Nicely foreshadowed and atmospheric mystery story  but when FAQs, forums and DVD bonus materials are needed just to 'grasp' the film, then it is probably flawed

Rating: 7/10 (2 September 2006)

Just starting to write this, I realize "Donnie Darko" will be a very difficult film to review. It is also a very difficult film to grasp the scope, timeline and message of  but now that I have just finished reading a long "Donnie Darko: FAQ", I feel as though I could give it a decent try without the most semi-coherent, rambling observations.
Plotwise, titular character Donnie (Jake Gyllenhaal) is on the surface a normal American 16-year-old, but scratch this surface and you find a deeply, deeply disturbed and dark teenager who is tormented by hallucinations of a demonic bunny rabbit, obsessive thoughts and a world of darkness that even his psychiatrist cannot quite grasp. The film has Donnie do a series of crimes and deeds in his fluffy suburban neighbourhood that at first appear to be petty and pointless, but eventually link up and culminate in an eerie revelation.
This "eerie revelation" is best left alone and unspoiled (the ending was spoiled for me before I saw it, grr!), but I will say this: even with a long-ass FAQ and DVD bonus material, it doesn't really make sense. It does occasionally, and when the pieces of the puzzle DO manage to fall in the right place, it's brilliant. As most of the time they jumble about in a great big existentialist mess, this puzzle feels incomplete and often too crazy for its own good. A few more solid facts would have been welcomed to ground this film a bit.
While they say that the ending usually makes the film, "Donnie Darko" has other good factors that redeem the hazy payoff. This is stuff like an hilarious Patrick Swayze as the local guru-fraud, the sensationally layered acting from Mary McDonnell as Donnie's concerned mother and a great soundtrack. Gyllenhaal undoubtedly captures the inner turmoil of his character quite well, like the bathroom hallucinations. This is clear-eyed and assured acting, which is more than you can say for the direction.
Remember the style of Dirty Dancing? That is a film from the 1980s that it supposed to be set in the 1950s, but fails miserably because it's just so blatantly 80's coloured and influenced  from the catchphrases, the hair, the outfits and music to the actors, it just oozes "1987". Well, the same applies to "Donnie Darko" (2001). It is set in 1988, for the sole reason that the director Richard Kelly felt more at home as a teenager in the 80s. But curiously, all the people look and act like 21th century characters or late 90s kids. It's wildly distracting.
This is far from a perfect film; it should have been sewn together more clearly. But this aside, it really is a very entertaining fare that would easily get an A+ for effort and an A for acting.
7/10