love for the first time. And why do they make love? Gretchen's stepdad, we're led to believe, irrationally attacks Gretchen's mother, leading Gretchen tearfully to Donnie's door and into his arms.
And why is Frank there at all? Because he left a party where he could've been making out with Maggie Gyllenhaal in order to buy beer, even though the party already had a keg. The behavior of an 18-year-old guy doesn't get much more irrational than that.
What other irrational behavior do the Manipulated exhibit?
Well, Donnie gets driven to his misbehavior by Mrs. Farmer's moronic adherence to the cult of Swayze. Said misbehavior gets him suspended from after-school activities; that's why he can't attend the talent show and is instead free to torch Cunningham's house. Once Cunningham is exposed as a panderer, Mrs. Farmer can't go to L.A. with the Sparkle Motion girls, so Donnie's mom goes, so the house is devoid of parents, so the Gyllenhaals can throw a bitchin' party where Donnie gets laid. And since Donnie's mom had to go to L.A., she's on the plane when the engine comes off, and ... um ... actually, I still have no idea why she had to be on that particular plane. That makes no sense at all.
Oh, and of course, everyone thought Sam Raimi was crazy when he made "The Evil Dead," but he irrationally did it anyway, and that movie was Donnie's and Gretchen's only date.
Thanks, jackass. Who are the fat guy in the tracksuit and the mysterious woman with the clipboard?
He's one of the FAA employees we see near the beginning and end of the movie. Apparently the FAA is so freaked out by the jet engine weirdness that they've sent their tackiest agent to keep an eye on the Darko family.
She is a talent scout for Ed McMahon's "Star Search '88."
What does it mean that Donnie's medication is a placebo?
This scene, which appears in the director's cut, is another hint from Kelly that he doesn't think Donnie's crazy. Dr. Thurman doesn't fully understand what's going on, but like so many of the other characters, she recognizes that something momentous is in the air and that Donnie seems to be in the middle of it, whatever it is.
What's the story with "cellar door"?
Ms. Pomeroy's vague attribution of the quote to a "famous linguist" was, I assume, mandated by the legal department; it's hard to get a handle on who first claimed those two words to be the most beautiful in the English language. I've seen it attributed to Pound, Poe, Tolkien, Mencken and a Chinese student of Mencken's who knew no English.
What does that creepy thing Grandma Death whispers have to do with anything?
I think it's telling how scared Donnie seems when he discusses her notion that "every living creature on earth dies alone." As the Tangent Universe draws to a close, Kelly is careful to give Donnie moments of reconciliation with nearly everyone important to him: his mother (in a sweet scene up in his room), his father (in a director's cut scene in the backyard, one of the nicest additions to the new version) and Gretchen (during the Halloween party). A friend of mine pointed out that another way of interpreting Donnie's smile as he settles into bed, just before he gets engined, is that he is pleased about the circumstances of his onrushing death. He was afraid of dying alone, without a connection to God or anyone? Well, following "God's channel," he has known love for the first time and has been given a chance to sacrifice himself for the love of Gretchen and his family and everyone. He knows he is about to die, but he doesn't feel at all alone.
What's with those weird blobs leading out of everyone's stomachs?
They're a visual representation of the future, inspired, Kelly said, by watching John Madden operate the CBS Chalkboard Telestrator on NFL broadcasts. Included among Donnie's many superpowers is the power to see the future. Donnie and Dr. Monnitoff have a discussion in which Donnie asks whether this representation suggests there's no such thing as free will. Dr. Monnitoff says that just because you see your future doesn't mean you have to follow it, but Donnie seems to believe that the future blobs represent "God's channel."
The film comes down pretty firmly against the concept of free will, at least in Tangent Universes. But that leads to a daunting question...
