Customer Reviews

S. Darko: A Donnie Darko Tale [Blu-ray]

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(8)
2 star:		(16)
1 star:		(38)

 

 

I can remember a defining moment for me in this film when, only a few minutes in, the titular character looks out her car window and sees a CGI unicorn made of clouds running alongside her. I immediately reached for my gun, but a compassionate friend stopped me, ensuring me that this couldn't possibly be the two hour long Guess Jeans commercial it was setting itself up to be.

My friend was damn wrong.

S. Darko is a sequel, like Troll 2 or the Second World War. The direction is hopelessly one-note and plagiaristic, the dialogue is reminiscent of a TV spot for Calvin Klein cologne, and the story is less a sequel, and more an accidental anthology of mini sequels, each sucking a little harder than the last.

Remember the pensive sequences in Donnie Darko where they'd show a time lapse of cloud cover, or morose suburbanites living out their lives to a somber soundtrack? Well, this movie does, and is considerate enough to include 50 or 60 shot-for-shot reproductions of those scenes for those who might've forgotten. With the bulk of the movie thus out of the way, the remaining running time is filled with multiple time travels that are impossible to care about, because they're established, abandoned, and picked up again like a relay baton in the Special Olympics.

Also, the principle relationship between Sam and her idiot friend is painfully bad. You know the one: lifelong friends who have been forged in the crucible of adolescence to become blood sisters. A bond so close that they can only communicate their intimate connection through the following dialogue:

Girl 1: "We're perfect together."
Girl 2: "Immaculate."

I am not making that up. That back and forth happens at least three times. Also, Sam's friend all but spits on her grave over a guy who the friend hooked up with over the course of maybe a week. A guy who ALWAYS has a pack of cigarettes rolled up in his shirt sleeve, exactly like how NO ONE does. The blood is rushing into my eyes again, so I have to stop this now.

Content reviews on a film like this can be very subjective, especially for the followers of the original film. Best summation I could come up with was the cast said in interviews: "...this is a continuation, not a sequel.."

The story follows Samantha Darko seven years later as she sojourns across the Country lost in a haze. She breaks down in a small Utah town with her friend - and then the rest just gets ridiculous. The whole prop department needs to be fired. It is "June/July 1995", but the vehicles, fire engines, signage, and other assorted materials are way off. For instance, one central part of the film was the theater showing 12 Monkeys, I doubt some small town in Utah got the film the year before it premiered nationwide. I know, a time travel film - anything is possible. The majority of the story is a train wreck of bad acting and irritating characters. Mostly a 2 star film - but the Blu quality is superb.

The picture is extremely clear throughout and the special effects looked professional and thorough. The camera work, slow motion shots, and rapid forward clips all looked well preserved. The destiny/Abyss snake-looking things all looked crisp and the indoor shots did not show any grain. The DTS gets quite a workout with the music, and assorted montages of that garbles voice and dimensional stuff.

The special features give this another star (half). It will probably help satisfy the curious minded regarding the whole what-were-they-thinking. The main documentary lasts 15 minutes and covers the usual interviews, rife with plenty of quotes about why there was a "continuation" not a sequel. There is also a 6:45 minute clip about some of the cast making a music video and talking about the uniqueness of Utah. There are 6 minutes of deleted scenes - glad they were cut, they were worse than the movie itself (more of the God will save you mess from the film).

I have enjoyed the original film for years and it still rents very well, but this is one of those films that moves off the shelf for curiosity sake, and for some nice Blu quality, but not for the story or acting.

Firstly, let me be blunt and admit up front that this film is really only a three star flick,I REPEAT ONLY A *** STAR FLICK, two and a half at the least, but there are already too many fan-boy rants, not reviews, about the movie sucking without ever having viewed it. You know fan-boys, right? Well, in case you don't, they're the same narrow minded losers who complained about the Transformers film not sticking closely enough to the original 80's cartoon's storyline. Yeah, the same boring cartoon that was made after a successful line of action figures, essentially to be a further adverstisement for said action figures. That film was as good as any whose main premise has to do with a bunch of over grown action figures from the Reagan era duking it out with things blowing up real good. Don't even get me started on the Speed Racer dweebs.

