Donnie Darko Directors Cut DVD? (1 Viewer)

[TonyD]

there must be a fan site alreay set up that describes the changes.

if not i'd be very surprised.

 

[RossMan]

Richard Kelly, the director is one to watch in the near future... several of his projects are in the works, including "Southland Tales".

For everything "Donnie Darko", visit this Richard Kelly site:
http://richard-kelly.net

Cheers!

RossMan

ps. watch the original cut first.

 

[Vincent-P]

Watch the original version first. I implore you. Then watch the director's cut.

 

[Vincent_P]

While I have yet to see "the Director's Cut", I have to disagree with the above. On the original DVD, Kelly was constantly lamenting how he was forced to cut many scenes from the film to get it down to a contracted maximum running time. He didn't whittle the original cut down based on his own artistic desires, he did it to honor his contract that gave him a maximum running time, thus this new version isn't about him "cashing in" at all.

While a lot of you (and hell, maybe even me when I see the "Director's Cut") might prefer the original "studio" edit of DONNIE DARKO, there is no denying that Kelly cut the film under duress and lost lots of material that was painful for him to cut. He makes that very clear in his commentaries on the original edit, especially if you listen to his commentaries over the deleted scenes.

Vincent

 

[Jamie Cole]

Good to see Best Buy has an excellent price on this ($15.99).

I am having a Darko party of sorts Friday night, and trying to decide which cut to show friends that haven't seen the film. I'm still partial to the original, and the music changes in the director's cut are jolting to me since I was already such a fan.

For anyone who is thinking of forgoing the old disc for the new one, get both. The commentaries on the first one are worth the price (which is usually under $10).

[offtopic]
By the way, Matt... I love your sig. Just finished "Song of Susannah" and can't wait to dive into the last volume.
[/offtopic]

 

[Vincent-P]

I actually don't prefer the theatrical cut. Once I get the DVD of the Director's Cut tomorrow, that is the main one I will watch. However, I think anyone viewing the film for the first time should see the theatrical cut. I simply do not think that the Director's Cut would have become such a cult phenomenon because is does not leave you with as many questions. And since Richard Kelly has not disowned or expressed real displeasure with the theatrical cut, I stand by my opinion. I even talked to him about this when I met him after a screening of the director's cut in Austin last fall.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

However, it must be noted that in the commentary for the DC, Kelly repeatedly stresses that the DC is NOT his preferred cut. He doesn't pick one or the other, but he does refer to the DC as a "remix" and acknowledges that a lot of it may be self-indulgent. It's not a cut and dried case in which the director clearly prefers the DC, unlike, say, Daredevil.

For the record, I liked the theatrical cut better...

 

[Hans M.]

Let me say “director’s cut” is not interchangeable with “definitive cut.” It is all based on your preference. Do you want a movie that is more mysterious and open-ended or a movie that answers all the questions?

I personally do not support the idea that the director knows best. There is such a thing a serendipitous art. In the case of Donnie Darko, the director needed to whittle the film to a certain running time. I have heard it was a demand by the studio, but I also heard it was his own decision to make it shorter based on festival audience response or even his assumed audience response. In any case, it was the director who decided what scenes to cut not the studio, so do not assume the studio dictated the cuts of the original theatrical release. I doubt a studio would ever consciously want to make a film more obscure. Studios like the classical Hollywood form, and they will push for it anytime they can since audiences respond better to films that follow the classical Hollywood cinema’s principles.

Also, before you give Kelly too much credit, you have to remember he still doesn’t have anything to prove besides Donnie Darko. It’s too early to consider him a brilliant filmmaker. This film still might be a fluke. He’s no Wes Anderson or Paul Thomas Anderson who both have proven themselves with consistently original films with distinct voices. I have always had a nagging sense that Kelly got lucky with the editing of Donnie Darko, creating a film that says something much more than what it seems due to holes in the narrative.

 

[MikeEckman]

It seems like several people are getting all worked up over this. Both versions are still available. Who cares how many cuts of a movie there are? As long as one of them is the one you like and its available to buy, then why complain?

If Peter Jackson decided to recut the Lord of the Rings trilogy down to 2 hours and he replaced Gollem with Kermit the Frog and Gandalf with Mr. Belvedeire, and replaced the Howard Shore soundtrack with one by Survivor, that would be fine with me because I would already have the cuts of the films that I enjoy.

