MovieChat Forums > Donnie Darko (2001) Discussion > Director's Cut is not good.

Director's Cut is not good.

posted 9 years ago by matthew-vaughn-141-344338
26 replies | jump to latest

I haven't seen this film in years, but have watched the theatrical version many times. I love the film, but I think that might be an accident. The director seemed to have a vision for the story that he ultimately didn't get to flesh out properly. I think the theatrical version is so much better for it. It is a much better film with a little ambiguity and less-is-more approach.

I also noticed that the car scene at the end was really poorly done. It just looks very cheap and contrived to me now, I'm not sure if there were significant editing differences. It's a shame because it's the climax of the film. A lot of the special effects look quite dated now as well, like the thorax worm bubble things. I also thought some of the physics and philosophy was a tad shallow and pseudo-intellectual. One example I can remember is when Donnie was talking to his science teacher about travelling backward in time faster than the speed of light, and the science teacher just agrees that it is possible. I think most physicists would agree that time travel is only theoretically possible going forwards in time, and travelling faster than the speed of light is not possible at all.

Anyway, it's still a good film with a great atmosphere and killer soundtrack, and really excellent acting all round.

[–] Reznik_T 8 years ago

I've only seen the DC so far (twice), and I love it. I've been afraid of watching the thetrical version, not wanting to ruin the experience. Is it worth watching it then, even after seeing the director's cut?

[–] matthew-vaughn-141-344338 8 years ago

I have no idea what that experience would be like, but I'd love to know what you think.

[–] Reznik_T 8 years ago

When someone sees a movie and thinks that it's perfect the way it is, they might be hesitant to watch a different cut or version of the same movie because of the possibility that it might ruin the picture they have in their mind about that movie. For example, I am Hungarian, and I've only seen Pulp Fiction with Hungarian dub, because the Hungarian voices are so good, I got used to them, that is the way I love Pulp Fiction, and I'm afraid the original dub might worsen the whole movie experience for me.

The same way, I've only seen the director's cut of Donnie Darko, and I love it the way it is. I was curious to hear from someone who has seen both versions if it's worth watching the theatrical cut AFTER seeing the director's cut.

[–] matthew-vaughn-141-344338 8 years ago

The theatrical version is just slightly more ambiguous. It's like the directors cut, but with some stuff taken out that I think was a good choice to take out.

[–] MAK_CDN 8 years ago

You nailed it matthew-vaughn-141-344338. It's what was left out in the theatrical release is what made the story. 5 of us where in the room the first time I saw Donnie Darko and all 5 of us had a different interpretation. Had we seen the director's cut initial I don't think this movie would have made that great of an impact.

[–] JPLogan54 8 years ago

The theatrical cut is far superior and you nailed it.
In Hawking's book it is theorized (based on Einstein) that travelling faster than the speed of light would allow for travel forward in time. That or being able to hover near a gravitational mass such as a black hole would slow time down for you, and hence upon returning to earth, much more time would have passed for people on earth. So in essence you would have traveled forward in time. Einsteins relativity.
Wormholes would be a way of closing the distance in space time, as though you folded a sheet and when those two points met, their distance was lessened. It was somehow suggested in ABHOT that this could be used to travel backwards in time. (Wormhole)
Forward travel is much more solidly supported by theory then backwards travel.
Of course you may know all of this, not trying to lecture you.
But the film did not get these points exactly correct and did make up some stuff about time travel for Sparrows book.

I think if you are going to watch the theatrical cut after only seeing the directors cut and enjoying it, then you have to let go of the notion that the directors cut offers the only possibly explanation of the events. Going from theatrical to directors narrows down those explanations. When you watch the theatrical version you'll notice all kinds of clues that suggest alternate possibilities as to what is happening. So I guess you have to allow for the fact that Sparrow's book doesn't get it exactly correct. I for one don't believe Sparrow was a Living Receiver. I think she was Manipulated Living who made an attempt to piece some strange events together into a book to try and explain what happened to her and what she witnessed. I also don't think Cunningahm, Pomeroy and Monitoff are Manipulated Living in the same way Gretchen is. I think Roberta and Gretchen are very similar characters though, almost like Roberta in a way was the Gretchen of her experience of how ever many years ago. With Roberta her Deja Vu was strong enough that she could formulate a book out of her strange recollections.

[–] distant-skies 8 years ago

I liked the DC. I just watched it. Even the DC is very ambiguous, but ultimately, the differences were more art related, such as the text and music. So, it's time travel, supposedly. That was also presented in the theatrical. It doesn't mean the DC explains everything that happens. it doesn't even explain most of it, imo. And I think people have a preference for the theatrical because that's what they saw, first. If nothing else, I prefer the DC because the song Killing Moon plays at a more appropriate time.

Why can't you be a non-conformist like everyone else?

[–] ickey_gross 8 years ago

Biggest problem to me was the pacing...adding all of the deleted scenes back in throws off the flow. The fantastic one-shot Head Over Heels scene at the school fits perfectly in the first twenty minutes as a great introduction to all of the student and school staff characters. In the DC it gets pushed to like 45 minutes into the movie and it left me feeling like it was an out of place music video in the middle of a movie.

[–] SillyGayBoy 8 years ago

I just rewatched the original cut and as I suspected, it is far better and I don't want to watch the directors cut again. Everything is paced better.

The only scene I miss is:

"You're like the only good teacher here".
"Thank you!"
When Donnie finds out the teacher was fired. Wish that was left in.

[–] cockpitanus 8 years ago

Always thought that the film was overrated. Your comment made me check which version I had watched and it actually was the DC. Gonna check out the original cut in the future, maybe then will my opinion on the film change.

[–] pdlussier1 8 years ago

...physics and philosophy was a tad shallow and pseudo-intellectual. [...] I think most physicists would agree that time travel is only theoretically possible going forwards in time, and travelling faster than the speed of light is not possible at all.

In short, wrong. Not dated.
Longer version: Under Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity, time travel into the future isn't theoretical, it's very simple. Satellites do it everyday, though at a rate of nanoseconds per year. Astronauts traveling away from and looping back towards earth will be younger than the time elapsed on earth. The difference becomes more marked the closer one approaches the speed of light. There's the real problem: we don't currently have the means to generate the energy required to attain really relevant speeds, but I suspect that one day we might...
Coming back is purely theoretical as it requires speeds that surpass that of light's (which requires infinite energy), but there's still debate and no absolute verdict re superluminal speeds. Plus, Special Rel. doesn't exclude it entirely (Tachyons), and General Relativity still makes it a (theoretical) possibility (See: Apparent Faster Than Light, wormholes, etc.).

I just got the DC. Haven't watched it yet but reading yours and other posts on this thread, wish I'd gotten the TC--that's the version I fell in love with, but curiosity go the better of me.

Ignorance is bliss... 'til it posts on the Internet, then, it's annoying.

[–] pdlussier1 8 years ago

Adding to my previous reply:

Just watched the DC and I pretty much have to totally agree with you except for the part I specified above, though I now agree with your tad shallow and pseudo-intellectual remark. For me, the source of all that is purely the addition of the text from Sparrow's book, whose pages appear on screen at times. Spells it out. Dumbs it down. Moves the film closer to Fantasy and away from Science Fiction.

Yep, really wonder how the DC version would have done had it been the original cut?

Ignorance is bliss... 'til it posts on the Internet, then, it's annoying.

[–] matthew-vaughn-141-344338 8 years ago

It probably would have been received like his other film The Box. Not well.