Human Nature

2002 "In the Interest of Civilization … Conform."
6.4| 1h36m| R| en
Details

A philosophical burlesque, Human Nature follows the ups and downs of an obsessive scientist, a female naturalist, and the man they discover, born and raised in the wild. As scientist Nathan trains the wild man, Puff, in the ways of the world - starting with table manners - Nathan's lover Lila fights to preserve the man's simian past, which represents a freedom enviable to most.

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

Cathardincu Surprisingly incoherent and boring
Sienna-Rose Mclaughlin The movie really just wants to entertain people.
Lucia Ayala It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.
Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.
wandereramor Human Nature is easily the least-remembered and least-talked about film in Charlie Kaufman's small but memorable body of work, and probably in Michel Godnry's ouevre as well. That's not too surprising -- it was a box office flop, is rather rough around the edges, and was part of the tail end of a bunch of 90s indy romcoms that everyone would like to forget. But I think Human Nature is definitely worth revisiting, especially given the slim odds of a new Kaufman film any time soon.Like Kaufman's other films, Human Nature grapples with the artificiality and all-encompassing anxiety of everyday life. Lila and Nathan are consumed with the attempt to deny their animal nature, which in effect means denying their own bodies. But despite their hours of etiquette training and electrolysis, animality keeps bursting out. The return to the wild and the acknowledgement of the animal appears for a time as a way to escape the postmodern anxiety that Kaufman constantly grapples with. But in the end, this is too easy a solution, and primitivism becomes another mediated narrative and ultimately a postmodern joke. But the escape to the wild was fun while it lasted -- and maybe, just maybe, there's something genuinely positive there.Beyond the philosophical point, it's also funny movie that doesn't overstay its welcome. While thoroughly enjoyable, Human Nature doesn't take it easy on the audience, despite being in a genre associated with crowd-pleasing. All of the three central characters alternate between being sympathetic and repulsive, and if there's a romance we're supposed to be rooting for, it becomes very unclear by the end.Kaufman's script is as good as ever, but many of the surrounding elements are pedestrian. Michel Gondry shows no sign of his usual visual flair or directorial ambition. Rhys Ilfan is good in a role that mixes endearing dorkishness with serial-killer menace, but other than him and a brief appearance by Peter Dinklage the performances are unremarkable and quickly forgotten. None of the visual or performative elements are exactly bad, but they lack the kind of inventiveness that would have made this film truly shine. Human Nature would have benefited from a Wes Anderson or a Rian Johnson at the helm.Human Nature probably deserves its status as Kaufman/Gondry minora, but it's still well worth watching. Like most good art, it raises more questions than it answers, leaving the audience to find a way to reconcile the demands of nature and culture. If this is the worst movie you make, you're doing something right.
frankvandal With the talent of Spike Jonze and Charlie Kaufman, the idea had enormous potential to be a profound and insightful exploration. But the entire project just fell flat. It was clever in parts, and overall it was different and interesting, but it was by no means a brilliant work of art or a truly meaningful look into human and animal existence. Many of the elements were present, but they never actually came together in any meaningful form. The opening scene wonderfully illustrates what should have been developed throughout the remainder of the film. After the titles roll by, we see a pair of mice (having successfully escaped a predator) walk by a dead human body with no interest or concern. With an odd sort of humor, we can see the difference between human culture and that of the natural world. Clearly, the mice do not care about filing police reports, notifying the press, learning about the deceases family, and all of the other hundreds of mundane things we humans do without thinking twice. Sadly, this sort of clever writing does not carry throughout the rest of the film. In addition, the acting is mediocre, and the characters feel as if they were not fully developed. The odd quarks and bizarre ideas, so much a trademark of Kaufman, are few and far between and seem as though they were merely added as an afterthought in order to make it seem more unique. The basic idea is good, and Kaufman's writing does manage to hold interest, but it is nothing special. The sad part is it had the potential to be a nearly perfect film. Somehow the great talent behind this move did not do nearly as much as they could have. Nonetheless, it is still a very worthwhile film. Kaufman's subtle presentation of ideas about life still manages to provoke thought, and it is a nice break (albeit a small one) from the traditional formula for movies.
Framescourer A modern screwball comedy that takes in everything from My Fair Lady to Greystoke whilst nodding askance at the corporeal British humour of Benny Hill. It can be a bit patchy and hangs together by virtue of a good cast. Rhys Ifans, reasonably fresh from doing a similarly oafish turn in Notting Hill plays a Tarzan-Adam opposite Patricia Arquette pushed into being an Eve-wannabe by virtue of excessive and socially proscriptive bodyhair. Both are game for taking their clothes off a great deal and in the most unflattering circumstances. Binding them together is a well-judged Tim Robbins. The relationships between the three are scrambled by a fourth, an urbane, conniving lab assistant to Robbins played by Miranda Otto with a 'faked' French accent (that knocks the socks off whatever Rhys Ifans is attempting). The argument for and against civilisation is played out in the sub plots like a complicated Mexican stand-off and the end is a good example of survival of the fittest. Harmless but misses its target. 4/10
buonanotte I'm writing a comment about "Human Nature" just because I can't wait for the release of "Synecdoche, New York". "Adaptation" was great but still to raw, the "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" was genuinely sweet and passionate. The good result at the box office confirmed the hit quality and quantity. "Human Nature", such as "Being John Malkovich", is hard to suggest to the average viewer despite Gondry's direction made it a colourful and brilliant joint. The one and only problem with "Human nature" is that it never makes you laugh. If you laugh, you'll regret it. And you get used to it straight away. Tim Robbins is amazing. The little details spread all over the film are countless (The crooked teeth of Lila, the mice holding the ad at the end of the story...) and Gondry found also a way to stick in a sung tune. I really hope Kaufman not to become redundant. The plot looks creepy and mysterious. We all know that he's a master at doing it. But will he change direction?