ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Interviews with Hideous men movie review

Updated on January 26, 2010

Movie Review : Interviews with Hideous Men

Interviews with Hideous Men – is a movie. And I’m not one to write movie reviews, as you could probably tell by my previous hubs. At first, I didn’t even think it was a very good movie – as in entertaining. My boyfriend even asked me what I thought of it when it was over – I just kind of sat dumbfounded. I told him that I wasn’t sure I even understood it. It didn’t make much sense to me. It seemed to be one of those movies strung together with a lot of dramatic brief interviews, a semi-plot that wasn’t explained and characters that I couldn’t relate to except in an esoteric way. I couldn’t even remember even one character’s name. What was the point of the movie anyway? I told him I’d get back to him – as I often do when I feel I have to let things just roll around in my head a bit.

Things do that in my head. They process, and get analyzed, through no conscious effort on my part. And it happens when I am otherwise engaged in front of a mirror either doing my makeup, brushing my teeth, or doing my hair. Not even thinking about some deep issue or a question that has plagued me or all of mankind for decades – the answer just appears from out of nowhere. Whether I like it or not - SPLAT and it’s in front of me. And there you have it - my analytical and creative process from which some of my greatest and most profound ideas have been hatched. But if I don’t relay them to someone or start them, or write them down right way – they are gone into oblivion. How fickle, the genius mind is. *Okay, I say genius, others may substitute a different word – but hey, it’s MY article.

I took a shower, and as I was drying off, I realized I was still processing what I had watched and all of the sudden it dawned on me. There were clues throughout the movie about what it was about – but you couldn’t piece them all together unless you rearranged the movie in your head and applied it to something else. All this while I was using the great Oil of Olay cleansing ribbons wash and feeling great washing all that over-conditioning out of my hair to set it right again. That shower is wonderful for a massage.

For me, I applied the behaviors in the movie to something I had studied pretty intensely a few years ago about the criminal mind – and why people can commit seemingly horrendous acts of violence. Personally - taken down to a lower level – I think everyone can be capable of the same behavior to different degrees and that was what this movie was portraying.

Bear with me if I try to explain what the movie tried to do – but I don’t think it quite reached its mark.

Okay, using my own analogy of the Criminal mind - suggests that the psychology of a criminal allows someone to commit a crime with against a victim, any victim, whether it be theft, rape, bullying, vandalism, hate crimes, racial violence, intolerance, domestic violence, murder, etc…because of one simple component. The ability of a perpetrator of a crime sees his victims as objects rather than people – or some may argue that they represent another person in the case of serial killers, or any serial crime etc. Either way, the perpetrator is unable to make any human connection with the victim – and therefore it makes the crime seem justified to them. The victim is objectified. Remorse may come years later or maybe sooner if the person actually was closer to them depending on the severity of their dissociative disorder.

The ability of the human mind to separate people we love and other people as objects or sometimes animals gives us the ability to act as judges. It is in that capacity that we see ourselves as the master of someone else’s fate. If we act in a majority, we call it society. We call them morals. We call it righteous. Even if the act itself by the majority is wrong and the judgment placed is against a minority is unfounded or based on fear or stupidity. The sentence is often inhumane and illegal. Genocide, invasion of privacy, the infringement of rights, violence against others, the holocaust, terrorism – these are all examples of how a majority acted on a belief that what they were doing was right at the expense of a minority. This happened throughout history but is now in our country supposed to be protected by this thing we call “ethics”. But anyone not in the top 30% of a large company or works for a small company without the benefit of a real human resources team knows that there is still harassment going on based on race, sex, sexual orientation, handicap, disability, and jobs that are considered “more appealing” than others. It is still impossible to work your way up from the bottom no matter how hard you work unless you can afford to attend the right parties and know the right people. My child does not have as much chance to be President as some child born of privilege who attends the right schools whose father or mother works the right connections and knows to steer them toward internships and a very disciplined and spotless reputation. That is what it takes to get into office these days. Knowledge of politics, travel, and it should include some semblance of military service.

However, if a minority or a single person stood up against a majority decision , which in their mind and heart believed was justified and morally acceptable even if the majority was to comfortable with their way of life to change - there was a judge and jury to face. Not exactly of their peers, but a representation of the moral majority. An example of this would be in a case of a crime of passion in the case of abuse, self-defense, or defense of another where the life of another person, animal, or plant species is weighed against a moral sliding scale. Often this scale brings into account the life of the perpetrator, financial status, contribution to society as well as their overall contribution to society. The perpetrator is also judged against a mental health scale, which is also objective. We see these cases against Greenpeace, Indian Tribes, and other Health Practitioners and Home Schoolers who choose to raise their children outside of societies norms.

All of that wasn’t in the movie, no.

But then again it could have been. In my opinion, this movie was about a person’s ability to feel and who they choose to hear. What does a person have to do to get your attention to make you understand that they are a real person with feelings and emotions and a 3,4,or 5 dimensional life just like yours. None of us are numbers on this planet. And when we realize that someone is treating us as one it makes us angry, sad, hurt or indifferent. And yet, we can turn around and do the same thing to others while we are wallowing in our hurt feelings and busy lives. The breakthrough comes when one of their objects takes hold and says “Look into my eyes, I’m in front of you and I am a person too. Feel how I must be feeling. Don’t just give me the blank polite stare of indifference or sympathy. Acknowledge me. Feel something!

You know we can’t make another person feel. All we can do is change the way we react to situations. And that makes all the difference in the world – to us and them.

I’d recommend this movie. But not for entertainment, but for a reason to take a good look inside ourselves.

I welcome any comments or questions as always.




    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • miloskc profile image

      miloskc 5 years ago

      Making a movie based on David Foster Wallace's book is simply impossible. I watched Brief Interviews with Hideous Men, and although there were some interesting parts, it was nowhere near as good as Wallace's book. I think that the book offers a much better insight into the psyche of "hideous men." But I enjoyed reading your hub!