The 2001 cult classic movie Donnie Darko made less money than its poorly reviewed and frequently criticized sequel S. Darko, as reported by the one of the producers of the original film, Adam Fields.
The news comes from an interview with Screenrant, with Fields having declared that the original movie has never net any positive income." According to the most recent profit statement, it's lost more money than the movie cost," Fields said. "It's really amazing that this $4.5 million movie that became the biggest movie on Netflix ... Yet over the entire last 16 years, they've reported less than $150k in domestic revenue. Where did all that money go? Into the Darko wormhole?"
Meanwhile, the movie's sequel S. Darko, which unlike the original was not put on Netflix and aired repeatedly on cable television, went on to make a net profit. "The irony is, I just got a profit check for S. Darko for $75!" Fields continued. "It ain't much, but the sequel, that was never released in theaters, cost almost the same as the original ... And yet, that movie is somehow profitable." The difference demonstrates the cost of movie distribution and how profit clauses can affect the income of those involved, sometimes to disastrous effects.
Donnie Darko was originally released on October 26th, 2001. The film had already seen difficulties at the box office due to its release's proximity to the tragedy at Columbine High School, which happened two years prior to the film's release. Due to themes of teen anger and violence in the film's plot, many distributors distanced themselves from it. Donnie Darko would suffer further difficulties following the September 11th bombings on the World Trade Center, given its focus on a plane crash.
As the film was largely missed or ignored by the public upon its release, it did not see a significant initial gross upon release, not even doubling its 4.5 million budget at the box office. "These profit statements have a standard clause that they can charge interest on the budget until it's been recouped, which is fine, but each dollar that comes is supposed to reduce that amount," explained Fields. "They've never applied any revenue to the cost of the movie, so the interest keeps growing every year. So now the interest is greater than the cost of the film". It's due to this unfortunate financial method that those involved in the project will likely not see any payment for their efforts.
As a result, S. Darko, which holds a low 13% on Rotten Tomatoes, is in some ways more successful than the film's predecessor. "Would be great if just a few dollars trickled down to the people who made the movie," said Fields.
Source: Screenrant