Why all the rigmarole? If no one in this Tangent Universe has free will -- and if God or whoever can make them act irrationally and do whatever He wand if God or whoever can make them act irrationally and do whatever He wants -- why did this whole scheme to get the jet engine off the plane have to be so complicated? It seems like a stupid way to save the universe, in the sense that anything could have gone wrong at any step. Why couldn't Whoever was in charge just make Donnie sleepwalk into the hills on Oct. 30 and use his superpowers to knock the engine off the plane? In the whole scale of things, that doesn't seem more irrational than some of the other irrational things characters do throughout this movie.
That's the exact daunting question to which I referred. It all seems very baroque, doesn't it, reminiscent of the overcomplicated plans hatched by villains in potboilers since the beginning of time. (My wife asks: If Voldemort needs Harry's blood so bad, why do they have to rig the entire freaking Triwizard Tournament to get it? Why couldn't Fake Mad-Eye just, like, send Harry to the infirmary for a Magical Mumps blood test?)
There's no good answer to this question -- why does God or Whoever make saving the universe so complicated? -- other than the obvious one. If saving the universe was as easy as all that, what a boring movie that would make, right?
No, I'm not that dense; neither cut of Donnie Darko, in my opinion, is anywhere close to the quality of 2001, nor do they have the chance of becoming enduring classic(s) of cinema on much other than a cult level. I was only using 2001 as a comparative model because you brought it up in the first place, but if I were to acutely contrast my point of view concerning the intentions of Kubrick and Kelly, I'd be debating the difference between near polar opposites.
I think we both just have different opinions of the original cut, which have inversely aligned our opinions of the new one.
Quote from: Ghostboy1. No, I'm not that dense; neither cut of Donnie Darko, in my opinion, is anywhere close to the quality of 2001, nor do they have the chance of becoming enduring classic(s) of cinema on much other than a cult level. I was only using 2001 as a comparative model because you brought it up in the first place, but if I were to acutely contrast my point of view concerning the intentions of Kubrick and Kelly, I'd be debating the difference between near polar opposites.
2. I think we both just have different opinions of the original cut, which have inversely aligned our opinions of the new one.
1. No disrespect was ever intended. You're one of the good ones here. I compare DD original & 2001 strictly in terms like "Complicated Films Left, to Large Extent, Open to Audience Interpretation; Films That Captivate Via Mystery, Nuance, and Unresolved Clue-droppings."
2. If you weren't big on the original, I'd give you a begrudging "Pass" on liking the D'sC better..... I suppose. :wink:
SPOILERS
doesn't the plane engine at the beginning of the film start the whole thing?
well, how did the plane engine get there if Donnie has not yet done all of the things he did because of the plane engine?
Quote from: bigideasSPOILERS
doesn't the plane engine at the beginning of the film start the whole thing?
well, how did the plane engine get there if Donnie has not yet done all of the things he did because of the plane engine?
it's a product of time travel. if you send something back in time, it's been there all along. nothing can happen twice on the same timeline.
For additional info, revisit Back To The Future, parts I and II.
Quote from: GhostboyFor additional info, revisit Back To The Future, parts I and II.
why not the third one also?
I don't remember as much time travel theory in that one, but my memory may be shaky -- I've seen that one far fewer times than the first two.
Quote from: GhostboyFor additional info, revisit Back To The Future, parts I and II.
although they totally ignore the nothing twice on the same timeline bit.
Quote from: GhostboyFor additional info, revisit Back To The Future, parts I and II.
yeah, but the difference there is that you see time travel taking place first. in DD you see time that's already been manipulated without any mention of time travel (i think, it's been a while since i've watched DD).
Quote from: bigideasQuote from: GhostboyFor additional info, revisit Back To The Future, parts I and II.
yeah, but the difference there is that you see time travel taking place first. in DD you see time that's already been manipulated without any mention of time travel (i think, it's been a while since i've watched DD).
But still: just envision Back to the Future Part I if the film's events were arranged chronologically (Marty shows up in Hill Valley, runs into both mom and dad, Enchantment Under the Sea, time travels into the 80s, etc.....).
