SPOILERS INSIDE!
No I haven't left my blog for dead, I've just been out of ideas as to what to write about and then came along this - perfect. This will be a sort of comparison/review between Donnie Darko and the recent sequel S. Darko. First off I'd like to say that S. Darko is in fact as bad as people say, where the original shines in almost every aspect of film making the sequel fails - it lacks any and all heart that Donnie Darko had. It's is set 7 years after Donnie Darko, it centers around Donnie's little sister Samantha on a road with some friend of hers who's name I forget. They're held up in some small town where some so called crazy guy by the name "Iraq Jack" is on the loose. Donnie Darko is set in 1988 so S. Darko is set in 1995, DD really felt like it was in the '80s the hair the clothes the music, the way people where etc it just had the vibe, S. Darko didn't really fell like it was in the 90s at all, now I'll admit the 90s is harder to capture film wise, but they didn't even try and throw in any classic 90s music. Now remember how amazing riviting and truly fleshed out the characters were in DD? We had the odd but loving girlfriend, the cool teacher who REALLY knew the kids, the somewhat idiotic but never the less faithful friends, the bat shit crazy teacher/mother who thought she was always in the right, I could go on but I think you get the point, now in SD we have these very flat characters who never quite feel whole, the friend who plays a central part in the film is someone we never really get a back story on, she was also annoying and obnoxious. We also the "bad boy" played by Ed Westwick (of "Gossip Girl" fame) - another annoying obnoxious character you couldn't give two fucks about, that you could infact replace with a blank of wood and no one would know the difference.
Now for plot, now I'll be the first too admit that I don't completely understand DD, not sure if I ever will but I certainly understand what happens in the film - it's more the how (and sometimes) the why as to what boggles me, but with SD it just flat out doesn't make sense (don't get me started on that fucking magical feather), it's a mess the scrambles all over the place to just try and find meaning in what it's spitting out but just can't. It's hard to explain with words but I can just "feel" DD, but with SD there's nothing there. It feels like vein attempt to recapture the magic of DD, where if they really felt they had to do a sequel they should have at least tried to add and expand on the plot - and not just be like "Hey that's cool, lets throw it in" (Why exactly does Sam have to die twice?) SD feels like the director watching DD and saying "Hey, yeah I can do that too" and falling flat on his ass when attempting to do so. Yes I think Donnie Darko is a modern masterpiece that I don't fully understand and S. Darko is an unnecessary soulless piece of crap that was never wanted, and isn't needed, god hope the rumours of a third one stay that way - rumours.
DONNIE DARKO FINAL RATING - 10/10
S. DARKO FINAL RATING - 3/10
S. DARKO FINAL RATING - 3/10
*Side note, I originally gave S. Darko 4/10 but after some consideration decided to knock it down a point.
