MovieChat Forums > Hoot (2006) Discussion > the most disturbing subtext of all

the most disturbing subtext of all

posted 17 years ago by ljd2003
22 replies | jump to latest

Who really gives a hoot?-This is a nice little movie about innocent owls, cute kids, and mean real estate developers or is there more to it? Here's the real story: a truant kid who runs away from home and lives in the hazard of the 14th hole at the country club or whereever, goes around the west coast of Florida finding helpless anilmals that need his protection. He doesn't wear shoes so that he can run to the needy animals even faster or being that most animals don't wear shoes either perhaps he feels more empathy for them. Anyway, one day he finds burrowing owls who happened to live in the path of a new pancake house. While other kids in the movie research village-permit violations and report wrong-doings that stop developers in their tracks, the barefoot boy wants quicker and more severe action. So, since he's living the life he wants anyway(no parents to supervise him/no school to waste his animal-rescue time)he decides that he'll stop this project by pulling up survey stakes, putting alligators in porta-potties, and causing criminal mischief to construction equipment. These are all crimes, but since the land developers are predictably portrayed as cruel and insensitive it's all overlooked. The movie ends with the kid setting his sights on another development he sees advertised on a billboard (because of course all development is horrible). I wonder what violence he's planning for these guys. The moral of the story ends up being: work hard to help those who can't help themselves and, oh yeah, also use whatever violent means you can think of in order to stop owls from being displaced. This movie might make a great training film for up and coming animal-rights wackos.

[–] AlmightyT 17 years ago

Pretty good review. This is simply a softcore eco-terrorism propaganda film for kids. Can't rid the world of freedom without brainwashed kids, now can we? And the part that's even scarier is so many adults liked this movie.

[–] gjyoung 17 years ago

Are you kidding me man? Of course things like what the developers were doing is bad and things like that occur everyday. And yes, at this point I would say that most development is needless and therefore bad. And what VIOLENCE (sorry for the caps, no bold) exactly did this kid carry out against the people developing the pancake house? I don't recall anyone being hurt by the direct action he took against this company, can you point out an example of violence? ( which is defined as: rough or injurious physical force, action, or treatment: to die by violence.) So if we have to take away the "freedom" of the pancake shop owners of the world to ensure some green space I say pull up all the survey stakes you can, steal as many bulldozer chairs as you can, as long as you don't cause anyone any harm.

[–] soccer-chic14 17 years ago

Do you even know what the word violence means? He didnt do anything violent. use a dictonary.

[–] irishtom99 17 years ago

vandalism thats not underlying a message is usually dismissed as mischief..but vandalism thats designed to get someone to do something is considered extortion
or even,when very severe,terrorism..violence doesnt have to be against a person..if you blow up a building to make a political statement,even an empty
building,that is an act of violence..this was a kid's film,the damage wasnt that horrible,and his cause was well meaning..but its not a stretch to call his vandalism an act of violence..

[–] temple-16 17 years ago

How about when MF caught the sales manager in a net, knocked him out, and bound and gagged him. This was kidnapping and other major felonies.

[–] jd_yankee_wynne 17 years ago

i just thought it sucked with all the bad acting, the horrible dialogue, the blonde kid was so gay

[–] eliostar1 17 years ago

This movie was so bad , I just couldn't bare to watch. And to those who think all development is bad, where do you suppose people are going to live, or eat at. Maybe they can move in with that homeless guy at the golf course. lol

[–] a-j-dickman 17 years ago

It's possible to build new communities and businesses while still preserving nature and the creatures who call it home. If it means picking a different spot for construction that might be less "desirable" to some, so be it. Man is so confident in his superiority over this planet that some day, the planet will fight back. Earth has been here a looong time and one day it will simply shake us off like a bad cold. Besides, who would want to kill or displace burrowing owls? Has anyone reading this ever seen an owl up close...they are beautiful, majestic birds. When they look at you with those huge eyes it's almost like they are trying to tell you, "Can't we all just get along?" That or, "Hows about I claw your eyes out, douchebag?" Either way, decent movie, great message. Peace.

[–] volley_xox_chix 17 years ago

Yea...cause we're all gonna die if we can't have a pancake house nearby.

[–] beccatx27 16 years ago

"eat at", "eat AAAATTTTT"? so much for your opinion on anything.

[–] jackspringer 16 years ago

Find another way to express your disatisfaction with a person other than saying their gay. That's offensive to a great many of us. It shows a real lack of intelect and vocabulary.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] hthomass 17 years ago

my family has been apart of southwest florida for 4 generations. my great grandfather helped build highway 41 from naples to ft myers by the use of donkeys kept at what is now the dog track in bonita springs.

that said, i have seen, my entire family has seen, the landscape change due to development. is all development bad? no, of course not. but since the 1950's, the rate of growth has far exceeded the land's ability to sustain it.

and this movie is a jab at all the newcomers to florida. please, this is a movie. not propaganda. it is meant to entertain as well as to bring awareness to the problems that are occurring.

as to the violence of this movie, wow. slap stick comedy. pioneered by the three stogies and dick van dike. cheaply done here for kicks. im sure "if it wasn't for the meddling kids" the construction "bad guys" would have gotten away with it.

