Donnie Darko

Released 2000
Stars Jake Gyllenhaal, Jena Malone, Drew Barrymore, Patrick Swayze, Noah Wyle, Mary McDonnell
Directed by Richard Kelly

This unclassifiable but stunningly original film obliterates the walls between teen comedy, science fiction, family drama, horror, and cultural satire--and remains wildly entertaining throughout. Jake Gyllenhaal (October Sky) stars as Donnie, a borderline-schizophrenic adolescent for whom there is no difference between the signs and wonders of reality (a plane crash that decimates his house) and hallucination (a man-sized, reptilian rabbit who talks to him). Obsessed with the science of time travel and acutely aware of the world around him, Donnie is isolated by his powers of analysis and the apocalyptic visions that no one else seems to share. The debut feature of writer-director Richard Kelly, Donnie Darko is a shattering, hypnotic work that sets its own terms and gambles--rightfully so, as it turns out--that a viewer will stay aboard for the full ride.

Summary by Tom Keogh

SPOILER ALERT: "Donnie Darko" is a dark, interesting film. Right from the start, I thought Donnie was going to succumb to schizophrenia and either kill his family or go on a school shooting spree. Fortunately, the movie was too clever for that. Unfortunately, however, it may have been too clever for its own good. It's a fantastic debut from writer/director Richard Kelly, but, from listening to the commentary, I think he forgot he wasn't in film school anymore. He insisted on paying homage to several of his favorite films by recreating scenes, outfits, etc. This doesn't interfere with the film, but he went a little overboard in that department. Another thing he went overboard on was symbolism. If you've ever watched student films, you know they're overflowing with pretentious symbolism. Commercial films, on the other hand, need to be subtle in that department. I think Kelly was reasonably restrained, and I don't think the symbolism really interfered with the film. Where I think Kelly went astray was with the story, which is pretty incoherent. All through the film, I kept wondering what was real and what was hallucination. At first, Frank appears to be an hallucination, but we eventually realize he was a real person at one point. Based on that, I started to believe he was using the time portals to visit Donnie in the past. Assuming that's true, the big question becomes what's Frank's motivation? Why does he visit Donnie and lead him on his journey? My answer to that question is the entire experience is an attempt by Frank to save his own life. He uses the time portals to visit Donnie in the past and gradually coerce him into remaining in his room on the night when the jet engine falls through the house, and he uses Donnie's schizophrenia as a tool to accomplish this. Whenever you have a time travel movie, there's a paradox. Given my explanation, the paradox is when does Frank realize he's going to die so he can take advantage of the portals to change the past. Then, of course, as with any time travel story, does changing the past change the future? Finally, why such a complex scheme to accomplish this goal?

That was my take on the movie. Then I listened to the director's commentary, and I learned Kelly had something completely different in mind. The two most important points he made were 1) there was a parallel universe, and 2) Donnie was a superhero. He thought everything in the movie foreshadowed these facts, and everything was incredibly obvious. Unfortunately, that's what happens when you immerse yourself in a project like this. You get involved in it for so long and so deeply, you think everyone else is on your wavelength. In this case, I certainly wasn't on his wavelength. I had considered the possibility of a parallel universe bleeding into ours, but it just didn't seem to fit. Also, I didn't view Donnie's nighttime raids as acts of a superhero, but the acts of a sleep-walking, drugged teenager. The big point I missed from Kelly's commentary was his overall explanation of the story, and I think it was because he didn't have one. I wanted to know why the jet engine crossed from one universe to the other, and why Frank was leading Donnie on his journey. Kelly didn't have any explanations for this, and he admitted he didn't know why Donnie returned to his room. The incoherent ending didn't ruin the film, but it did rob it of the emotional impact that it should have had. This was despite the haunting Tears For Fears song Kelly wisely chose to lay over the ending. The one thing I needed to know to have emotional closure in this film was Donnie's motivation for sacrificing his life. If he did it to save the lives of Frank and Gretchen, then it would be moving. By not knowing his motivation, the ending just came and went, and I didn't feel anything for anyone. Despite its flaws, however, this is an interesting, often exciting film that's always alive. It doesn't sleepwalk through any of its parts, and I'm looking forward to Richard Kelly's next effort. --Bill Alward, August 29, 2002