“One for ‘Big Fan’”
I got really excited on the way to Big Fan. I did not know, at the time, that the movie was directed Robert Siegal, writer of The Wrestler – a movie I enjoyed despite the parts I later found out were flooded with Jesus references. I get a little tired of that shit. (Watch the subway scene in Spider-Man 2. Spider-Man is Jesus? Come on.) The starring performance is by Patton Oswalt whose voice I could not place. It was so familiar though and thanks to the internet I found out he’s Remy, Star Rat in Ratatouille. Conversely, thanks to Toy Story, whenever Tom Hanks yells dramatically in a movie (particularly when he parts with Wilson in Cast Away) I can only think of Woody. Okay so getting to the point, I think this is the best way to write a review because I walked out. I can’t ruin the ending.
But I wouldn’t – okay, I’m not not recommending this movie because it was stuck in my head afterwards. I would mostly liken that to a bad relationship: even after you break up, there are still memories, good and bad, especially the morning after. So why did I not like Big Fan? Because it was boring. The editing was overcompensating for scenes that went on for too long. (Also I thought the editing was a little defensive, like maybe they were worried the shots weren’t that good.) The funny parts – there were not really any funny parts. There were depressing parts. And I love depressing. But I like funny anddepressing. Siegal (writer/director) did not try to be funny very often, and when he did try, he wasn’t funny. Kevin Corrigan (Tree’s Lounge, Living In Oblivion, Superbad) who is usually so precise in his portrayal of the stoned characters he’s cast as, but he was off the mark, too. To be fair, the whole point of his character was he was off. But still. It must have been Siegal. Bad director. Because you had good actors, not making it happen. None of it was doing it for me. And I tried. I was in denial for maybe the first fifteen minutes. Now. The whole premise, the main dilemma is a tough one. I’ll give it that. But the way it got there was just so contrived, like this wouldn’t be happening unless it was leading somewhere. In a good movie, you get the opposite. You’re experiencing things as they happen and when there’s a consequence, you never see it coming. Does that make sense?
“One for-” is the chronicle of solo public movie viewing.
