Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Willie Oleson" data-source="post: 342641" data-attributes="member: 8">[ATTACH=full]41175[/ATTACH]I chose this film based on the many &quot;take no prisoners&quot; kind of reviews, hoping it would be so-bad-it&#039;s-good. Disappointingly, it wasn&#039;t.It&#039;s basically about a somewhat unsuitable person being a diehard fan of a somewhat unsuitable celebrity and then they bring out the worst in each other.It&#039;s not a typical good vs. bad scenario and this seems to put off many of the people who have rated THE FANATIC. But why should a story be the way we expect it to be? As for the unintentionally funny parts, it looked like intentional dark comedy to me but since I don&#039;t know what it was meant&nbsp; to be I could be totally wrong.It&#039;s not a spectacular or very original film by any means, it&#039;s a storyline that could have happened (and kinda did ) in Penn Badgley&#039;s YOU.Perhaps the Big Name is its major hindrance - without John Travolta in it it may have been considered a nice indie flick.I thought the hustler part of night time Hollywood (those who&#039;ll never make it big doing crappy performances for tourists) was captured rather nicely, and I absolutely love the main soundtrack theme which, unfortunately, is not on youtube.Speaking of music....[MEDIA=youtube]zXWgokx6fK8[/MEDIA]Is it really shameless self-promotion, as most reviewers think it is?It looks SO extremely obvious that I refuse to believe that Fred Durst thought he could sneak it in and then think he&#039;d totally get away with it. I refuse to believe that anyone would be that ignorant.I prefer the theory that this was nothing but intentionally-cheekily trolling the audience and in that case the joke is on those who swallowed the bait.At the risk of stating the obvious, some people are offended by the incorrect perception (!!!) of the mentally disabled.Perhaps all aspiring artists should receive an extensive manual of all the DOs and DONTs?Freedom of speech but no freedom of art? Oh the hypocrisy of it all.If you&#039;re looking for an intriguing stalker movie that offers something completely new then don&#039;t bother to put it on top of your to-watch-list.If you want to watch John &quot;former sex-on-dancing-legs&quot; Travolta in a most unflattering role then this might be your cup of tea.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Willie Oleson, post: 342641, member: 8"] [ATTACH type="full"]41175[/ATTACH] I chose this film based on the many "take no prisoners" kind of reviews, hoping it would be so-bad-it's-good. Disappointingly, it wasn't. It's basically about a somewhat unsuitable person being a diehard fan of a somewhat unsuitable celebrity and then they bring out the worst in each other. It's not a typical good vs. bad scenario and this seems to put off many of the people who have rated THE FANATIC. But why should a story be the way we expect it to be? As for the unintentionally funny parts, it looked like intentional dark comedy to me but since I don't know what it was [I]meant[/I] to be I could be totally wrong. It's not a spectacular or very original film by any means, it's a storyline that could have happened (and kinda[I] did[/I] ) in Penn Badgley's YOU. Perhaps the Big Name is its major hindrance - without John Travolta in it it may have been considered a nice indie flick. I thought the hustler part of night time Hollywood (those who'll never make it big doing crappy performances for tourists) was captured rather nicely, and I absolutely love the main soundtrack theme which, unfortunately, is not on youtube. Speaking of music.... [MEDIA=youtube]zXWgokx6fK8[/MEDIA] Is it really shameless self-promotion, as most reviewers think it is? It looks SO extremely obvious that I refuse to believe that Fred Durst thought he could sneak it in and then think he'd totally get away with it. I refuse to believe that anyone would be that ignorant. I prefer the theory that this was nothing but intentionally-cheekily trolling the audience and in that case the joke is on those who swallowed the bait. At the risk of stating the obvious, some people are [I][B]offended [/B][/I] by the incorrect perception (!!!) of the mentally disabled. Perhaps all aspiring artists should receive an extensive manual of all the DOs and DONTs? Freedom of speech but no freedom of art? Oh the hypocrisy of it all. If you're looking for an intriguing stalker movie that offers something completely new then don't bother to put it on top of your to-watch-list. If you want to watch John "former sex-on-dancing-legs" Travolta in a most unflattering role then this might be your cup of tea. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Who played JR Ewing?