That's what you get in Donnie Darko. See the top portion of my spoilers post at the top of this page if you want it really, seriously spelled out. If not: Please, for the love of Creed, don't.
edit: I just thought of something. Marty McFly and Darko's jet engine are narrative analogues. Or maybe just Doc Brown's time machine is the engine's analogue. Hey, what's with that goofy pinwheel thing the camera lingers on in center of the Darko engine's intake fan?
ok, so take BttF, give Marty superhero qualities and allow people who die (manipulated dead) to contact people freely through space and time?
Quote from: bigideasok, so take BttF, give Marty superhero qualities and allow people who die (manipulated dead) to contact people freely through space and time?
Yeah, and assume that the whole BttF plotline had been divinely orchestrated by some higher intellect and you're pretty much there.
here is a recent chat. it touches what we've been talking about a little bit. also, apparently Kelly has 5 finished screenplays.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57872-2004Aug11.html
more stuff here:
http://www.richard-kelly.net/
Quote from: bigideasalso, apparently Kelly has 5 finished screenplays.
...and nine projects:
http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=4&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=45
okay, i saw this last night.
a brief history...... after reading whatever, i cant remember, and seeing a supercool poster i ended up seeing donnie darko on opening night in theatres and liked it a lot. what i didnt find out till later was that two of the reels were mixed up in the middle of the film, so i thought i was watching a film that was much more complex than it actually turned out to be when i got the dvd and re-watched it. i saw it another handful of times showing it to some people and have not seen it in 2 or 3 years.
so i went into the directors cut without a real good memory of exactly how the film went, not really going to notice every little change. i did notice it seemed LONG. i dont know if i was just used to the pacing, or that i was watching it on a shitty screen and it was late, or what. but the extra 20 minutes really FELT like 20 minutes. not that thats bad, it just makes it into a different sort of movie. i much preferred Under The Milky Way to the new opening song, it doesnt seem to fit as well and maybe i'm just to used to the old one, and maybe i just like it better. the new version finds 1000 little ways to tie everything together and drop clues and references in a way i dont remember the original doing. hardly a conversation or something thats being shown or anything in the film is arbitrary. EVERYthing seems to be dropping a clue/reference.
basically, i think the directors cut just makes DD into a different sort of film. the original cut moves pretty briskly and is left more ambiguous. the directors cut takes its time, finds 1000 little ways to drop clues and ends up being a much weirder experience. so i dont know that the directors cut makes it better/worse, its certainly an interesting alternative, but i just prefer the theatrical cut.
RUhi?
Quote from: themodernage02the extra 20 minutes really FELT like 20 minutes.
So true. I could've sworn it was far more than 20. The pacing is all fucked up.
Quote from: themodernage02basically, i think the directors cut just makes DD into a different sort of film. the original cut moves pretty briskly and is left more ambiguous. the directors cut takes its time, finds 1000 little ways to drop clues and ends up being a much weirder experience. so i dont know that the directors cut makes it better/worse, its certainly an interesting alternative, but i just prefer the theatrical cut.
Well said, and simply said.
Paradoxically, the D'sC does make it both weirder and more expository/explanatory/clue-ridden (and I groaned at so many of the "clues"....too "clever" for my taste). Also more "obvious" and more a parable/allegory. I've softened on the better/worse question since seeing it in the theatre but for now, I like the theatrical cut way more.
http://www.dvdanswers.com/index.php?r=0&s=1&c=5193&n=1&burl=
Fox Home Entertainment has officially announced the new director's cut of Donnie Darko which stars Jake Gyllenhaal and Maggie Gyllenhaal. The two-disc set will be available to own from the 15th February next year, and should set you back around $26.98 in total. The film itself should be presented in 2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen along with both English Dolby Digital 5.1 and 2.0 Stereo Surround tracks. Extras will include an audio commentary with Writer/Director Richard Kelly and Kevin Smith, a production diary with optional commentary by Director of Photography Steven Poster, a story-board to screen featurette, a They Made Me Do It Too documentary on the cult of Donnie Darko, #1 Fan: A Darkomentary and the trailer for the director's cut. I'm afraid the artwork has yet to be released, but we'll bring you that very shortly.
