S. Darko

S. Darko

So the official trailer for s.Darko is now out and about. You know the one, the sequel to Donnie Darko? The one about his sister that apparently suffers from the same affliction of psychosis and derangement that a man in a bunny suit is going to bring the apocalypse. Honestly, I can't even understand how this is becoming a franchise but ever since the release of the Directors Cut of Donnie Darko I've been pretty convinced that the original release was a total fluke in its success and that wherever it went from that point on couldn't really do the name any harm because it was accidentally good in the first place, know what I mean?

Comments

  • I agree completely. I think its a beautifully made movie but the cult following that it has makes no sense to me. I also read that the director / writer (I don't know his name) made a "sourcebook" for the film that explains the whole movie?? If a movie needs a sourcebook to make sense then its not an artisitcally successful film.
    Justin on Monday, February 23rd, 2009 @ 12:44pm
  • uh oh - here we go again. fact is the movie didn't need explaining, but the director's cut does give lots of new things as well as explaining it more. so as a fan, i was very happy to see it & enjoyed a lot of the new visuals. the source book likewise, just a great thing to have if you didn't figure it out yourself already. much like any other movies around. s. darko however i am 100% with you on, michael. it's a cynical nostalgia cash-in with no warrant. the fact that richard kelly is not involved proves that. also don't call donnie a fluke until you've seen kelly's new one. i'm sure it will redeem him. southland wasn't perfect, but it showed clear signs of brilliance that prove that he should not be ignored just yet.
    caspar (v) on Monday, February 23rd, 2009 @ 12:59pm
  • Caspar, I am entitled to my opinion. If the Directors Cut is the way that Richard Kelly intended the film to be then he had no grasp of suspense and no faith in the viewer to figure things out. I can't believe there is actually an occasion where the studio was RIGHT and the directors vision was less accurate. You can argue with that if you like - but it's an opinion. To ME, the Directors Cut was far inferior and actually kind of insulting to the viewer after having seen the original. Southland Tales was far from perfect. I won't even get into that again.. the movie was bad. Period. Again, this is an _opinion_ - you are allowed to feel differently but I'm sticking to my guns on that one. I'm still curious to see what Richard Kelley has in store with his next movie but if it sucks, it's his third strike and I'm done with even mildly caring.
    Michael on Monday, February 23rd, 2009 @ 1:27pm
  • hey michael - i wasn't saying your opinion wasn't valid or that you weren't entitled to it (you of all people know how this works). i'm sorry it was taken that way or you felt i was being overbearing in any way. i am just, of course, voicing my opinion too & since it's massively in the minority (as was proven last time we had this argument), i think it's only fair to restate it as i still truly believe it. we can agree to disagree & i won't bring it up again as (probably due to my behavior) it's become a bit of a sore point! which is so awful considering the amount of joy we both got from the original & how pertinent it still is as a film (with or without director's cuts). i mean have you seen the apocalypse now redux? or the star wars special editions? all unbelievably horrible in places, but the originals are still beauties. here's hoping 'the box' brings us together as one again under the banner of richard kelly's valiance as a director.
    caspar (v) on Monday, February 23rd, 2009 @ 1:43pm
  • i think it was the "uh oh - here we go again." - as if you were virtually rolling your eyes at my opinion. but I digress. Hopefully Kelly has some good left in him and with the lack of pressure now hanging over him (regardless of personal opinion I think it is safe to say that Southland Tales was a pretty phenomenal _commercial_ flop) he can hopefully take the liberty to make a great film. I WANT him to be a filmmaker I follow and look forward to new works from.. I'm just hesitant now after the previously stated examples. and I apologize if I was a bit abrasive as well. I tend to do that without even realizing it. Richard Kelley can unite us all. Viva la Richard Kelley.
    Michael on Monday, February 23rd, 2009 @ 1:46pm
  • yeah - i thought the my initial salvo might have been it! i should have thrown in a smilie or something as it was done with a big grin & a nudge & a wink to boot. ah the glorious miscommunication of the internet. it's all good. thanks for clearing the air!
    caspar (v) on Monday, February 23rd, 2009 @ 1:53pm
  • im going to go to a broader point -- outside of "Sleepaway Camp II" i can't think of a single movie sequel that did not involve a substantial player from the first film that was worth a damn (and the bar was set pretty low with "Sleepaway Camp") i just don't understand why people are so adverse to new ideas when it comes to movies. i know we live in a world where "madea goes to jail" rakes in $45mil in a single weekend, and "Paul Blart: Mall Cop" is #1 two weeks in a row. yet "makeout with violence" has to struggle to get by on a shoe string budget. (i will confess i havent seen the full project) but i know a handful of different people who could all write/produce/direct better stuff than half the crap that makes it to theatres (let along straight-to-DVD). no one really wants to see "starship troopers 3"... and if they do, they certainly arent the kind of people to build an audience with.
    paul on Monday, February 23rd, 2009 @ 2:07pm
  • from what *I* read of the sourcebook, NO ONE had that movie "figured out" except the director. I was fine with it being a beautifully executed dumb movie about an insane teenager.. but NOOOOOooo we need quantum mechanics and divine intervention (which, in case you didn't know are always certain to be movie-killers).
    Justin on Tuesday, February 24th, 2009 @ 6:05am
  • can I say with the most simplicity i can conjure up - donnie darko only stumbling into "good" in the first place is the best way i've heard it. Don't get me wrong, i loved the film, but sequels and legacies and such i think have to be out of the question.
    paul on Sunday, March 1st, 2009 @ 12:32am

Add Comment

URLs will be autolinked
 
c Send Comment