Donnie Darko Sequel. Codenamed, "S. Darko"

GameMaster · 05-09-2008, 11:13 PM

Here are the details. I'll hold my breath. Sequels that don't follow the original character usually aren't that good.

Bond · 05-09-2008, 11:47 PM

Donnie Darko is definitely one film that does not need a sequel.

thatmariolover · 05-10-2008, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bond

Donnie Darko is definitely one film that does not need a sequel.

After they ruined the original with the special edition (which gave a pretty concrete f-you to the fans, 'here's what happened for real, stop interpreting it for yourself') I have no interest in a sequel.

The truth is, the film as he meant it to be was bad. And as this film will be a sequel to that and not to what fans loved about it.

Seth · 05-10-2008, 02:04 AM

What do you guys think about Richard Kelly's Southland Tales? I rather liked it for what it was. I would like to see the 160 minute Cannes version though cuz the 145 minute felt disjointed from lack of supporting scenes.

Dylflon · 05-10-2008, 01:18 PM

Man, the special edition explains what's going on?

I actually wouldn't mind checking that out.

thatmariolover · 05-10-2008, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylflon

Man, the special edition explains what's going on?

I actually wouldn't mind checking that out.

Yeah, it adds some pretty concrete scenes regarding time travel.

Professor S · 05-10-2008, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylflon

Man, the special edition explains what's going on?

I actually wouldn't mind checking that out.

Don't. Its terrible.

And I expect the sequel will be straight to video looking at the hack director they attached and the 10 mil budget.

Renwood · 05-12-2008, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylflon

Man, the special edition explains what's going on?

I actually wouldn't mind checking that out.

The ambiguity was the best thing the film had going for it. When its all spelled out and made clear, its not as interesting of an experience.

I don't understand the desire to use the "Darko" brand on this movie. It seems like it has a fair enough premise, and judged on its own, could be entertaining. Now it will judged against something that fans laud over like a martyr and most people have never even heard of.

Dyne · 05-12-2008, 03:29 PM

Yeah, I'm severly worried that this movie is going to have "American Psycho 2" written all over it.

KillerGremlin · 05-12-2008, 03:45 PM

Donnie Darko does not need a sequel...but, I guess now that it has gained some popularity amongst casual viewers Hollywood feels that they can make some money, good for them. Money in the bank.

Swan · 05-14-2008, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dyne

Yeah, I'm severly worried that this movie is going to have "American Psycho 2" written all over it.

Don't even bring up that atrocity.

*shudders*

Jonbo298 · 05-10-2008, 06:57 PM

Yep, this'll probably be an epic fail. Like Butterfly Effect 2

Typhoid · 05-11-2008, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonbo298

Yep, this'll probably be an epic fail. Like Butterfly Effect 2

Yeah, because Butterfly Effect 1 was such a masterpiece.

Jason1 · 05-11-2008, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Typhoid

Yeah, because Butterfly Effect 1 was such a masterpiece.

I actually liked The Butterfly effect. Underrated movie, In my opinion. But not sure about this Donnie Darko sequal, Im a big fan of the original.

Swan · 05-11-2008, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason1

I actually liked The Butterfly effect. Underrated movie, In my opinion. But not sure about this Donnie Darko sequal, Im a big fan of the original.

Completely agree with you. I enjoyed it as well. I think the main reason it was kind of looked at poorly was because Ashton Kutcher was starring in a serious role.