Okay, sorry about the rant folks.

Going into this film's plot is futile. Just like Donnie Darko the plot is dense and uneasily consumed in the first viewing. Without spoiling the film too much, I can tell you that the movie comes from and explores the perspective of a character whose role is that of the manipulated dead as opposed to the first film's living receiver. If you know your Donnie Darko mythology that little bit of info will help you swallow the film with a little more ease. Sam Darko is similar to Donnie in that she is an outcast and morose. She's running from her past and it leads her to a town in the middle of nowhere that might as well be hell. She meets a man by the name of Iraq Jack, who has the same role in diverting a major dimensional disaster that her brother did in the previous film. That's about as much of a plot description as I can give.

THE GOOD: The acting is all wonderful. The character of Sam Darko is more passive then her brother Donnie so she may come off as more of a victim, but her ultimate role in thee story requires all this once all is said and done. The cinematography, using the digital Red Camera, is perfect and filled with gorgeous vistas that even Ang Lee would envy. The story supplies a switch of focus more traditional to the first film half way through and its really unexpected and interesting. Whats really neat about he film is that it really expands the set mythology and explores things left out on the sidelines, like what exactly is the manipulated dead doing or going through while the living receiver is doing his duty? The soundtrack, like the original, is AWESOME! It's filled with obscure or minor hits from 1995(The Cocteau Twins, Dead Can Dance), so don't expect the radio rotated hits that the original had from 80's, but they're all great tunes and brought me back to middle school days. Lastly, and most importantly, its a sequel that expadns some of the mythology set forth in the original but doesn't change or alter the final conclusions of the first film. Donnie Darko isn't cheapened and none of its final impact derided. Another real cool change, in keeping with the perspective switch, is that instead of seeing the universe thorugh the genre of a super hero/sci-fi view we get a more feminine perspective, a fairy tale. Some of the first few images drive this point home.

THE NOT SO GOOD: As is the case with most sequels some of the romance and surprise is removed. The film is smart for just changing the perspective, but at the same time we've vistied this universe already and nothing can change that. We don't get enough time insid Iraq Jack's head, and since he's so very important to the film's final conslusion this is a real problem. The director cribs or tries to pay homage to some imagery in Richard Kelly's original and they just come off hollow this time around. The first film's conclusion tightly wrapped everything up, but this one seems to purposely leave some loose ends, maybe for a further installment? Finally, my biggest gripe with this flick has to do with the impending doom itself. The original had a very interesting, weird X-Files like disaster involving the plane engine, that was creepy and very visual, but this film's doomsday is so abstract it just doesn't leave enough of an impact on the visual level. It's a cool concept especially if you've read Carl Sagan, but its abstract nature just doesn't have the real and relatable visual oomph of the plane engine from the original.

Well, there it is. You really need to have seen and understood the first film to get into this one, but it doesn't rely too much on the first movie for its main story, just some of its concepts and overall mythology. So check it out, it's not great or brilliant but it is truly entertaining and it moves at a fast clip. It doesn't screw with the rules set by the first. So, if you're not a finatical, basement dwelling fanboy at least rent it. If you're a fanboy-nazi, then why would you bother seeing it or even reading this review. Now go back to your blog....somewhere else.

The film stays true to its title, A Donnie Darko Tale. Unlike most sequels, it takes place in the same universe(universes?) but doesn't change what went before it. Besides, the original was so comic book centric, why wouldn't a sequel be warranted? Comics have way too many sequels, spin offs, and even alterante realities(DC's Earth II) to take place in.

This was a half hearted, quarter budgeted recreation of the original. It had no energy acting (like the first) that lacked the charm, heart and creepiness of the original. I loved Donnie Darko, sure I didn't understand it at first, but it was charming and there were subleties that you pick up on when you watch it a second time.

This movie was Samantha's story 7 years later on a road trip with a friend to become a dancer. Their car soon breaks down in a desert town in Utah where the first night of their breakdown a meteorite crashes that creates a fracture in time. Think I'm ruining it? The movie does that 10 minutes in and it is no big mystery.

