The Fanatic.

Review #1719: The Fanatic.

Cast: 

John Travolta (Moose), Devon Sawa (Hunter Dunbar), Ana Golja (Leah), Jacob Grodnik (Todd), James Paxton (Slim), and Denny Méndez (Amanda) Directed by Fred Durst.

Review: 

I'm sure you are familiar with the director in Fred Durst in that this is his third feature film since he decided to venture a path beyond just singing nu metal for Limp Bizkit, which he helped form in 1994 as the front-man and lyricist. Sure, The Education of Charlie Banks (2007) and The Longshots (2008) weren't wildly seen by audiences, but they-Nah, never mind. You aren't here to hear a description about Durst, a guy that I hadn't heard of before this film. It is probably a dubious achievement that the first time I heard of his band was in this film, since he includes a portion of his own band's song in the movie, describing it as something "good" - no comment. Anyway, you aren't here to wonder why Redbox has decided to get involved in being one of the seemingly endless amounts of companies behind the film. No, no, no, you are here to see just where John Travolta goes with the material. At least, that is what I hope you are here for. Perhaps nobody has had as many highs and lows as Travolta, particularly since he has seemingly managed to be the best thing about each and every single one of those two types of film qualities, whether that means hits like Saturday Night Fever (1977) or stuff such as Battlefield Earth (2000). Of course, I am saying this as more of a blanket statement for when I eventually encounter some of Travolta's other works within this decade, which includes Gotti (2018) and a handful of forgettable stuff you might find on the video-on-demand circuit (or while rummaging through DVDs). 

It seems strange to think that it has been two years since the release of this film, one that certainly inspired more derision than actual sales, as if the aura of seeming like a bad cult movie was just too much to handle in terms of actual appeal. Think about it: an actor with plenty of experience in going the full mile in presence (whether over-the-top or not) paired with a singer for a director and a premise that seems ripped right out of a generic Lifetime movie? How could this not be an "extra primo" bad movie for the (laughing) family?  The problem with bad movies is that it will remind you of better movies that cover similar material. Of course, the truly bad movies will basically slam you over the head and make you truly cringe in what you should be watching. This is one of those times, and it is particularly curious because of the lead performance that comes for such a ridiculously dull waste of time. Imagine spending 89 minutes watching John Travolta wearing a silly hairpiece and perform in a certain manner (possibly) on the autism spectrum that has more energy than the rest of the small cast combined. How many movies could be linked by this film in being better than this one? The easiest one could be The King of Comedy (1982), one that involved a lead character that has obsessive fantasies about being friends with a celebrity and going for a big break by kidnapping a talk show host. With that in mind, that movie was done by the same director behind Taxi Driver, which has inspired quite a few arguments about their similarities (incidentally, the star for both movies in Robert De Niro ended up starring in another movie about obsessions with The Fan (1996), albeit about baseball). Sure, one could reference Rain Man (1988) when it comes to the acting challenge, but One Hour Photo (2002) is the true other movie to look at - that involved a lonely man obsessed with his work and with a perfect family. All of these movies have something that The Fanatic lacks - a three-dimensional character, complete with a supporting cast that also are meant to be full-fledged people. Sure, each movie has an interesting idea when it comes to celebrity worship or idealization of folks (along with performances by respectable actors), but The Fanatic manages to take the most generic routes possible while managing to say absolutely nothing at all, unless one thinks unintentional comedy is a statement. The very first line of the film pretty much sets it up, what with a character "needing to go poo." It just spirals down from there, really. It might as well rival The Vulture (1967) in terms of its absurd leaps of logic with character decisions or motivations, and I am saying this about a movie that saves its one surprise for the climax in an ending that is as limp as the rest of the movie. 

Again, one must re-iterate that Travolta is pretty effective here. Sure, the movie is incredibly cringe-worthy to actually sit through, but he never seems to ham it up for detriment. He sinks right into a fanatical role and makes it seem like something that could be interesting to view when it comes to the mind of someone who lets his curiosity go too far. The movie doesn't have a likable character, but the devoted desperation seen here by Travolta almost works in exceeding the lack of dimensions shown by the script (for which Durst wrote the story while co-writing the screenplay with Dave Bekerman) in the parts that don't involve him as much. Sawa is almost as interesting, in the sense that one can be just as irritated at the ongoing events as he would - of course, the movie has no inclination of actually doing anything interesting with him besides the bare minimum of "well, he's the one being stalked, so let's have him give out threats and that is it". For such a small cast, the others might as well be transparent in the ways they come and go (the shop owner that we see in the opening disappears halfway through, and the randomly placed security guard used to motivate the lead to "stand up for himself" also does the same). Golja plays a paparazzi that I suppose is meant to represent the third leg of a triangle about celebrity obsession or something...while also serving as the narrator (maybe she was the only one who could stomach such generic lines). She is mismatched here, easy to say. Besides, the actions the script has the character take serve as the first (or second, if one thinks about it) domino of lunacy to fall that just inspires numerous derisive questions. 

To spare one the details, the whole movie hinges on someone not getting an autograph. Scratch that, it hinges on the characters lacking logic; imagine seeing your friend (obsessed with certain things like horror and stars) get kicked out of a party that you helped him break into, and you decide to tell him about an app that tells him about where celebrities live. Gee, what could go wrong? The fact that the celebrity responds to this dude going to his house multiples times by threats and not just...calling the cops, is more baffling. Somehow, the accidental death of a housekeeper (by falling on their head in a scuffle) is only noticed after at least a day of being in the yard dead (Moose thinks its a nosebleed while deciding to go in the house, so I don't think he went so far as to move the body. Nah, he has time to go in the house and play with antlers). Of course, the climax is both the best and dumbest thing about the whole film: imagine the irony that the best part is a character deciding to respond to being tied up and breaking away by shooting the attacker's hand off, shooting near his ears, and then stabbing him in the eye. Again, since there are no characters to really emphasize with, it makes for great amusement in all the wrong ways, a vapid and illogical experience that doesn't say anything new about obsession nor does anything interesting as a thriller beyond a plethora of clichés. If you find yourself compelled to see every Travolta movie or perhaps want to see a dull cringe time, this might be for you. Others will either be bored by what they see because of its bland execution or will just roll their eyes and find something better to do. In that sense, The Fanatic might live on as a grand curiosity for people who like to see abject failure with dignity. It doesn't come close to being one of the worst, but a 3 seems aptly appropriate.

Well, we have done it. Anniversary in August has reached its 16th and last review for this month. Oh sure, we had a busy time in August last year, but August is a month that generally follows busier times, as evidenced by the fact that the busiest months in Movie Night history are July, June, and December. Hmm. I hope you folks enjoyed these reviews, which ranged from interesting curiosities to...other stuff. Consistency is a goal I hope for with Movie Night, which has had ten reviews in each month since April 2019. Onward we go. Technically, other months should get their own months with how quiet it usually is, such as September or February. Well, there is one idea...

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.