i hate huckabees - I Heart Huckabees (2004) Discussion

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

One of the worst films I have seen, which is a shame because all of the talent involved. I mean David O. Russel showed great promise with Three Kings, Law, Watts, and Wahlberg have proven themselves to be good actors while Dustin Hoffman has proven to be one of the best of his generation. Why did all of these greatly talented people decide to participate in this movie? Just horrible.

3/10 and it's only that high because of Wahlberg's, Watt's, and Law's decent performances.

"This town needs a new class of criminal, and I'm going to give it to 'em."- The Dark Knight

reply

[–] desolationrow83 16 years ago

One of the worst films I've seen. A very self aware movie with that whole Wes Anderson-ish "Look how RANDOM I can be!! You never know what anyone's gonna say next, but I garentee it will be so OUT THERE, yet delivered in a dead-pan kinda way". If you like the film, then that's cool! I'm glad you did!! Have fun with it an enjoy!! HOWEVER, I can't stand the arragance of people (such as Thunderwalk...Thunder-Wanker more like it!) who really advertise this film as being some sort of I.Q test for an elite group of film goers that think they are intellectualy above us when it comes to cinema. Just because we don't like something that diguises itself as thought provoking, doesn't make us below you.. I admit, the film is different.. but diffirent doesn't always mean good. This film just felt like a rip off of what woody allen has been doing since the seventies. Like a lot of people, this film couldn't fool me, it was merely a bit more fuel for those people, like Thunderwalk, who just like the IDEA of liking this film.. as apposed to liking the film itself.

Is this your homework, Larry?

reply

[–] libraloony 16 years ago

Didn't like it either. The whole movie was confusing, not deep :S

reply

[–] darlingnicky767 11 years ago

I was really surprised by your take on the film. I happen to loathe Wes Anderson films, yet Huckabees and Flirting With Disaster are in my top 20 of the 90's-- 2000's. I didn't find it random at all, and it definitely IS NOT an IQ test. My sister has a PhD in astrophysics and she was bored by the film. I consider myself to be a tad over average in the smarts arena, yet I reveled in the simplicity and humor delivered as a slice of angel cake. Sure, it made me think. I've likely viewed it 5 times, and each time I "get" something I had glossed over previously.

To me Huckabees is brilliance in its writing, directing, and acting. But I don't think intellect has a whit to do with it.

reply

[–] trymyproduct11 16 years ago

sneer!!! sneeer! sneeeeeeeeeeer! rawrrrrr!!

Apparently, the definition of "pretentious" is "deals with subject matter not found on a hillbilly's book shelf". I had no idea.

reply

[–] conchord_phan 16 years ago

I'm surprised some of you really tried to understand what the hell Albert was saying. I just looked at him as a little cooky and whatever he said such as "If the forms of this world die, which is more real, the me that dies or the me that's infinite? Can I trust my habitual mind, or do I need to learn to look beneath those things?" I just laughed at.

with that said, I'm not so sure you were supposed to really understand Albert's thoughts, as he didn't even understand them.. or himself for that matter.

Treat each day as if it were the last. Please be a child sponsor for World Vision.

reply

[–] Jmann85 16 years ago

If I had not been having flashbacks from the previous nights shroom trip I may not like it as much as I do. But, as it is, I love this movie.

reply

[–] dragonlady278 16 years ago

this movie SUCKED!

reply

[–] randy_rory02 16 years ago

I really liked the movie. However i think it's either a film that people will like or hate simply because it is a little quirky and some people simply don't like films that go in that direction. I myself didn't think of it as pretentious because i really thought of it as more of a comedy having a laugh at these 'everyone trying to understand the world' situations that have become more popular. It was clearly trying to be very tongue in cheek and I don't think it was trying to convince the audience of anything that the therapists (i know they don't like being called that, its just easier :-)) or characters suggests, it was just a platform for a funny movie. I liked the dialogue and unpredicatbility of the movie. Every character seemed to have something interesting to offer. At the end of the film or even during it i wasn't thinking about all the concepts and ideas i was just entertained especially at the end just very happy. This film, in my opinion, shouldn't be taken seriously, it is there to be laughed at and enjoyed. Clearly though some people won't like it and that's fine but i think that's not because they couldn't understand it, or that its pretentious just because this is a style of movie that that viewer doesn't find funny or entertaining. To put it simply if you don't find this funny throughout you won't like it. People have different senses of humour. For the people that don't like it i think they need to view it as a comedy that they didn't like and not as a serious film that they didn't like because it is not 'deep' or hard to follow or confusing if you bear that in mind. :-) i hope this made sense.

reply

[–] radicalgarbage 15 years ago

I'm aware this comment is extremely late and the people it concerns may not get to read this, but I'm one who absolutely loved this movie.