"whatever violent means you can think of in order to stop owls from being displaced..." well - no. but the movie is for kids. bad guys had to be easily identifiable. cartoonish. this movie will not create bad kids - but i do find that this movie will create people more sensitive about the world we live in.

and now im going to go watch planet earth and be amazed.

[–] The_Dying_Flutchman 17 years ago

Insane hatred and bitterness rule this haunted world; ultimately no one is safe and nothing can keep us from sliding into the pit.

Nothing exists more beautifully than nothing.

[–] potawatomi-1 17 years ago

Hey, the United States was founded with violence and disobedience. Remember the Boston Tea Party and the Revolutionary War?

Mullet’s actions reminded me more of college fraternity pranks than reckless violence. If you want to see real ecoterrorism, read The Monkey Wrench Gang, a novel by Edward Abbey. The “gang” would have done much more to that bulldozer than just removing the operator’s seat.

[–] xbeexstingx 17 years ago

I don't understand why you are all arguing about the subtext HERE, on IMDB of all places. Wil Shriner didn't write the story, it's based on a book. If you want to rip each other new ones over the subtext in the story, go do it on Carl Hiaasen's message board and leave this one to people who want to discuss the actual film. Or, better yet, keep your ridiculous conspiracy theories to yourself, because FYI this story isn't REAL, and it wasn't fabricated by extreme enviromentalists to brainwash kids. For goodness sakes, it was produced by Jimmy Buffett.

[–] lovefool_11 17 years ago

I agree with xbeexstingx. I thought it was a good movie. Go complain some where else.

RIP Heather Drusch
"She belongs to fairytales that I will never be."

[–] sirgeoffgassy 16 years ago

I agree with ljd2003 100 percent! I won't let my kids watch this garbage! The message is "save all cute 'n cuddly creatures by ANY means necessary"!! So, if you disagree with abortion, go bomb an abortion clinic? If your health insurance denies you treatment, go bomb or interfere with a hospital or doctors office until they see your way? What a terrible message in sending children that sabotage is okay as long as you feel you are on the "right" side. I know kids find ways to see things, and I'm sure some teacher will show this movie in class as a "learning tool" as I believe Scholastic was one of the movies sponsors. I told my kids treating the environment well is a good thing. Helping animals is a good thing, but not destroying property or pranks that could cause a human injury or death. I hope parents watch the movies before they let their children see them. In reply to those saying it was just harmless pranks....don't serial killers and sex abusers start out by torturing animals? In their sick minds they are just having fun and not hurting any humans. Most terroists get their practice as teens pulling pranks that keep escalating to violence. See Columbine for just one example......One poster mentioned the kidnapping, but what about the alligator in the outhouse? Wouldn't the chemicals have killed it? What if it bit the man using it?

[–] OrangeBush 15 years ago

Sometimes you have to make a stand! Nobody got hurt and the pancake company was breaking the law.

[–] skerz0 15 years ago

There are interesting viewpoints from both sides here. The most obvious being the observation that the oversimplification and relative "freedom" of the kids in this film are unrealistic. I agree that some parts of this film do not reflect real life, for example, the character running shoeless and living in a marsh/forest area (I am not an expert on geography).

However, this film's theme is not the portrayal of teenage life in Florida. It shows the clear and present danger of environmental threats to society. Moreover, it shows this in a way simple to understand and get. This film delivers this environmental message more effectively to children and teenagers than "An Inconvenient Truth", which is highly statistical and analytical. In consideration of the fact that today's children will run the world tomorrow, this film's theme prevails over its realism.

Environmental issues will affect us. For instance, a recent report said that ocean waters could rise seven meters, flooding Washington, D.C. and New York state. The exact mentality and vigour of the teenagers in the film are what we all need. "Hoot" shows that even the most naïve and unwilling of us can make change. Change will not happen rapidly. Change will require effort and passion, as demonstrated by the children in the film. And change is what we need now.

To some, "Hoot" may encourage acts of ecoterrorism, comparable to those of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. Violence and crime are aberrant. However, inaction is untolerable as well. So what is required is the perfect balance of action and boldness. I was inspired by these children to be more alert about the environment, and we must recognise those who break the ice on saving the planet (especially children). After all, if all the major economic hubs of the world are flooded, could we really accuse those trying to save society?

[–] kendycar19 15 years ago

Have you ever been to a pancake house? Nothing good ever happens in a pancake house. Ever.