does time really travel?

I don't see why every slight review I come across for S. Darko is negative. I've watched it several times and I enjoy it. Albeit, I don't understand the whole plot very well. In fact, there may very well be many plot holes in the film that never get smoothed out. I enjoy it for it's style and cinematography, soundtrack, and odd characters. Nothing really develops over the period of the film yet I never felt I left empty-handed. Has nice dialogue pieces in a few scenes, rather existential in nature, but it is what Donnie Darko was like. I never really understood what the plot of that film was either. I do understand the basics, but it's just creepy the whole way through like a never-ending dream. Both movies are set in a fugue state and actually best watched in the middle of the night. It's like a late night movie, something you can go to sleep with on your mind.

To me, these films just set all these things up that were never to occur which basically exes out the last hour or two you spent watching. The whole time travel spiel is complicated in my opinion and can be argued for decades to come. I hate getting into debates on the Back to the Future trilogy because logic can be argued endlessly on the discontinuity of it all. At this point, I'll take it as it is. Sometimes I want to think on what I'm watching and other times I just want to drift in my mind. These films allow me to follow the flow they procure from each scene to the next and just let time take me on its journey whether it's end game truly defines anything.

I just want to be entertained, I don't even want to compare each film to the other. One was a cult movie and the other a straight to DVD sequel, shouldn't that tell you something? There's no way in hell it's going to compare considering the pedestal one puts Donnie Darko on and than sticks a smaller, almost novella in a vague vein of the source material against it. It won't compare so enjoy it as it is. If was irrelevant maybe someone wouldn't be very harsh...but who cares, right?




Still trying to figure out how I feel about Ed Westwick. I like him in almost everything I've watched him in. He's strange and has a very rough American accent. I love his true British one too, they sound very seperate, but equally appealing. He's in S. Darko and I like his character seem like a rip on James Dean or something, but it works just for him there. Would 50s greaser be a popular look in the mid-90s? Sideburns alone rocked the decade and that bad bowl-shaped haircut. What a conundrum.

Have I ranted well enough yet? Have I bored a random visitor who merely wanted peruse and not here me wailing about this crap? Well, I love this crap and I take pity on the cheesy and underrated and under-appreciated things. I like, scratch that, love the little things that no one gives a shit about. I'll continue to seek random and weird things to publicly illicit my love for and I don't have to care what others think because no one even reads my stinking blog!

S. Darko is not the worse movie experience I've had (Bloodrayne will never compare to anything else *shutters*) and it's not the best, but it's a movie I'd revisit in the middle of the night. Preferably when my mind is clear and slowly buzzing to get a good night's sleep. I think I need a caffeine drip soon. Just that we are clear, I'm not a huge caffeine-head, but I get my share when I need it. I'll think of something better to talk about next entry.

Good night.