Ashmaele posted:

---

Her reaction:

---

B_Shinkicker posted:

---

Frank doesn't kill himself. Frank dies in the alternate reality and is sent back as a conduit for Donnie. In the main timeline, when Donnie lets the engine crush him, his mom and sister won't die in that plane crash and Frank will live because Donnie won't be there to shoot him.

---

There are also three features that are absolutely essential for figuring out what Kelly was trying to achieve: A track of commentary featuring Kelly and Jake Gyllenhaal, those deleted/extended scenes, and pages from The Philosophy of Time Travel. Even the scene selection headers offer information not actually included in the movie itself.

Here's the metaphysical framework the DVD extras reveal. The moment Frank wakes Donnie at midnight, October 2, is when Donnie, et al, have entered a tangent universe. This tangent universe arises the moment the aircraft engine ("the Artifact") enters the universe via a wormhole. (Sparrow's book amplifies Monnitoff's conjecture that such a wormhole could only be created as an "act of God.") Tangent universes are inherently unstable, lasting only "a matter of weeks," eventually collapsing in upon themselves, each one "forming a black hole within the Primary Universe capable of destroying all existence." (This is also a real, glaring scientific boner. This sentence is contained in Sparrow's Philosophy of Time Travel, supposedly published in 1944, but the term "black hole" did not exist until 1968.)

Here's all the remaining important bits from The Philosophy of Time Travel, all capitalization of Really Important Nouns sic.

"The Living Receiver is chosen to guide the artifact into position for the journey back to the Primary Universe." (Uh-huh.) "No one knows how or why a Receiver will be chosen. The Living Receiver is often blessed with Fourth Dimensional powers. These include increased strength, telekinesis, mind control, and the ability to conjure fire and water." (The last two are almost clever.) "The Living Receiver is often tormented by terrifying dreams, visions, and auditory hallucinations during his time within the Tangent Universe." (Check, check, and check.) "Those surrounding the Living Receiver, known as the Manipulated, will fear him and try to destroy him... The Manipulated Living are often close friends and neighbors of the Living Receiver. They are prone to irrational, bizarre and often violent behavior. This is the unfortunate result of their task, which is to assist the Living Receiver to return the Artifact to the Primary Universe. The Manipulated Living will do anything to save themselves from Oblivion. The Manipulated Dead are more powerful than the Living Receiver. If a person dies within the Tangent Universe, they are able to contact... [and] manipulate the Living Receiver using the Fourth Dimensional Construct." (Referring to the index it's apparent this refers to those "liquid spheres.") "The Manipulated Dead will often act as an Ensurance Trap for the Living Receiver to ensure that the Artifact is returned safely to the Primary Universe. If the Ensurance Trap is successful, the Living Receiver is left with no choice but to use his Fourth Dimensional Power to send the Artifact back in time into the primary Universe before the black hole collapses in upon itself."

Let's face it: this is some truly wacky shit. (And I don't mean that in a good way.) It's not the worst metaphysical construct I've chanced across (for example, it makes a lot more sense than Scientology), but it's also far from the best. But that's not the central problem. The main problem, the huge problem, the rotting-elephant-carcass-in-the-middle-of-the-dining-room problem is that there is no conceivable way for even the most astute viewer to deduce Kelly's metaphysical construct from the film itself. The phrases "Tangent Universe," "Living Receiver," "Manipulated Dead," etc., never appear in the film. Kelly's version of reality isn’t ambiguous, which would suggest that it could be one of several competing explanations for the movie's mysteries. It's not even obscure, something that could only be gleaned from watching the film over and over again. Rather, it is impenetrable. It is opaque. You can't get there from here.

For all the talk of Hawking, wormholes, and Einstein-Rosen bridges, Kelly has failed to grasp the conceptual constraints that gives science fiction much of its unique power. It isn't just about nifty skiffy concepts, it's also about the science, mechanisms and rules governing them. You can break the rules only if you've provided a logical, internally consistent framework by which your exceptions work. You can take a taxi cab to Mars via a warp gate, but if you fail to mention said gate, even by inference, you've broken the unwritten social contract that underlies science fiction. By contrast, Kelly's metaphysics is like the house dealing poker cards from the bottom of the deck, never showing you the cards, announcing you've lost, and then burning them. It's like reaching the end of an Agatha Christie novel and finding out that the wildebeest did it, except there was no wildebeest in the book. It's a cheat.

Ashmaele posted:

---

I still don't get why bunnyplug essentially kills himself in this movie, and I've never had anyone explain it to me.