The casting was a little strange, because too many members of the cast looked similar.

Without the charm and quirky humor it made the movie a chore to watch. It seemed very long and didn't quite make sense. Didn't make sense to the point there had to be two or three wormholes by the end of the movie. The fact that the evil bunny appears in the movie made little to no sense considering Frank wasn't in the movie, or in the time zone.

We all love Donnie Darko or else you wouldn't be reading this, but please skip this movie. You should know how bad it is, when the trailer for the movie shows scenes from the original, but doesn't show any scenes from this movie.

I, like many other avid Donnie Darko fans, was 80% angry to hear this movie was coming out...but at the same time, 20% excited at the possibility as well. I couldn't help thinking they would soil the premise and ideas behind Donnie Darko--try to change the artistic brilliance of the original into a formula.

But, I rented it anyways and wanted to actually give it a chance without being TOO pre-judgmental.

Sadly, it turns out I was right to pre-judge, I thought thy were going to try to capitalize on what made DD so unique, and I was SO VERY right. From the opening shot of a skyline, you can feel the blatant mockery and lack of any original direction or cinematography.

But still, I kept on watching--and I kept on being disappointed. All of the actors were stiff, including Samantha (Donnie's little sister), and the friend she was traveling with was extremely annoying to look at and listen to.

There was no plot really, no storyline--not even a general direction outside of a failure to mimic the orginal's. It was more like they literally went out of their was to mock DD instead of pay homage to it in a continuation/sequel. They amplified everything surreal about DD by 100% and dumbed it all down--somehow making the movie far more incoherent than DD was. I agree with the other reviewer who said Samantha just wandered aimlessly through the movie for the most part--and her character as well as the rest of the movie was terribly written. And I also agree with that reviewer when he said the prop guys need to be fired.

However, I made it a little over half-way through the movie and had to turn it off. I was just too horrible. Even as a stand-alone movie, if it weren't affiliated with Richard Kelly's masterpiece whatsoever, it would still be an awfully dreadful excuse for a smart, surreal film. I believe the only way the movie could've been worse is if Steven Seagal had been in it as the Manipulated Dead...but at least that would've been comical.

I think they just tried far too hard to recreate the magic of Donnie Darko, and ended up slaughtering the premise instead. I personally hope that the director of this wasn't a fan of the original, because if he was--he should be very ashamed of himself. And even though I'm sure she just needed the money, Daveigh Chase should also be ashamed of herself for partaking in this.

IT SIMPLY DOESN'T WORK ON ANY LEVEL! I tried, World, I really did...so very hard.

And if you're reading this having never seen the original Donnie Darko, buy the dvd Donnie Darko - The Director's Cut (Two-Disc Special Edition) or Blu-Ray Donnie Darko [Blu-ray] instead...PLEASE.

1. I think the idea of telling the story from the point of view of the Manipulated Dead instead of the Living Reciever was great. 2. I think the idea of continuing the story using Samantha Darko was great. 3. I believe Iraq Jack was a brilliant character.

These great ideas, unfortunately were poorly executed. Here's why I think this way:

1. As I have watched Donnie Darko, I have certainly wondered what it was like for Frank the Bunny. He was the second most important character in Donnie Darko but we know virtally nothing about him. So I could certainly understand why someone would want to write a movie from this perspective. I think the reason it was so poorly done in the movie is because the idea that Samantha Darko would be the Manipulated Dead is just downright stupid and illogical. The Manipulated Dead should have been a completely different character.

2. Continuing the tale from Samantha Darko's perspective is brillant. Why? Because she would have found the book The Philosophy of Time Travel. She would have been motivated to find out why her brother had this book and what the book meant. She could have tracked down someone who knew Roberta Sparrow, leading her to Iraq Jack. Then Fisher (the director)could have explored Roberta's back story like he said he considered doing in the special features on the DVD. Perhaps Corey could have still been a part of it. A friend occupying her on her journey trying to run from her past, while Samantha was trying to find information so she could understand hers.

