|
awful
Dec 3, 2004 4:35:05 GMT -5
Post by mistafeesh on Dec 3, 2004 4:35:05 GMT -5
opps, sorry to troll. I didn't mean to - I posted, bookmarked the discussion, and forgot to come back. I just want to understand why anyone would like the film, let alone be fan enough to, say, buy a t-shirt...
My first reaction to the film was a massive disappointment. I'd been trying to persuade my wife that it'd be a good film to watch for about 6 months after reading some reviews. I was expecting something along the lines of, perhaps a modern day ingmar bergman. Maybe with a touch of Ray Bradbury, or just good ol' surrealism.
Maybe I've changed since I last watched those sort of movies anyway, but I just found the whole thing really contrived. I could see that there was stuff hidden below the surface, and got a grasp of quite a bit of it on my first (and only) watching, but a quick trawl of t'interweb proved that it was, IMO, contrived claptrap.
I mean just the kind of thing I used to make up on the spot when I was a kid playing wierd games with my mates - "to travel back in time you have to be in a metal container and there has to be fire and water" or something like that (was a while ago - It's not that it doesn't make sense - I probably wouldn't mind that so much - it's that it makes really crap sense.
I also think the ending was just plain pathetic. It was just like the script writer either ran out of time or energy and killed him off. I know it meant that he avoided all these things happening, blah blah yackety schmaketty, but it was crap. Sorry.
About the only thing I liked was the bunny suit.
|
|
|
awful
Dec 3, 2004 5:32:05 GMT -5
Post by Omnipotent on Dec 3, 2004 5:32:05 GMT -5
About the only thing I liked was the bunny suit. Speaks volumes
|
|
|
awful
Dec 3, 2004 7:54:11 GMT -5
Post by ProvidencePortal on Dec 3, 2004 7:54:11 GMT -5
Well, I have to be fair and say I can see where mistafeesh is coming from -- which is not to say I agree, but only that I understand. There IS a lot in this movie that's sophomoric. That's charming for many of us. For others its one of the key elements in making the movie "interpretable" and giving us hours of discussion time on even the smallest detail.
But I can certainly understand how someone might encounter the movie and, for whatever reason, focus on the elements that are born of the fact that Kelly began writing this in high school and finished it at 26 -- not much time to mature as a writer in theme or in conceit.
|
|
|
awful
Dec 3, 2004 10:44:54 GMT -5
Post by mistafeesh on Dec 3, 2004 10:44:54 GMT -5
that explains a lot! ;D
I still think the film is pretentious and shallow, whilst pretending to be deep and meaningful (lamb dressed as mutton?) but I probably shouldn't have trolled your forum. Sorry!!
I'll go away and leave you alone now...
|
|
|
awful
Dec 3, 2004 18:57:33 GMT -5
Post by Madridarko on Dec 3, 2004 18:57:33 GMT -5
There IS much more deeper concept than oh my god lets go save the worl, ummm I have nothing else to say so lets make donnie die.
There is all the emotions that donnie felt in discovering his true "fate" there is the concept of divine intervention and how god trully excists and he is still there even for those who like donnie belive them self athius or do not know what to belive in. There is also much more than oh look a weired object umm lets go back in time. If you haven't read POTT you should read it. There are just soo manny things and in cotradiction to your statement, I belive this is one of the very few deep movies that exists. That ending was just wonderfull in my opinion it was just like the cherry that fit perfectly ontop of the desert.
Umm, I am not really fond of Ray Braddburry, I think he was just a bit too much of a pshyco. You want to read something about ending something abruptly, read Farentheit 451 by him and you will see that the book is ok/good untill the last two chapters its all like Oh well ummm, I know let's make the bomb go "Boom" on the city and Guy leave him with the hobos. I also didn't like of that book that they just mention Clara, then she dissapears and never again makes a comeback. No this is not the only of his books I have read, I have read others of his short storie. He is crazy, he believes he can remember everything, even his own birth!
