Boy is this movie a mess. It’s a Philosophy 101 class run amok, and is probably only deep to the deeply stoned, but somehow David O. Russell manages to hold it all together, and he keeps all the weird tonal shifts from going completely bonkers.
It’s easy to hate–I can definitely see people who would just find it unfunny, pretentious, or just stupid–but I laughed, a lot. It’s a meaningless movie about finding meaning, saying everything and nothing about everything and nothing. It’s a little bit of Charlie Kauffman-lite, I think, but it worked for me. Kinda.
I thought this movie was alright, but it felt like it was more interested in spewing as much philosophical content as possible rather than being funny start to finish.
I enjoyed it, but I think it could have been a lot better.
I liked it. I totally loved the first half of it, and I thought it got kinda slow in the second half, and the ending was not satisfying. But it was a good movie. A lot of good acting in there.
Regardless of anything I read or hear about this one, the combination of the heart and the word “Huckabees” in the title kills any interest I can muster – I think it keeps triggering my “crappy chick flick” reflex, even though I know the movie is nothing like that.
I saw this movie tonight (since it finally opened up on more screens) and I gotta say that I liked it. I think I do somewhat agree with you, Steve because it is a movie that could be easy to hate.
However, I thought all the bizarre moments that bounce into the movie came together nicely as the characters sorted each other out and made peace with themselves. And while the philosophy isnt exactly new, I thought it was presented in a pretty compelling way that had me wondering just what the hell was going to happen next.
Oh wow, this thread is ressurected from long ago! Well, I’ll comment in it, then.
It may be philosophy 101, but I don’t think it was pretentious at all. It was more like it mocked pretentious pop-existentialism while also exploring it, with good acting and funny characters to boot. I enjoyed this movie a lot. More than I did Waking Life, which is another pop-philosophy film that comes to mind.
The Matrix is Philosophy 101.
I Heart Huckabees is more like Philosophy in the 400 level.
(311 or 313 is history of Modern Philosophy, like where the qualities of an apple lie, and the relationship of matter to itself in various forms would have to come after that. Since you have to know where the red is before you posit where the red goes.)
Modern Philo and Existentialism are both 200 level classes at my university. That’s where I’d put the movie, and we actually watched it during my Existentialism class last semester. The 300 level classes are reserved for more indepth examinations of a single philosopher or problem (like Good versus Evil or Skepticism). Huckabees really doesn’t treat anything at that high level.
I really liked this movie. Sure, it’s not the most organized film ever made, but I find the more I watch it, the more I pick up each time. Plus, I like watching Marky Mark get hit in the face with a giant ball. It makes me giggle.
Eh, maybe. It might also feel like it isn’t very in depth because it isn’t completely boring. Ahem Kant Ahem. My 100’s were intros, 200’s were framework type things like Elementary Logic, 300’s were famous dudes and eras and 400 was questions not posed and answered by Larry Fishburne.