3. And while these two young women are trying to deal with their past, Samantha meets Iraq Jack (and some of the towns characters. A few of them were nothing but filler in this movie.). The character of Iraq Jack was the one character that the creators got right in this movie. Unfortunately, they do very little to let us get to know him. In Donnie Darko, Donnie's identity and angst was explored in great detail. The creators of this movie should have done the same with Iraq Jack, exploring the depths of his post traumatic stress disorder and need to do something to right all his wrongs. If Samantha had watched his life unfold in a similar way that Donnie's had, she could have understood what Donnie went through, realized her brother was a hero, and made peace with his death. Samantha would have had a huge character change by the end and been a lot less passive.

Ultimately, I think the director Chris Fisher made a fairly good fan fiction movie, but nothing more. I give the movie 3 stars because there were some brillant ideas in there. Samantha's role as the Manipulated Dead does perhaps help us understand the incredible character of Frank the Bunny a bit more. I think the subplot of the asteroid affecting the person studying it was vulgar and ruined the beauty and mystery of the Donnie Darko universe. It just didn't fit in with the rest of the story. The asteroid shower was hardly end of the world like. The scene where Iraq Jack goes back to the windmill to change his fate was great but everything else just fizzles at the end.

In the special features, nearly everyone's gut reation to the idea of making a continuation of Dannie Darko was DON'T! The fact that The Director's Cut of Donnie Darko was somewhat poorly recieved should have made Fisher realize his continuation would not be well received. It's almost as if he thought, "Die hard fans will hate this movie, but they will still want to see it." There just seems to be something very wrong with that. Egotistical even.

Rarely are sequels better than the original. So it should come as no surprise that this isn't as good as Donnie Darko. Was it a necessary sequel to make, maybe not. However, S. Darko does a great job at exploring the mythology of time travel through black holes and the theory of it's consequences.

The film itself looks and sounds great. While many of us will miss the 80's esque mood of the first film, this is a very stylish and well edited movie in it's own right.

It has enough uncertainty and fragmented symbolism that will have you rewatching it. Trying to find some understanding while putting the pieces together was part of the fun of the original!

If Donnie Darko was 4-5 Stars this is an easy 3!

As a big fan of Donnie Darko I was curious to see the pseudo-sequel, S. Darko.
Even going in with low expectations (I never trust sequels) I was disappointed by this film. Right off the bat it said to me, "Hi, I'm an art film. I'm full of brooding, sexy characters doing and saying things for inexplicable reasons. Even my outcasts and nerds are attractive people in glasses and high-water pants." Forty minutes into the film I replied to it, "You don't have characters, you have caricatures." The nerd was a total social misfit with feigned awkwardness, the cool kids were, as mentioned, brooding and sexy and had no sympathy toward the nerd (who turned out to be secretly creepy). There were Christians in the movie, but they were, of course, closet child-molesters and seemed incapable of finishing a conversation without mentioning that they know Jesus. They were framing the local Gulf War veteran, who was inevitably crazy, for their crimes. The ex-soldier was guilt-ridden for war-crimes he committed... oddly all things that sounded like Viet Nam and certainly not the Gulf War of the early 1990's. There was a farmer who was an ignoramus and didn't know the difference between "Apocalypse" and "Acropolis" and a cop who looked like a male stripper getting ready for his act at the bachelorette party. The aging waitress at the diner liked to talk about how she was attractive when she was young. Oh, and inevitably, the drunk-driving jerk cool-kid turns out to be the most decent guy in town.
What the movie lacked was any of the mystery of Donnie Darko. It was a showcase for pretty people to act brooding and sexy and turn out to be attractive nerds. While I know I will watch the original again and enjoy it. I may not ever view this film again.

[...]

Donnie Darko was truly an original and memorable movie. Darko was written and directed by a young and gifted filmmaker named Richard Kelly. The movie struck a massive chord with its intended audience after the studio botched its theatrical run. The DVD sold like hotcakes and was one of my favorite films of 2001. Flash forward to the here and now and we have S. Darko, a pseudo-intellectual wet noodle of a debacle. S. Darko is nearly unwatchable and easily the worst film of the year so far. Poorly acted (most of the miscast young actors stumble around vacantly and able to produce a single emotion), written, and directed, its a miserable movie-watching experience.

