Anyone catch the image in which diesel fuel costs $123/gallon? Whoa.
Unnecessary Donnie Darko Sequel: S. Darko
I generally try to avoid posting either news items or negativity but this one baffled me on several levels. It sounds like the same Hollywood story: Take what is a tight (well the original version, not the Director’s Cut) cult film with an ending that was pretty final and turn it into a money grab by producing unnecessary sequels. But it is not a big studio looking for the lucre but rather a couple small production companies with a studio distributing. This doesn’t change the non-necessity, the likes of which have not been seen since Blair Witch 2: Book of Shadows.
They’ve got Daveigh Chase (apparently doing very little when not on the set of Big Love or dubbing the Lilo & Stitch cartoon) to reprise her role as Samantha Darko, youngest sister of Donnie, of whom the film will follow:
The story picks up seven years after the first film (and Donnie’s death) when little sister Samantha Darko and her best friend Corey are now 18 and on a roadtrip to Los Angeles when they are plagued by bizarre visions.
No Richard Kelly involvement here (and I’m sure some would snarkily comment that after Southland Tales and Domino where is the problem? - although I’m not one of those people). Reinventing a lightning strike is a difficult task and making this thing a road movie seems lazy. The appeal of the original film (beyond the hook of ‘end of the world’) was the suburban social and family tableaux that Kelly covered in great detail and with a lot of flair (see Row Three’s Finite Focus Entry on Donnie Darko), that appeal would likely be lost (for me anyway) in a road picture.
It’s a guaranteed sale though. Fox is already distributing in North America and the budget is $10M, while the rest of the rights of the film will likely be auctioned off at the Cannes film market in a couple weeks.
Full Screen Daily story is here.
I’m one of the few who doesn’t see the “amazingness” in the first DD, so this sequel idea holds very little interest to me. Don’t all jump on me at once. I didn’t hate DD or anything, just don’t see the greatness in it. I think it’s just alright.
Comment by Andrew James — May 9, 2008 @ 8:16 am
That seems in line with the re-re-visionist (!) opinion of the film after all the kiddies jumped all over it.
I still think the film is indeed an important one, it remains a regular enough viewing particularly for Jena Malone and Mary McDonnell and Holmes Osborne.
Comment by Kurt Halfyard — May 9, 2008 @ 8:26 am
I really enjoyed DD but there’s no way I’m giving these people money for what sounds like a lame money grabbing sequel. I’ll sit at home and have nightmares of big bunny rabbits instead.
Comment by Marina Antunes — May 9, 2008 @ 10:15 am
I am coming at this piece of info as having DD at number 2 on my top 100 films of all time list. And I am obviously miffed and rather angry about the idea that they’re doing a sequel. One of the major appeals of the film in the first place was how original it was, and now they are going to sour that by making a probably lame sequel. Sometimes Hollywood truly disgusts me.
Comment by Ross Miller — May 9, 2008 @ 12:03 pm
I concur with the above. DONNIE DARKO=awesomeness. DD2=a pathetic stab at a fast buck.
Almost as ridiculous as the rumors of a TITANIC sequel that were circulating years ago. Just think, after that movie made mega millions, of how many executives wished the damn ship docked safely, at least once. Probably the only movie on the highest grossing list where a sequel was impossible, AND IT’S GOT THE NUMBER ONE POSITION BY A LONGSHOT!
You gotta love it!
Comment by Dave Becker — May 10, 2008 @ 3:15 am
This seems pretty ridiculous but maybe it’ll end up going straight-to-DVD and none of us will ever have to think of it ever again.
Comment by Scott — May 10, 2008 @ 3:48 am