Patricia Arquette Movie:

				Salesrank: 256756
		Our Price: $70.36
		Used Price: $11.12
		MPAA Rating: R (Restricted) Media: DVD

Editorial Review:
This fascinating comedy questions what we mean when we use words like "nature" and "civilization." Lila (Patricia Arquette, Lost Highway, True Romance), a nature writer who grows hair all over her body, falls in love with Nathan (Tim Robbins, The Player, The Hudsucker Proxy), a scientist attempting to teach table manners to mice. While hiking in the woods, they discover Puff (Rhys Ifans, Notting Hill), a man raised in the wild since childhood, whom Nathan seizes as a test subject for his experiments--and soon these three, along with Nathan's French lab assistant (Miranda Otto) are embroiled in criss-crossed love affairs as they (and the audience) attempt to figure out what it means to be true to one's own nature. Though Human Nature isn't as surefooted as Being John Malkovich (which was also written by distinctive screenwriter Charlie Kaufman), it has moments of startling comic genius. --Bret Fetzer

Human Nature [Region 2] Reviews:
How can such talented people make such a poor film?
2009-05-18 - Directed by Michael Gondry (Science of Sleep, Eternal Sunshine) and written by Charlie Kaufman (Being John Malkovich, Adaptation), you'd think this would be a great film. You'd be wrong. It tries way too hard to send a message about the human race (good and bad), and just about everything falls flat, from the acting to the storyline to the directing. High hopes, but highly disappointed.

Funny Zoophilia
2009-02-16 - Not The Beast, but a comedy on outcomes of lust and copulating at the beginning of the third millennium, where sex rules.

You Have Got To Be Kidding!
2007-04-05 - I like weird movies, I like bad movies. But I do not like TERRIBLE movies, and that is what you have here.
The plot if there is one sounds like it was made up while two guys were in a druken stuper. The acting is terrible, and there is NO entertainment value what so ever. Can we give it a minus 1?

Are we moving forward or backward?
2007-04-02 - Males outwardly act to build a "civilization" based on repressing urges, secretly yearn to return to nature, yet ultimately do whatever it takes to bag some tail. Best line: "As you say in the vernacular, I want me some of that."

Females fight against nature tooth-and-nail (think cosmetics industry), and ultimately "sell their soul" to land a relationship (and the requisite baby).

Sounds pretty cynical, yet accurate, doesn't it? I don't think the human species, or any species at that, has ever made it far without a healthy prioritization of sex. What this movie does, however, is attempt to peel back the veneer we have painted upon ourselves.

I had this movie on my "to watch" list, but forgot why it was there. Shortly into it, I got weirded-out by the imagery and matter-of-fact treatment of some pretty ludicrous scenes. I thought, "Is this a joke?" I stuck with it and only during the end credits did I realize it was Michel Gondry and Spike Jonze flick, and a Charlie Kaufmann Freudian-tinged script.

I'm sure there's much to this movie that I am missing (What is the meaning of the scientist's new little brother? Where exactly is the white room?). I'm purposely writing this review before reading any other reviews or analysis at all, so I can't pretend that I figured out all the metaphor and simile on my own. Maybe the movie demands a second viewing? Or maybe, like good art, the movie is only a conduit by which we find the answers within ourselves. That sounded good, huh?

-a little verbal masturbation from a not-yet-evolved ape

Do I have to give it even 1 star? :-(
2006-09-14 - A truly awful, abysmal movie, its only redeeming quality is its ability to make me fall into deep slumber. Everyone is awful in it. One only wonders if actors really have no options in the jobs they take.

Stupid, tasteless, boring, asinine. Not worth any more thought.