S. Darko is about Donnie's sister Samantha (a broody and sullen Emo) who wanders around with another sneering Emo on a road trip to So Cal. Their car breaks down in a hellish small town in Utah populated by a hunky mechanic (a comatose Chuck Bass from Gossip Girl). Chuck smokes and tries to look edgy and seductive in Hanes white T-shirts in an odd bid to prove his heterosexuality, but he fails miserably, much like the movie in general. The other characters include Iraq Jack (wtf), a totally miscast and awful James Lafferty of the popular CW teen soap One Tree Hill. We also get a dumb cop, freaky Christians and an embarrassed looking Elizabeth Berkley of Showgirls and Saved by the Bell fame, blurting out some of the worst dialogue ever written. The plot has the basic conceits of the first film, minus any kind of menace, style, or wit. The bunny mask is there, the head has barbed wire around it so Iraq Jack can mutilate himself. A gratuitous and gruesome scene ensues. There's so many holes in the movie, I lost track after 50 or so. At one point meteorites start falling all around and no one seems to notice or care. The combination of the awful CGI and the non-reaction from the dead cast did produce some laughs. At this point I lost the will to keep going.

S. Darko sucks. Fans of the original movie deserve better than this turd. This film should have never been made. I lost at least 20 IQ points during this flick. I need to rinse the memory of this flick from my mind forever. I still have no idea what possessed me to watch this movie in the first place, I knew it was going to be terrible. All I can say is they made me do it !

[...]

When I sat down to watch "S. Darko" I promised myself that I would approach it with an open mind and watch it as an individual tale separate to the original "Donnie Darko" albeit set in the same universe. Reviews were mixed. At best it was ranged somewhere between enjoyable, confusing and inferior. Reviews at their worst described it as a downright abomination.
I remember seeing the original "Donnie Darko" at a special screening back in 2001. Not many people got it back then either. I felt at times I was one of the only few who understood its powerful message and feared it would be another wonderful movie underrated and lost among the multi million dollar trash that Hollywood would churn out that same year.
Flash forward two years later and suddenly everyone was in love with "Donnie Darko". It had found a new life and a new appreciative audience on DVD. It suddenly became a modern cult movie. Everyone was talking "Donnie Darko". Now we could all re-watch it over and over, make up our own minds about it and scan the Internet for theories and explanations to back up our own way out philosophies. Funnily enough, I feel the same fate awaits "S. Darko".

SPOILERS.........................

"S. Darko" starts its story in 1995, seven years after the events of the original "Donnie Darko". Now teenaged, Samantha Darko (underplayed beautifully by the originals Daveigh Chase) is midway through a road trip with her best friend Corey and literally on a journey of self-discovery. We are told of her disconnection with her family since the death of her older brother Donnie and quickly learn of her inability to remember her dreams and her odd sleepwalking habits. As fate would have it their car breaks down just outside a small Utah town and it is here that Samantha begins to unravel the mystery of the visions that we see plague her nightmares. If you are familiar with the original characters Donnie was a "living receiver" and the "Manipulated dead" was Frank the Bunny whose future deceased personality communicates with the "living receiver" to help them discover the path that destiny has laid out for them and in turn save the deceased from dying. Here the roles are switched around. Samantha has become the "Manipulated dead" which explains why she cannot remember her dreams where her future deceased personality guides a "Living receiver" known as Iraq Jack, a young veteran of the Gulf War who's odd behaviour and rambling conjectures are passed off by the townsfolk as someone living with post traumatic stress. To say anymore would ruin the overall outcome of the movie but suffice to say that it does share a similar plotline with the original, at times even mirroring its eccentric characters. I have a feeling however that there is also a lot more to come in the "..Darko" world. There was a reason why Donnie sacrificed his life to save Samantha from the plane crash and her journey is far from over with this film.

Other elements worth noting are its beautiful cinematography, which captures the strikingly odd landscape of the Utah desert and its score, although not dissimilar to the original, is haunting in its own inimitable way.
Although arguably inferior in style and structure to the "Donnie Darko", like its brethren, "S. Darko" will slowly but surely grow in mass appeal.