I finally saw this, snagged the UK 2 disc set. The Smith/Kelly commentary is decent, better than I thought. I dunno if they're going to port the 'They made...' doc that's on the UK one or do some American slant... it's funny and scary, the Brit nerds are certainly something. The production footage w/ comm. is okay, you get on-set video and some technical tidbits about the production, nothing earth-shattering.
Quote from: RaviFox Home Entertainment has officially announced the new director's cut of Donnie Darko which stars Jake Gyllenhaal and Maggie Gyllenhaal. The two-disc set will be available to own from the 15th February next year, and should set you back around $26.98 in total. The film itself should be presented in 2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen along with both English Dolby Digital 5.1 and 2.0 Stereo Surround tracks. Extras will include an audio commentary with Writer/Director Richard Kelly and Kevin Smith, a production diary with optional commentary by Director of Photography Steven Poster, a story-board to screen featurette, a They Made Me Do It Too documentary on the cult of Donnie Darko, #1 Fan: A Darkomentary and the trailer for the director's cut.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedigitalbits.com%2Farticles%2Fmiscgfx%2Fcovers4%2Fdonniedarkodirectorsdvd.jpg&hash=c7925c40720f0a0f6f7fa4f97becacaadedd2268)
That is a great cover. I'll probably buy this even though I have the first one. It was dirt cheap. I'd like to see if he's actually improved on anything. Sucks, though, 'cause Kelly has yet to prove this was some sort of fluke. Wish he'd get on with it. The cast for Southland Tales (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405336/) looks horrible, and Kelly's mug shot makes him look like the next Brett Ratner.
Quote from: wantautopia?the next Brett Ratner.
Long overdue...
i don't like the cover because that's not donnie darko's body.
were they hoping that the rerelease/director's cut would take off and make a lot of money at the box office?
i guess it didn't pan out.
I dont think that was the idea... however... the Directors Cut did gross more than the original theatrical release of the film... and now they will start selling the new DVD which will also sell good...
This was a 3-4 million dollar movie and it already made over 15 million between theatrical and video... so not bad for being his first project and a very complicated one
well, i hope Kelly had more financial dividends for the Director's Cut. it says on imdb that he was only paid $9,000 for Donnie Darko. hopefully he asked for a good percentage of the DVD sales.
Quote from: andykit already made over 15 million between theatrical and video...
thats probably how much all the new marketing crap cost.
Quote from: PubrickQuote from: andykit already made over 15 million between theatrical and video...
thats probably how much all the new marketing crap cost.
:inlove: yo! what up P?
spoils
some of the additions/changes were good/interesting, but i disapprove of all the new technical readouts in the eyes and the football screen/fireworks at the end.. it makes the universe seem engineered by the government/not mystical or magic at all, although the very first eye was really amazing. the shot of the jet engine travelling through the hole was totally fucked by the new screen filter and that was one of my favourite things ever. also i prefer non-cg books. showing the passages of the book gives this version a definitive interpretation/destroys the mystery i liked. i also really didn't like hearing carpathean ridge over and over and over. it cheapened it. the new sound tweaks where donnie discovers the wallet/burns down the house were good. i wish they had kept frank's "i'm.. so sorry." and left his voice alone in the movie theatre. i never noticed how bad a lot of the dialogue was..i still love the story and the universe and everything. the original's better, though.
i think calling kelly the next brett ratner is a tad harsh. at no point did ratner aim for or achieve any artistry/cinematic value at all. how much kelly aimed for and achieved is debatable, but he's definitely got some.