For the curious, what makes this movie so good IMO is the fact that it addresses many of the questions that I think about to myself. It's really a reinforcement of understanding that my thoughts aren't too out there and that we all sometimes have to ask ourselves "why are things the way they are?".

This especially rings true during the dinner table argument scene where some interesting points are made such as: "Why do we support terrorist regimes and dictatorships only when it benefits us (oil) even though it's morally outrageous to do so?"; "Why do we see urban sprawl as a good thing when it's just killing us and our natural environment?"; "Why don't we try to make evolutionary social advancements the way we have evolved technologically?"; "Why is it that we know that we can't get along and yet we don't fix it?" and finally despite all this, when you're unconscious (ball trick scene), you don't care. When you're deep asleep, it all melts away and yet it always returns the next time you wake up. So what does this all mean? Why are you always drawn back into these problems you don't think you can solve? What's right and what's wrong? Who made the rules to what's right and wrong? etc.

It's a movie that reaffirms many people's fears and questions by putting it on screen. Yet that's oddly very comforting. Why? The answer is a play on what the movie is all about.

reply

[–] condemned_until_rebirth82 15 years ago

Excellent, excellent points radicalgarbage. I actually loved the movie for all those things you mentioned. You certainly hit the nail on the head there.

I loved how the movie suggested such powerful questions and dilemmas in a such comedic, silly form. Which leads us to believe that no matter how tough or meaningless things are sometimes, there's always a humorous side or point of view to them. So look brightly at things in order to have a fresh perspective and therefore be able to solve those projected problems or even calm down those surfacing curiosities.

All in all, this movie is nothing short of sheer brilliance!

~ nothing is as perfect as you can imagine it ~

reply

[–] AutobahnLP 15 years ago

One of the most original movies out there. This movie is just not for everyone. Some people don't have deep questions... as the conversation at the African man's house states... or atleast... "don't have to worry about that stuff, do we?" because of Jesus, I guess. YOU"RE IDEAS HURT STEVEN!!! Haha!

I think the plot was simple yet clever. I don't understand what the problem was with following it? Pretty straight forward, if you ask me. The soundtrack is wonderful too! This is one of my fav movies and I enjoy meeting random people who love it as much as I do. It's like a little club. If people don't like it, that's great.

I have trouble getting people to like movies like ""I Heart Huck, The Baxter, Sasquatch Gang, The Big Lebowski, Raising Arizona, Bottle Rocket, Life Aquatic and Broken Flowers and so on and so on. Darjeeling!?!

Point is... I liked David O, Wes Anderson and the Coen Bros better, when nobody knew about them. If I have to talk people into liking the movies mentioned above... I've already given up on them.

Btw... I am searching for my other.

reply

[–] condemned_until_rebirth82 15 years ago

It's great to see you mention Wes Anderson, incidentally I heart Huckabees' atmosphere is quite similar to Anderson's style - clever and has a sweet numb feeling to it. However, I heart Huckabees is more fast paced and the characters aren't as numb-looking like for instance, Bill Murray, hehe.

So yeah, those directors you mentioned are awesome!
And definitely it'd be cool to form a 'I heart Huckabees' club, wouldn't it? :P

~ nothing is as perfect as you can imagine it ~

reply

[–] ClockworkKarma 15 years ago

When I saw this film in the theatres, I was amazed by the fast-paced/sheer amount of storyline.
There's a lot packed into 1:45. I sat thru it twice.
The more I got to know the film, the more I realized the concepts aren't as far-out as people think.

Radicalgarbage made some really good points.

I think Russell showed that people are out of touch with nature, and this film reveals the 'plastic people' who are out there destroying marsh's and treating each other like 'ornaments' instead of 'people.' It's a reality.

I'm a Wes Anderson fan, too. So I appreciate the fact that some of you are, as well.
I expect more from a film than a few "yucks", which is all you get from a lot of comedies. This film says something. Use your 'CC1' closed-captioning to read what they're saying if you still don't get it.

reply

[–] boydegg 15 years ago

I love this film. It really is one of those films that a lot of people hate or feel like they 'don't get it' (Life Aquatic, Napoleon Dynamite, Big Lebowski, Eternal Sunshine, Nacho Libre, Man in the Moon) and I love those films even more because so many people don't get them (though I'm not sure why).

I feel like I enjoy Huckabees more with each new viewing.

How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?
How am I not myself?

reply

[–] fschuster 15 years ago

It's pretty funny how this ended up an I LOVE this movie thread considering the OP.
I'm a huge fan of Wes Anderson, but I have to admit this film lacks the natural sublety of his comedy. It seems to me that films like this one try too hard for a stylistic rhetoric that is didactic and loses all sense of engaging realistically with the audience. It's fine that people enjoyed it because I think the filmmaker definitely shows a lot of potential yet this movie does not in any way reach the level of modest and natural communication that those of Wes Anderson or Charlie Kaufman.

reply

[–] nurserycryme 15 years ago

Yeah I agree. And what's funny to me is how many people accuse those who didn't like this movie of being morons who "don't get it." They think this film is too arty and difficult for us common folk to understand, which is total crap. This movie is a bubble gum, dip-your-toe-in-the-water type excursion into existentialism wrapped in a shiny package. I love challenging films. I loved Jean Luc Godard's "Breathless." I hated this movie.

