Fox Searchlight Pictures | Release Date: October 1, 2004
7.1
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 152 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
106
Mixed:
19
Negative:
27
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
6
JeffL.Nov 28, 2004
Picture, if you can, this summer's out-of-left-field, oddball indie hit What the Bleep Do We Know if it were reimagined as a screwball comedy. Add to it a brilliant cast of game actors young and old, and a gifted director whose credits Picture, if you can, this summer's out-of-left-field, oddball indie hit What the Bleep Do We Know if it were reimagined as a screwball comedy. Add to it a brilliant cast of game actors young and old, and a gifted director whose credits (the hilarious Flirting With Disaster and brilliant Three Kings among them)have thus far been uniformly impressive. Now picture the whole thing turned into the sort of overambitious, underachieving, yet occasionally captivating mess that can only be made by a genuinely gifted filmmaker when he falls on his face (think Coppola with One From the Heart, or Soderbergh with Full Frontal.) Don't blame the cast, though. Hoffman and Tomlin are a hoot as pair of "existential detectives" out to help their clients (Schwartzman and Law among them) understand and straighten out their lives' physical, mental, and spiritual messes. Wahlberg is sweetly funny as an angry, environmentally conscious firefighter. And Watts is both spectacularly sexy and sympathetic as a model who finds happiness only after trading in her abbreviated modeling skivvies for something, let's say, less revealing. The problem is in the script, which is overstuffed, underfunny, and fatally full of its own cleverness. And believe me, you can live without seeing the scene of Schwartzman and Huppert carnally cavorting in the mud. But as "failures" go, I suppose this still has more worth seeing than most Hollywood fodder that aims a lot lower. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
Compi24Mar 9, 2014
It's about as frantic and as unpredictable as a hummingbird on blow, but David O. Russell's crack at existentialism does prove to be a clever and entertaining philosophical piece at times.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
PatC.Mar 12, 2007
Excellent movie on a cerebral level, and proof that genuine creativity is still possible in Hollywood. Too bad the film is structurally weak. The convolutions of the thought processes presented spill over into the plot presentation - just a Excellent movie on a cerebral level, and proof that genuine creativity is still possible in Hollywood. Too bad the film is structurally weak. The convolutions of the thought processes presented spill over into the plot presentation - just a little too much to juggle on the fly. And sure, it's a comedy, but the music mocks the content. End result: Less than the sum of its parts. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
5
JimH.Feb 26, 2005
Unlike most Hollywood efforts these days which are aimed at 13-year olds, this film is aimed at 18-year olds. Half-baked ideas are batted about with an earnestness familiar in college dorms. Most of the members of the excellent cast often Unlike most Hollywood efforts these days which are aimed at 13-year olds, this film is aimed at 18-year olds. Half-baked ideas are batted about with an earnestness familiar in college dorms. Most of the members of the excellent cast often have a vaguely panicky look in their eyes, like participants in a student production. Given the talent that was employed in making this film, it is a major disappointment. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
MichaelM.Oct 27, 2004
I Heart Huckabees is by far the strangest movie of the year. I really don't mean that in a positive way. It's wacky and bizarre, but unlike other bizzare films it doesn't go anywhere like Being John Malkovich did, and it I Heart Huckabees is by far the strangest movie of the year. I really don't mean that in a positive way. It's wacky and bizarre, but unlike other bizzare films it doesn't go anywhere like Being John Malkovich did, and it doesn't keep us on the edge of our seat like Mulholland Drive did. In the end, it really never explains what the movie is about or what we just saw. I Heart Huckabees is very pretentious in that it looks down on you, and tries to impress you with how quirky or ingenious the David O. Russel thinks he is. The best of part of this film is the acting however, something that even Russel couldn't screw up. Jason Schwartzman proves to us what an excellent actor he truly is while Jude Law proves to us what an excellent actor he still is. Isabelle Huppert gives a solid performance for the short time she is in the movie, and Naomi Watts' provides us with the most insane character of the film. Although I wasn't really impressed with Mark Wahlberg, his character provides some more humor for the film (which it is in desperate need of). The real highlight of the movie as far as acting is concerned is the dynamic duo of Dustin Hoffman and Lily Tomlin. By fat they are the reason to watch the film as the quirky and very much so estranged existential detectives. Both Hoffman and Tomlin deserve Oscar nominations for their roles (I doubt they'll get them though.) In closing, I Heart Huckabees is a film you watch merely for the acting alone, and never glance at again. I'm not too crazy about David O. Russel's new film (as you read above), but I never really was impressed with his other two films: Three Kings and Flirting with Disaster. Both of the films struck me as average at best. Huckabees is a wait-till-DVD kind of thing, I guess you could say I didn't Heart it. Grade: C+. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
MitchDec 4, 2005
Philosophy 101 gets boring after about 30 minutes. Great cast, top notch talent all around, but squandered.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
FrankO.Feb 2, 2006
I just could not get into the theme of this movie. I have enjoyed all of David Russell's previous flicks but NOT this one. I like the visual effects but not the plot line.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
nallanMar 11, 2005
Yawn, at only 1hr40mins this was hard to take. Small glimmers of funniness and a few interesting ideas but nothing new. Most films that come out of hollywood treat the audience like an idiot so it is always good to see a film that aims Yawn, at only 1hr40mins this was hard to take. Small glimmers of funniness and a few interesting ideas but nothing new. Most films that come out of hollywood treat the audience like an idiot so it is always good to see a film that aims higher. However there other films around that are also doing this and doing a better job at tackling bigger ideas and with a bit more of a punch and better punchlines. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
JohnNMar 16, 2005
Painfully boring. I kept waiting for it to get on track, but it never did. What a waste of talent. The plot meanders all over the place trying to be philisophical and funny, but just doesn't work.
0 of 0 users found this helpful