26th of April, 2005
?Donnie Darko?
Posted by DLW in Uncategorized at 6:27 am | 
Permanent Link
I saw this movie twice this past weekend. I found it to be part science fiction, part teenage rebellion movie that mixes dark humor with an affirmation of familial and self-sacrificial love and that satirizes pat, easy answers to life´s difficult questions. I think it also affirms a belief in God, ultimately. Even though Donnie´s actions end up mainly ensuring that others may live as they were meant to live.
Anyone else?
dlw
The 26th of April, 2005 at 6:53 pm
I don’t think Donnie’s sacrifice allows people to go on living as they have before. I don’t know if you watched the Director’s Cut or the Theatrical Version, but clearly we are meant to see his sacrifice as having changed people in a way they themselves can’t define. In those final scenes, as the camera moves from character to character and catches them in their private moment of reflection on Donnie’s death, we see that even the unsympathetic characters have changed, or at least are now open to the possibility of change. For example, we see the child molester sitting on his bed, weeping. The self-righteous woman Kitty Farmer is shown with anxiety clearly expressed on her face. Frank is shown touching the eye that will now never be shot out. I see that final montage of character reactions as kind of an expression of how we often are as Christians, never quite fully recognizing the sacrifice that has been made, but nonetheless touching the spiritual wound that Christ/Donnie healed by his sacrifice. That’s the way I read it, anyway.
The 27th of April, 2005 at 3:59 am
I would agree with you. I guess it depends on what I meant by “meant”.
It seems with Donnie that even though the bulk of the movie will never occur in “reality” that all are still affected by his choice.
Is Frank, in fact, Donnie´s sister´s boyfriend? I was talking with a friend and he seemed to say that early on in the movie the character of Frank is introduced as such. I had thought that he might be someone from the past, the Frank that his parents and Kurt Russell´s character bring up in their conversations.
dlw
The 27th of April, 2005 at 5:53 am
I don’t think Kurt Russell has a role in this film. You may be thinking of Patrick Swayze, but I don’t remember him having such a conversation with Donnie’s parents. I need to buy this movie and watch it again!
I don’t know if Frank is his sister’s boyfriend or not, but I don’t think so. If so, that tidbit went right by me, and I think I was paying pretty close attention. I think it fits the movie better if Frank is more mysterious. But I could be wrong.
The 27th of April, 2005 at 6:13 am
I meant Patrick Swayze.
I´m curious because it´d be interesting to know if “Frank” came from the past. It seemed a lot of people were affected by his death then.
dlw
The 27th of April, 2005 at 10:07 am
Hi. I saw this post on the Planet Emergent feed and I had to post because I really like this movie. I haven’t seen the “Director’s Cut” yet, so all of my comments are on the original.
Before I launch into what I think Donnie Darko is all about, one thing: Frank is his sister’s boyfriend. In the opening scene when Donnie is riding home on his bike, we see his car (the one he is driving later) driving away from his house. At the party, Donnie’s sister is looking for Frank. The clues are all there.
The movie is, mostly, about divine intervention and asks the question: If God is in control of everything, do we have free will or is everything predestined?
I think that we’re supposed to understand that God is manipulating everyone in the film in order to bring Donnie to the point where he makes the choice to sacrifice his own life to save the universe.
Salon ran an article on this when the Director’s Cut first came out, explaining a lot of the film’s details. Honestly, I think the original version doesn’t stand without some kind of explanation to go with it.
http://archive.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/2004/07/23/darko/
The 27th of April, 2005 at 10:07 am
This post has been removed by the author.
The 29th of April, 2005 at 8:32 am
I don´t think I like it when directors provide an authoritative explanation of a movie. DD was more interesting for me when Donnie wasn´t just completely being manipulated by God so he´d take the engine in the kisser at the end.
If the antagonist/bunny-dude is just a hand-puppet for God who is behind everything, the alternate reality created is just a sick experiment by God the vivisectionist and Donnie is really just a super hero given powers by that God so he can act out his predetermined role.
It´s ultimately a pessimistic movie, not unlike with the Butterfly Effect, where the protagonist ends up killing himself prior to birth like the other time-travellers before him so they wouldn´t then mess up reality for everyone else.
dlw
The 25th of May, 2007 at 9:36 am
chk it out - it explains the entire movie - http://www.alchemicoblu.it/pdf/philosophy_time_travel.pdf