---

Ashmaele posted:

---

Let's face it: this is some truly wacky shit. (And I don't mean that in a good way.) It's not the worst metaphysical construct I've chanced across (for example, it makes a lot more sense than Scientology), but it's also far from the best. But that's not the central problem. The main problem, the huge problem, the rotting-elephant-carcass-in-the-middle-of-the-dining-room problem is that there is no conceivable way for even the most astute viewer to deduce Kelly's metaphysical construct from the film itself. The phrases "Tangent Universe," "Living Receiver," "Manipulated Dead," etc., never appear in the film. Kelly's version of reality isn’t ambiguous, which would suggest that it could be one of several competing explanations for the movie's mysteries. It's not even obscure, something that could only be gleaned from watching the film over and over again. Rather, it is impenetrable. It is opaque. You can't get there from here.

Kelly's metaphysics is like the house dealing poker cards from the bottom of the deck, never showing you the cards, announcing you've lost, and then burning them. It's like reaching the end of an Agatha Christie novel and finding out that the wildebeest did it, except there was no wildebeest in the book. It's a cheat. [/blockquote]

---

B_Shinkicker posted:

---

But we don't know that Donnie didn't get out of bed even if Frank didn't intervene. After all, Frank was already there to warn him, so that leads us to believe that Donnie DID originally get out of bed before the engine him.

---

__Bonk__ posted:

---

The whole movie was in an alternative timeline which was closed at the end so it didnt even happen. Its like a circle which was cut of. A closed loop of time.

---

illmyrin posted:

---

Ashmaele posted:

---

Let's face it: this is some truly wacky shit. (And I don't mean that in a good way.) It's not the worst metaphysical construct I've chanced across (for example, it makes a lot more sense than Scientology), but it's also far from the best. But that's not the central problem. The main problem, the huge problem, the rotting-elephant-carcass-in-the-middle-of-the-dining-room problem is that there is no conceivable way for even the most astute viewer to deduce Kelly's metaphysical construct from the film itself. The phrases "Tangent Universe," "Living Receiver," "Manipulated Dead," etc., never appear in the film. Kelly's version of reality isn’t ambiguous, which would suggest that it could be one of several competing explanations for the movie's mysteries. It's not even obscure, something that could only be gleaned from watching the film over and over again. Rather, it is impenetrable. It is opaque. You can't get there from here.

Kelly's metaphysics is like the house dealing poker cards from the bottom of the deck, never showing you the cards, announcing you've lost, and then burning them. It's like reaching the end of an Agatha Christie novel and finding out that the wildebeest did it, except there was no wildebeest in the book. It's a cheat. [/blockquote]

---

I strongly disagree. I got there from here. There are clues. There are very subtle oddities that, if explored and wondered about, end up making sense out of other oddities. The critic you're referencing sounded like someone who was butt hurt that the movie didn't teach him how to time travel.

---

illmyrin posted:

---

Ha! It's not about time travel!


Its What Dreams May Come meets The Cell! Except God is the sexy therapist and you're the sick twisted dreamer.

---

Ashmale posted:

---

Yes, there are clues. But NONE of what was quoted from that old lady's book was specifically mentioned in the movie. ALL of it came from the Director's Cut DVD. And ALL of it is crucial to explaining and understanding the plot. The guy may be butthurt but he's right.

---

illmyrin posted:

---

Ashmale posted:

---

Yes, there are clues. But NONE of what was quoted from that old lady's book was specifically mentioned in the movie. ALL of it came from the Director's Cut DVD. And ALL of it is crucial to explaining and understanding the plot. The guy may be butthurt but he's right.

---

Ok I might have missed something. I got a copy given to me as a gift, it's the only version I've ever seen. Didn't know there was an earlier that didn't have the screen flashes or strange messages. I never saw any directors explanations on my disk though. There is no section that says "directors commentary." I suspect you're saying there was a version that didn't have the weird stuff I got hooked into.

---

eodoll posted:

---

illmyrin posted:

---

Ha! It's not about time travel!


Its What Dreams May Come meets The Cell! Except God is the sexy therapist and you're the sick twisted dreamer.

---

I'm pretty sure it's about a jet engine that fell off an airplane somehow and then went back in time 1 month and fell on his house.

So it's about that 1 month where he died a month ago to an event that happened in the future and he's having trippy dreams in between because he should be dead but isn't.

Like tomorrow something will happen that will kill you last month - cool concept but these guys didn't execute very well. I think most people like it though moreso because of the concept than anything else.

---

illmyrin posted:

---

eodoll posted:

---

illmyrin posted:

---

Ha! It's not about time travel!


Its What Dreams May Come meets The Cell! Except God is the sexy therapist and you're the sick twisted dreamer.

---

I'm pretty sure it's about a jet engine that fell off an airplane somehow and then went back in time 1 month and fell on his house.

So it's about that 1 month where he died a month ago to an event that happened in the future and he's having trippy dreams in between because he should be dead but isn't.

Like tomorrow something will happen that will kill you last month - cool concept but these guys didn't execute very well. I think most people like it though moreso because of the concept than anything else.

---

You're missing the separation between the movie's "real world" and Donnie's "real world." In Donnie's world he escapes the falling engine and embarks on a journey that leads him to choose to go back in time, taking an engine to the knee, in order to save the day.

---