"Anatidaeophobia: The fear that somewhere, somehow, a duck is watching you." ~ Gary Larson

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] info-16301 15 years ago

I am glad more people understand the language of the movies and criteria when something is really good or poorly and pretentiously executed.

I wrote that about this movie:

"This movie doesn't convince with its "philosophy" because it lacks the humor and craftsmanship of someone like Wes Anderson (or Herzog or Lynch), who can pull such stunts more elegantly. It looks like beginner's poetry, where everything is too obvious and serves its pupose in a crude way.

That's the main problem with this movie. The Film has and is a language in itself - if you abuse this art-form to "write" (instead of "film") a popular psychology/self-help novel through it you don't exploit the medium fully.
One shouldn't put awkard dialogue into actor's mouth and write exemplary situations that proove their thesis... You write a story, use symbols, use the rich language of the movie art/craft. A little detachment, ambigous meanings, elegant solutions, symbolic or allegoric story with several possible meanings (think Lynch, Kubric), the form (aesthetics, cinematography) of the film should be on par with the message, too, etc.

I was especially surprised that those actors who are experienced stars performed like in an art-school movie because of the unconvincing and poorly written scipt or maybe just average or poor directing of the whole thing.

One bright moment is the scene/demonstration of why you cannot be in the "pure being" state all the time and how unavoidable the human drama is- it was sexy and convincing for a second, but still - if I imagine what could Kubrick do with such material..."

Another vote for "I hate this movie".

reply

[–] mmnk 15 years ago

I liked this movie, but those of you who are saying that it's too deep, and that if you're an ignorant then you won't get it, are mistaken themselves. This movie is a spoof, a comedy. If it doesn't make sense then it's because you're looking for something that is not there. If you thought it was pretentious, it was ON PURPOSE. Don't take it too seriously.
Dear..Mr....Royal...Hampton.

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ducky664 14 years ago

Comparing this garbage to Wes Anderson and the Coen Brothers is way too inappropriately generous.

reply

[–] BelleCBelle 15 years ago

Thunderwalk 1978 commented on this thread, implying that only those who thought "deep thoughts" were capable of understanding this film. WELL, I think plenty of "deep thoughts" and enjoy many films, but I HATED THIS FILM on many levels, beginning with the script. So there!

"You must be the change you seek in this world."

reply

[–] machineinc_DeteriA 15 years ago

It might be because you either don't have an open mind or you are not smart enough to even get it in the first place.

reply

[–] cableaddict 14 years ago

I understand this movie completely.

- And I think it's boring, ostentatious poop.

I imagine that it must appeal to psuedo-intellectuals who want to think of themselves as more clever than other movie-goers. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

If someone can tell me what the actual point is of this movie, what the viewer is suppose to take away from it, I'm all ears. Sadly, it's just an exercise by the writer. Clever, but meaningless.

-And not very entertaining.

reply

[–] mpurvismattp 8 years ago

Poop? You speak like a child so I bet u think like one also. You don't understand this movie sir. Shaking my keys and playing peek a boo is more your speed. Lol

reply

[–] majikstranger 14 years ago

Whoever doesn't like this movie is a Dumb ass. This is movie is brilliant. Now i know there were no deaths, or nudity or big bangs and children need loud noises and colors to be entertained but this is a more of a mental treat. This movie just was and it was nice.

in another thread someone was discussing hating this movie and hating existentialism, that shows you the type of crowd your in. People who dont like the idea or cant handle the idea of a higher world. Pray to your God and shut the *beep* up cause you those types of people obviously never evolved.

reply

[–] laeyisoracle 9 years ago

You seem even more pretentious than that other guy. I personally have nothing against people who like this(or these types of) movie, but damn, keep your finger-snapping hipster pretentious, smug-ass attitudes within your own circle jerking clique. Just because someone doesn't like a movie or concept you don't doesn't mean they aren't evolved. If anything, you're showing how much you aren't evolved yourself. Belief in existentialism or getting philosophical rhetoric and concepts doesn't make you any more smarter than anybody else, and defecating on those that don't agree with your world view NEVER makes you enlightened. You can disagree with someone and live in peace, but what pisses me off are those who just can't, and take their "holier than thou" attitudes as the hammers smashed against those they deem under them for not "getting" what they do. If these people WERE truly evolved, they'd know better.

reply