The movie donnie darko, umm I don't like how it is all set up to look lilke it was in the 80's I mean great effects and they did a very good job, got me fooled, but I think it would have been cool if it was more moderday, or maybe it would have ruined the whole movie? I don't know
|
|
|
awful
Dec 6, 2004 21:29:17 GMT -5
Post by Pax on Dec 6, 2004 21:29:17 GMT -5
Re: Kelly writing this beginning in high school, etc. As far as I know, he wrote this in 1997, I think this was on the DVD commentary, so he wasn't in high school, but college. Also, re: Bradbury is psycho. Have to strongly disagree. It's been a while since I've read "Fahrenheit 451," but "The Martian Chronicles" and his short story collections are great, and I highly, highly recommend "Something Wicked This Way Comes," one of the finest supernatural/horror novels of all time. Yes, Bradbury can be a bit sentimental and he idealizes childhood a little much...but hell, is that so bad, really? Just wanted to disagree and put in my 3-5 cents worth. Carry on. Peace.
|
|
|
awful
Dec 7, 2004 18:04:56 GMT -5
Post by Madridarko on Dec 7, 2004 18:04:56 GMT -5
Peace? that is something Omnipotent would say, wait, hum. Omni?
|
|
|
awful
Dec 10, 2004 6:10:48 GMT -5
Post by Omnipotent on Dec 10, 2004 6:10:48 GMT -5
Peace? that is something Omnipotent would say, wait, hum. Omni? You know your comments about me being other people is bordering on disrespectful now. Millions of people say peace, I didn't invent the word you know.
|
|
|
awful
Dec 10, 2004 19:41:43 GMT -5
Post by Madridarko on Dec 10, 2004 19:41:43 GMT -5
I am not teling you, I am teling pax, and maybe what I mean that maybe she/it/he might have gotten it from you, or maybe it was trieng to immitate you or something. I don't know, but you are one of the few that actually puts a meaning on PEACE. I am sorry I won't doubt you anymore. I think this has probably proven enough.
|
|
|
awful
Dec 10, 2004 20:59:42 GMT -5
Post by gretchen on Dec 10, 2004 20:59:42 GMT -5
pax comes around only ever so often. he (i believe?) has made some excellent comments, but never really sticks around. i have no reason to believe pax is omni, or that pax is trying to emulate omni.
pax has no need to be anyone but him(?)self.
|
|
¤(ø[¤-{cellar door}-¤]ø)¤
New Member
Sleep is lovely, death is better still, not to have been born is of course the miracle
Posts: 24
|
awful
Jan 1, 2005 9:24:44 GMT -5
Post by ¤(ø[¤-{cellar door}-¤]ø)¤ on Jan 1, 2005 9:24:44 GMT -5
Long range empathy sucks... *holds her head* donnie darko is an awesome movie, maybe you're the dumb kid who cant understand the plot of the movie?
|
|
|
awful
Jan 1, 2005 19:16:11 GMT -5
Post by Twitchmonkey on Jan 1, 2005 19:16:11 GMT -5
[quote author=¤(ø[¤-{cellar door}-¤]ø)¤ link=board=review&thread=1090111711&start=40#2 date=1104589484]Long range empathy sucks... *holds her head* donnie darko is an awesome movie, maybe you're the dumb kid who cant understand the plot of the movie?[/quote]
But attacking someone for their views that in no way effect you is pointless wouldnt you agree? Coming here to this forum to write out that post was not a very necessary or intelligent thing to do but its over and everyone should just walk away from this post...personal opinion is not a measure of intelligence but picking apart a movie on a forum about it wasnt the best idea
|
|
|
awful
Jan 1, 2005 23:15:46 GMT -5
Post by gretchen on Jan 1, 2005 23:15:46 GMT -5
this thread needs to be locked.
seriously.
|
|
|
awful
Jan 2, 2005 3:50:12 GMT -5
Post by Twitchmonkey on Jan 2, 2005 3:50:12 GMT -5
this thread needs to be locked. seriously. You gonna use your special God powers to lock it?
|
|
|
awful
Jan 2, 2005 9:47:21 GMT -5
Post by gretchen on Jan 2, 2005 9:47:21 GMT -5
if only
|
|