Excellent film, but don't miss the point

Rating: 1/10 (3 August 2002)

This was a wildly creative film, well directed and acted. I never thought that I would enjoy a Patrick Swayze preformance as much as I did here. Perhaps he should be cast against type more often.
I have noticed, though, that a lot of the comments here have been focused on "figuring out" the ending. I have to think that's not really the point. If the ending was to be understood, it would have been explained in the film. Rather, it's an aspect of surrealism that the movie freely mixes into the film's story. Moreover, I don't think that the surrealism is simply a stylistic device, as it often in the films of David Lynch, Jean-Pierre Jeunet, or even Terry Gilliam. Instead, I think that all of the unreal aspects of the film serve as a metaphor for the film's exploration of the psychological landscape of late 80's suburbia, with it's simplistic pop psychology masking the fact that reality is never discussed. Also, everyone seems to have missed the importance of Graham Greene's short story (you should read it, by the way) in which the act of destruction is seen as the only option for escaping a reality that stifles creativity. Donnie's diversions into the unreal represent the fantasies of escape, even, if necessary, into nightmares.
There is, of course, much more to the film than I have room to state here. It deserves a rather extended dissertation, and is open enough to interpretation for an entire seminar. I will just say that it is definitely worth watching, even if you are not prone to analyze films.
Oh, and I'm not prone to respond to other reviews, but I really do have to correct what another (very stupid) reviewer said here. This has nothing to do with being "really cool in the early 90s and living in California". If you watched, the film gives the date 6 or 7 times, each time being in 1988. And Middlesex is in Connecticut. Get your facts straight before you review, people.