Waste of time

Good concept, poorly executed.

Admirable film.

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

"S. Darko" is a sequel that's fated (dare I say engineered) to disappoint fans of the original movie. And even if you approach this as a completely separate entity, it's still awful. Bad acting, nonsensical story (not in the good way), bitchy characters and plot elements that are thrown into a blender half-heartedly. The writers didn't bother to tie this to the original in any meaningful way.Yeah, I'd known for years that this was a bad movie, but it's really curiosity more than anything; you just have to find out *what* was so bad about it. But here, it's not bad in a good way. It's just wretched. The kind of stuff that makes it hard to sit through. There's no joke to be in on, no ironic enjoyment to be had, just bad all around.Steer clear of this. Or at least have something better ready to go to wash away the bad taste.2/10

A sequel or so called continuation of the original film that should have not been made. Even few of the people that played a part in making this movie was like "why does there need to be a sequel?" and yet they went ahead and made this cheap crappy movie. I just wanted to forget this movie as soon as I finished watching it. This movie is simply unnecessary and doesn't add anything to the "Donnie Darko" film but subtracts it. This one is all over the place but just doesn't seem consistent. It's like the writers wrote down a bunch of scenarios and just decided to mash them all together in a incoherent and in a manner that is not very clever. I think they first tried to get Maggie Gyllenhaal who played Elizabeth Darko to play a part in this movie. But I guess she smartly declined. And now this revolves around Samantha Darko who is Donnie's youngest sister and it takes 7yrs after what happened in the first "Donnie Darko" film. It started out like it might be a watchable flick but as the movie started to progress it got worse and worse. And my gosh the special effects are just freaking awful, even for a straight to DVD movie. Movies like this goes to show that if you don't have a creative or good idea for a sequel, don't go for it! I am just going to forget that this movie ever happened.3/10

So, Donnie Darko was one of my favorite movies, so I was eager to see the sequel. nd I must say, it was awful. They practically copy the first movie. Their are so many references to the first movie. And some characters even seem like ones based off of the some in Donnie Darko. Even for people who understand the first movie, this is extremely hard to follow. And their are so many characters that this movie doesn't need. The only good thing to come out of this movie was weather or not Frank was real in the first movie. But no spoilers about anything. I was truly disappointed, and if Jake Gyllenhall had anything to do with, I'm sure it would be 100 times better. So to those Donnie Darko fans, watch at your own risk, its not worth it.

All the recognizable bits are there... the reverse time-lapse, the god-botherer, the giant bunny rabbit, the mangled voice, the (supposed) tear-jerker song toward the end, liquid future-paths... but here I don't see any semblance of a decent story. You get the sense these elements were handpicked because they're expected from a Darko movie, rather than being used to add to or create the story in a meaningful way.Wouldn't have been surprised to see a dialogue about smurfs or something similar (there may have been but I stopped taking complete notice a little way in). After all we did get treated to the cringe-worthy "Why are you looking at me funny?" - "Why do you look funny?", an obvious nod.I get the sense it could better seen more than once (did have the cynicism turned on) but it will be a while before I give it that chance. Bunny-droppings.