|
|
Post by gretchen on Jul 10, 2005 14:02:40 GMT -5
while we must credit richard kelly for the major ideas of donnie darko, he did afterall write and direct the film, many members feel he is contradictory in his interpretation of the film, or that it differs highly from their own.
should we just accept kelly's responses from interviews about the film's meaning?
or should we keep searching for our own?
is kelly's commentary the end all and be all of donnie darko?
|
|
|
|
Post by Omnipotent on Jul 10, 2005 14:08:46 GMT -5
The great thing about Richard Kelly's commentary is he doesn't really give unequivocal answers away in his commentary, he always says things like "I think" and realistically it's like what do you mean you think, you created the film.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bigboy on Jul 11, 2005 17:37:36 GMT -5
I'd say that by definition, the "meaning" of a movie must be defined by the intent of the Author and Director. In this case we have a double whammy; Richard Kelly both wrote and directed Donnie Darko, so I can't imagine that what we see is anything but his vision of the movie.
The notion that he contradicts himself (in the thatrical and directors cut commentaries) would seem to imply that that isn't the case - but personally I prefer to belive that the dichotomy (multichotomy? - is that a word?) of meaning is a part of the design, rather than the thought that he doesn't know his own mind.
|
|
pigs
New Member
Too lost for words
Posts: 11
|
Post by pigs on Aug 7, 2005 15:48:17 GMT -5
I disagree, Donnie Darko is up to interpretation for the viewer, everyone has got a different view about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bigboy on Aug 8, 2005 10:30:34 GMT -5
I DO kind of agree with that - Like I said, I prefer to believe that the multiple interpretations of the movie are there by design rather than chance - that everything we see and interpret is consciously put there by the writer/director.
Also I agree that what you take away from (any) movie is very subjective - in my post above I was talking more about the intent of Kelly and whether or not we can believe everything he says about the movie given what seem to be contradictory statememts.
Welcome to the boards Pogs!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Madridarko on Sept 22, 2005 19:45:08 GMT -5
Like bigboy staded before, the meanings of things such as movies and so on is a very subjective matter...
there are different levels of intepretation and it just depends on the viewer.. and for some reason DD has specifically captivated the mind of those individuals who are in a constant search for a deeper significance in things.. and it is because it has the capability of having such a profound meaning.. (most other movies have one or two interpreations and have a tendency of being superficial, yet donnie darko can be interpretaded through many distinct perspectives and seems not to have a definite concrete significance)
and I think that even Kelly understood this and thus decided not to get too involved into it's meaning because that is one of DD's major attractions, it's "multichotomy".....
|
|
|
|
Post by ProvidencePortal on Sept 26, 2005 7:31:23 GMT -5
... perhaps "the state of having more than one mother"? Mad, for the love of God: spellcheck. It's not as though you're writing at a 1:1,000 typo to accurate word ratio; it's more like 1:3. You're just being lazy. |
|
|
|
Post by Madridarko on Oct 3, 2005 22:42:34 GMT -5
Oh... wow... There IS a spell check button...
Has it always been here?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bigboy on Oct 4, 2005 3:31:44 GMT -5
Part of the update Mad.
Straying from topic a little here though...
|
|
GrandpaDeath
Junior Member
All around me are familiar faces ...
Posts: 55
|
Post by GrandpaDeath on Oct 4, 2005 13:40:28 GMT -5
Mad, for the love of God: spellcheck. Straying from topic a little here though... Perhaps not, Big. Imagine for one moment that Kelly hit the "a" key instead of the "o" when typing his script. The film he really meant to produce was "Donnie Dorko," the sad tale of a brilliant-but-schizoid teenage outcast who hallucinates that the world is about to end in 28 days ... ;D ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Bigboy on Oct 4, 2005 14:14:34 GMT -5
Ha Ha LOL ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by ProvidencePortal on Oct 4, 2005 15:57:48 GMT -5
Oh -- I thought the joke would be that his name was Dannie, not Donnie.
Because, you know, THAT'D be a tragedy. ;D
|
|
inverted pentagram 36 degrees
Guest
|
Post by inverted pentagram 36 degrees on Dec 8, 2005 4:29:48 GMT -5
From watching both the older and newer versions of the movie, here's what i got:
The meaning of the film goes beyond what the writer/director intended and that is why often in the commentaries he is unsure of some of his ideas.
Just like in the movie, in real life people are being manipulated by a higher intelligence. This can be applied to the ideas that come through the director in real life. The meaning of Donnie Darko IS what each individual sees in it, it IS also the meaning that the director intended, but hidding in secret is a greater meaning intended by intelligent forces that where channelled through the creative process of the director and everyone working on the film. This is the greatest irony of the film and those intelligences laugh at our ignorance; speaking of no evil, hearing no evil and seeing no evil. Watch the movie again.
|
|
|
|
Post by 36 degrees on Dec 8, 2005 4:33:53 GMT -5
this idea was made stronger in the directors cut by implanting the newer rabbit icon - a symbol of the inverted pentagram, along with the strengthening of the idea that everything was being controlled from outside by a strong force. The refernces to evil.
|
|
|
|
Post by 36 degrees on Dec 8, 2005 5:37:35 GMT -5
|
|
