|
Post by ProvidencePortal on Oct 29, 2004 14:17:28 GMT -5
Have the members of the movie club figured out what your hints are for, or are they still confused. Let us know how they take the movie! please Josh, you're the man for asking. I had to let up a bit because a couple of my more tech-savvy friends were getting anxious to do some email tracking and try to identify where the mysterious "frank_the_br" emails were originating. At least one of my cinemaphile buddies quickly interpreted the profile I created for that address and the Web site I built as homages to Donnie Darko, but I think he's the only one. And of course my little brother, with whom I'm convinced I sometimes share a brain, knew IMMEDIATELY that it was me, that I was pimping Darko, and that I was planning it for movie night. So, to date here's what's left: next Wednesday is now my turn to facilitate the next movie night, so that's when we're going to watch Darko. So in the course of three more Frank emails between now and then, I'm going to add slightly more to the Frank Web site each time, starting with the Cellar Door sight, then the Donnie Darko official site and then this message board. But I'm not going to "officially" announce that I'm Frank or that we're watching the movie at movie night until everyone gets there in person. I got my skeleton-ribs t-shirt in the mail yesterdray from the e-bay auction I won, and am going to get some cheap, ratty hooded grey sweatshirt at one of the big-box discounters. I'll be wearing that on the night in question. I got three of the t-shirts from CafePress.com as giveaways, and I'm going to ask basic trivia questions for them -- things like, how many universes are portrayed? Does Donnie time travel? ... and the like. I'll report back with how everyone reacts. Thanks again for asking!
|
|
|
Post by josh on Nov 8, 2004 0:16:05 GMT -5
And?????? Tell us they were awed. Tell us they were overwhelmed. Tell us they were inspired by your extreme and thought provoking insights into the karma of Donnie Darko?
|
|
|
Post by ProvidencePortal on Nov 8, 2004 14:08:47 GMT -5
I'm pleased to say I have a very positive report. Last Wednesday was our Donnie Darko movie night, and by my measures, it was a resounding success. Here are some highlights: 1) Set-up -- From the web site and the "frank_the_br" emails and profile to the sound bites I sent and the giant "they made me do it" I drew on our front porch (traced off the actual scene in the movie) and "frank was here, went to get BEER" sign I put on our fridge (also traced off the TV from the actual movie scene), from my own skeleton-ribs t-shirt and grey hooded sweatshirt outfit to the music CDs I made for each attendee and had playing as they arrived (all the pop songs from the movie -- original and DC -- along with some choice score selections) ... it was definitely the most involved movie night yet. As it turned out, fewer people than I had assumed believed I was sending the emails -- most had half bought my suggestion that someone had gotten our distribution list and was sending crank emails ... or even that we were involved in some viral marketing-style campaign for the director's cut of the movie. 2) Audience -- We had a good mix: a couple first-time viewers and a couple more people who either hadn't seen the movie for several years or who had only seen parts of it, along with a couple more who'd seen it more than once. No one had read interviews, watched commentary or participated in an online forum on the movie. 3) Response -- My buddies are smart and honest; at least one them, at the closing credits, said "For most of the movie I just wished he [Donnie] would get over himself." I set up the discussion to generate raw responses to the movie w/o any of the added contextual stuff (PoTT, etc), and that made it interesting. Coming out of the viewing, everyone understood the movie to suggest that Donnie time travels and that he dies to save Gretchen and his mom/sister. When introduced to more context (most importantly the information in the PoTT, but also stuff in the commentary and in interviews and some of the additions/changes in the DC), there were mixed reactions. Some people saw the connections immediately, some were very put off by the fact that the added layer felt disjointed juxtaposed with a still very fresh viewing of the movie. I offered this movie up to my group for a few reasons (we typically frame each presentation up with some questions), and I thought you guys might be interested to see how I guided the discussion: [/i]-- Our discussions of movies typically begin with structural notations, what we liked about shot selection, performances, writing, the like ... but then turns to thematic interpretation: what is the screenwriter (and for his/her part, the director) trying to tell us about life? With DD, it's different: there's much less to talk about thematically and far, far more to talk about structurally. In truth, we have a boy's coming of age story set against a sci-fi background, and themes are tough to come by there ... just as they are if structure obfuscates the story. Still, people have a very emotional reaction to this film. So my first question was: how can structure alone -- a strong score, carefully selected music, emotional topics, a non-linear presentation and the death of the main character -- create an emotional response, and what does that mean about us as an audience? "Unique layering/texture" -- DD is a unique movie in that understanding of it is signficantly altered by (some would say dependent on, but that's a judgement that assumes one "righter" approach) a body of texts outside the movie itself. As we've said many times on this forum, the PoTT is essential reading ... yet it appears only as a prop in the theatrical release, with one illustration shown, and that one only reflects an effect we've already seen in the movie -- the time spear. The story of the movie can be understand further (and differently) with deleted scenes on director commentary on the DVD. It is expanded (and extended, really) by the web site, which tells parts of the tale that occur after the credits roll in the theatrical release. Finally, some might successfuly posit that one can't REALLY get the meaning of the movie without exploring it with others ... that not only the sense of the movie, but its theme of togetherness in God's plan, is meant to be understood socially, not individually.[/ul] I also brought up some of the considerations from this forum -- that Sparrow may have been a Living Receiver, that Donnie may not have had to die, that common interpretations say that Donnie doesn't time travel -- and all were well received. In short, I owe all of you a big, big thank-you for your contributions and support ... the discussions you've had with me and with others here in the forum helped full some very fun and insightful discussion. Thanks again! edit: fixed HTML tag
|
|
|
Post by rightfielder21 on Nov 8, 2004 16:07:07 GMT -5
Glad to hear it went over well...