 

[WallyB]

I picked up the DC DVD today at lunch and have watched a bit of the bonus material on disc 2. Watching some of those "enthusiasts" - specifically the #1 fan "Darkimus Prime" or whatever he calls himself - make me not want to watch the movie again.

Please tell me that guy is not for real.

 

[Matt Czyz]

He is. There was a contest or something. Sad but true.

 

[MarkBourne]

Oh, no he's not. Watching it, it's pretty obvious that the whole thing is a put-on. A very well made put-on, granted, but it does fall off its razor's edge a time or too. No matter -- it's still hilarious.

 

[DaveF]

I rented the original two weeks ago, having heard good things about Donnie Darko. I found it to be an engaging movie, but ultimately very flawed. Having watched the deleted scenes, listened to about half of the commentary, and read most of the HTF discussions, I concluded the director did not communicate in the film what he thought he did.

So, I'm curious if the director's cut corrects that problem, and fully conveys what was in the director's mind.

Anyone know if it will be available for rental at Blockbuster?

 

[Christ Reynolds]

i didnt think it was a put-on at all. because it has an entry at imdb means nothing. i could be wrong, but the guy seemed very real and very annoying (i know i'm not wrong about the annoying part). the actors he encounters seem genuinely uncomfortable by his presence, but richard kelly seems creeped out at the end of the "film".

CJ

 

[Paul D G]

Re: #1 Darko Fan -- I watched a few minutes of this today (will revisit after I see the film) and while it could be a put on, it could very well not be. One might look at his collection of 30 copies of the DVD and think it's a joke, but I know fans of things who are like that.

I know a guy who bought seven copies of an album because of minor differences in the packaging -- this one had the sticker sealing the digipak, this one didn't, this one had a variation of the pattern on the sticker, etc. Another band I like had an album come out with four different color cd cases. Not only did people buy all four, but they bought imports from other countries because the blue was a lighter shade than the domestic version, etc. Same album, different color case (which, I add, are stock colors you can get at any cd supply shop).

Then you get into fan conventions and people dressing and acting like characters, or the whole fan fiction thing....

There's no end to the level of obsession with people. If his short film is a joke, then it's a parody of real people.

-paul

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I'm sure it's a joke - I'm just not sure Kelly was in on it when it happened...

 

[Mike~Sileck]

Watched it today ~ It must be a joke ~ if someone was that obsessive then I think his pictures would look better than simple computer print outs, and he might take some time to make a better jet engine than just a piece of tin foil wrapped around some cardboard.

Gotta say it was very funny, I'll be watching the DC later in the week and see how I feel about it (I've seen the original several times).

mike

 

[Matt Stone]

Hehe, thanks. Hope you like the last book

Still haven't watched the DVD. I'm anxious to listen to the Kelly/Smith commentary though.

 

[Jason Roer]

DaveF,

You are 100% correct. The theatrical cut, while very engaging, is a flawed film. Richard did not convey that which he meant to. Only through reading on the site and/or listening to the commentaries do we get his vision. Keep in mind I still enjoy the film and recommend it to friends. Richard did an amazing job capturing the high school life - the interactions between the characters both in school and at home were spot on. The overall feeling of intrigue was compounded by the "ticking clock", the countdown.
Despite its flaws I consider Donnie Darko a success.

The Director's Cut answers within the content of the film all questions raised by the theatrical cut. The problem is we lose the pulse pounding feeling of dread from the theatrical cut. That is a sacrifice I wouldn't have made. It was critical to the feel of the film. I would never recommend the Director's cut to anyone unless they were a huge fan of the theatrical and were only interested furthering their knowledge of the Darko universe. Of course all the information from the D.C. could be found elsewhere.

It is an interesting dilema. Here we have a film whose Theatrical Cut was flawed in that it didn't give us the information needed to understand the writer/director's vision. Then the Director's Cut answers the questions. Yet when all is taken into consideration, it was the theatrical cut (in my mind) that was the far superior and successful film.

"Ambiguity can be our ally."
Jason Roer
Reply to Donnie Darko D.C. DVD Thread

Cheers,

Jason

 

[DaveF]

That's bad.

Donnie Darko (and Sky Captain) impressed upon me that a movie is not always about the story. It can be about the experience, even if it suffers under subsequent analysis. I look forward to watching the DC. But I think it's very unfortunate that the director is unable to both properly tell his story while creating the desired mood. That is a dilemma.

I think the root problem was that the director didn't actually understand the story he was telling. He was telling a joke but didn't know the punchline; a good trip but unsatisfying for the listener.