Further discussion on Huckabees:

Originally posted by oscar jubis
My suggestion is not to regard the philosophical battle abstractly but to see it only as it relates to Albert and Tommy. Their dissatisfaction with the state of things creates polar tendencies within them: narcissism (Tommy's violence, Albert's inflated self-regard) and disengagement vs. altruism and engagement. In my opinion, the "existential dicks" and Huppert's nihilist are primarily plot devices and conduits. They make it possible for the film to dig into Albert and Brad's pasts, serve as a way to get Tommy and Albert together, and facilitate getting inside their heads (not unlike the portal in Kaufman's Being John Malkovich).
I watched the film again this weekend, and I do appreciate it more every time I see it. I think my approach now is to stop analyzing the philosophical underpinnings of the story at some point...for instance, I could argue that an "existentialist" self-analysis by Brad and his girlfriend would only lead them to reinforce their own self images and approach to life. But that wouldn't be nearly as fun for the filmmakers, so I'll stop there. I do like the overall philosophical message though, which seems to be that yes, everything is interconnected, but yes, there also is much pain and suffering that forms a large part of human existence. So, an approach to life should acknowledge both aspects (life=interconnectedness + nihilism), but American society at this point seems to be in full disregard of this. Is that the point of the film? Whew, I'm tired...

I Heart Huckabees is no Nashville. We might have to wait a while for another film like it. It's not a perfect movie like Before Sunset. It's not neat and its puzzle doesn't fit together the way Eternal Sunshine does. But it's more daring and ambitious than anything made in the USA in 2004. Even though not completely successful, even if Russell hasn't quite made his masterpiece, I Heart Huckabees achieves enough to merit inclusion into a list of best films of 2004. At the minimum, Russell deserves credit for creating a narrative full of good-natured humor that asks the right questions. Of course, this is only my subjective opinion.
I agree that it's more daring (and ambitious, yes) than almost anything else made in the USA in 2004, but unfortunately that doesn't say much anymore. My point in bringing up Nashville is that it is, in my mind, the most effective film I've seen to view through a microscope, so to speak, America, its society and its people. At the same time, it remains a beautifully poetic film in its structure and storyline. Before Sunrise and Eternal Sunshine, while perhaps "perfect" films, are more personal in nature and don't take on subject matters of such wide scope.