|
|
|
Post by gretchen on Nov 8, 2004 16:52:40 GMT -5
the giant "they made me do it" I drew on our front porch (traced off the actual scene in the movie) and "frank was here, went to get BEER" sign I put on our fridge (also traced off the TV from the actual movie scene), prov is just too awesome for me.
|
|
|
Post by ProvidencePortal on Nov 8, 2004 17:41:24 GMT -5
Those two signs were seriously kick-ass; tracing the writing (we have a pretty big TV, so I was able to do poster-sized tracings) made it looks so cool ... they looked exactly like the moments in the movie.
|
|
|
Post by Madridarko on Nov 8, 2004 19:58:21 GMT -5
Sounds like somebody had a fun night (who can't have a fun night after finishing watching DD) and unfortunatly did not invite us to it. We would have been the perfect persons to answere/contribute to those umm discussion questions. I hope you actually shared this website to anyone who liked the movie. Which by the way you don't really mention what were there reactions to the movie it self like for example who liked it or disagreed with it or thought it was a waste of time or wanted to look at it again to understand it better etc.... But that is good, that this movie is still alive and is slowly, in an extremly slow pace, diffusing. Eventhough I think that that would kinda take the fun out of Donnie Darko being a cult movie. I think that is the whole point actually it goes more with the style of being a cult movie than an actually #1 best hit movie. I mean it could not damage it if it was a bit of a bigger cult movie as in more people watching it, but while there is not a DD craze in which everybody adores it. That should be reserved for a selective few, like us. I think that makes it even more special, that only a few people really get it and understand it and enjoy it and adore it. But that is only my idea.
|
|
|
Post by Twitchmonkey on Nov 8, 2004 20:13:14 GMT -5
I disagree Madrid....I wish DD would have huge amounts of success so that Kelly has the money to make more movies.....I dont really care if other people like it or not
|
|
|
Post by Madridarko on Nov 8, 2004 20:27:46 GMT -5
In a way you could be right, but I think it would just ruin the whole essence of the special things of his movies. I mean it would be like I think Jurrassic Park, everybody loved the first one and wow etc.. but then they made a second one and it was ok not really good then another one came and so on and so forth and each one was worst than the other one. I am not saying there will be ten Donnie Darko's but it would ruin the whole special thing of Kelly's movies.
|
|
|
Post by Twitchmonkey on Nov 8, 2004 22:23:43 GMT -5
In a way you could be right, but I think it would just ruin the whole essence of the special things of his movies. I mean it would be like I think Jurrassic Park, everybody loved the first one and wow etc.. but then they made a second one and it was ok not really good then another one came and so on and so forth and each one was worst than the other one. I am not saying there will be ten Donnie Darko's but it would ruin the whole special thing of Kelly's movies. Youre confusing my words....I'm not talking about making sequels to DD....Kelly said he would never do that....I'm talking aobut DD having more success so that Kelly has more money to do other projects
|
|
|
Post by Madridarko on Nov 8, 2004 23:46:31 GMT -5
Your'e getting my words wrong, I actually did not mean sequels of DD but movies by Kelly. After a while uhgh, they would not be that great of a thing. Oh, another movie by Kelly yeah. Even if the first I don't know 5 or so were pretty good. Maybe even less. After that, they would just be plainly boring. Just imagine it like this, if god was to make miracles by millions each day, they would not be considered that big of a deal.
|
|
|
Post by Twitchmonkey on Nov 9, 2004 0:34:44 GMT -5
Your'e getting my words wrong, I actually did not mean sequels of DD but movies by Kelly. After a while uhgh, they would not be that great of a thing. Oh, another movie by Kelly yeah. Even if the first I don't know 5 or so were pretty good. Maybe even less. After that, they would just be plainly boring. Just imagine it like this, if god was to make miracles by millions each day, they would not be considered that big of a deal. There is a big difference between a concept running dry and a director making a lot of movies....a concept can only have so much steam before it runs out but whos to say that richard making 50 movies will be any worse than 50 movies by a bunch of different directors......I dont think he would make a movie unless he has more to say and as long as he has more to say I dont think hes going to venture anywhere near meiocre
|
|
|
Post by Madridarko on Nov 9, 2004 0:47:07 GMT -5
exactly, right now he is not making mass movies because he doesn't have the money, it's because he doesn't want to, he wants to take his time on one carfully to ensure it to be a very good one. Money would not really help much at this time for he has money, it's not like wow he is a billionair. It would help in getting very good actors.
|
|
|
Post by Twitchmonkey on Nov 9, 2004 1:51:58 GMT -5
exactly, right now he is not making mass movies because he doesn't have the money, it's because he doesn't want to, he wants to take his time on one carfully to ensure it to be a very good one. Money would not really help much at this time for he has money, it's not like wow he is a billionair. It would help in getting very good actors. I still dont totally understand you.....so you want him to have the money to get good actors but not too much? I think richard knows that if he makes a bad movie it wont do well and I want him to have the money to create whatever he wants to create
|
|
|
Post by ProvidencePortal on Nov 9, 2004 12:11:40 GMT -5
Which by the way you don't really mention what were there reactions to the movie it self Not true ... it was a long post, but one ought to read it completely before taking its author to task on what it did or didn't contain. In fact I exactly mentioned what the reactions were: I even quoted someone who found himself distracted throughout the movie by Donnie's overwrought teen angst. But, so it's here in a shorter post: people generally liked it, were surprised and/or skeptical when introduced to the concepts in the PoTT (many felt the theatrical release, as it stands, is dramatically unlike the PU/TU/Living Receiver stuff ... so different as to make it seem forced to say that's what the movie's about), and are interested in seeing the director's cut. edit: misspelling
|
|