Donnie Darko *spoilers*

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Shawn
It couldn't have been the jet engine. Because that flight would have taken off regardless of what he did.

In this theory, what I think you're not getting though is that whatever spurred the jet engine through time in the first place, and the creation of the Tangent Universe, will now not happen again. You can't look at it as simply being a linear, single dimension. Since Donnie sent the engine back from the Tangent Universe, when his sister and mother get on the plane, they will not crash this time. The flight will go smoothly and the plane will not crash. They will never discover how and why that engine got there.

 

[kogase]

So let's get this straight... the people who made this movie made up some random "philosophy" on time travel and "tangent universes", and everyone here is pulling their hair out trying to figure out what it all means? This sounds similar to trying to make sense out of Dianetics and Scientology, or the Bible.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: kogase
So let's get this straight... the people who made this movie made up some random "philosophy" on time travel and "tangent universes", and everyone here is pulling their hair out trying to figure out what it all means? This sounds similar to trying to make sense out of Dianetics and Scientology, or the Bible.

Basically, but it's just a lot of fun to figure out what actually happened. It really gets your brain going.

 

[myusername]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: archcommus
The move was interesting but too queer for my tastes.

I think everyone overanalyzes it, the writers just probably decided to make a stupid movie about nothing and out came Darko.

Try watching it with the Director commentary.

I really liked this film a lot, and you'd never hear me trash the film. However, I DID listen to the director commentary, and he couldn't pronounce - and obviously barely understood what Deus Ex Machina meant.

I won't say this detracts from the absolutely stunning visuals and mood that the film sets, but if you are looking for deep analysis, you will need to turn somewhere other than the originators. (Which, fwiw, is actually relatively common - very few auteurs "know" what goes into their work)

Oh, and as far as the other topic of debate - I firmly believe the opening scene is incredibly sexy.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: myusername

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: archcommus
The move was interesting but too queer for my tastes.

I think everyone overanalyzes it, the writers just probably decided to make a stupid movie about nothing and out came Darko.

Try watching it with the Director commentary.

I really liked this film a lot, and you'd never hear me trash the film. However, I DID listen to the director commentary, and he couldn't pronounce - and obviously barely understood what Deus Ex Machina meant.

I won't say this detracts from the absolutely stunning visuals and mood that the film sets, but if you are looking for deep analysis, you will need to turn somewhere other than the originators. (Which, fwiw, is actually relatively common - very few auteurs "know" what goes into their work)

Oh, and as far as the other topic of debate - I firmly believe the opening scene is incredibly sexy.

That's why I said to turn to Director's Commentary. It provides a simple overview of what the director had envisioned, and a simple explanation to what is actually happening, but it doesn't go into the extreme theories out there.

As for the opening scene...for a lack of a better word, it was "perfect." Kinda sent a chill down my spine, with it being creepy, weird, and awesome all at the same time.