Editing Human Nature (2001 film) (section)

=== Critical response ===
On [[review aggregator]] [[Rotten Tomatoes]], the film holds a score of 48% based on 95 reviews, and an average rating of 5.8/10. The website's consensus reads, "As quirky as ''[[Being John Malkovich]]'' but not as funny, ''Human Nature'' feels too forced and unengaging."<ref>{{cite web |title=''Human Nature'' (2002) |url=https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1113402_human_nature |work=[[Rotten Tomatoes]] |publisher=[[Fandango Media|Fandango]] |access-date=April 26, 2018}}</ref> On [[Metacritic]], it has an average score of 56 out of 100 based on 30 critics, indicating "mixed or average" reviews.<ref>{{cite web |title=''Human Nature'' Reviews |url=https://www.metacritic.com/movie/human-nature |website=[[Metacritic]] |publisher=[[CBS Interactive]] |access-date=August 28, 2020}}</ref>

[[Roger Ebert]] awarded the film three-stars out of four, lauding the film's "[[Screwball comedy|screwball]] charm" and commenting that director Gondry stages the film with a "level of mad whimsy" that feels "just about right".<ref>{{cite web |author=Ebert, Roger |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/human-nature-2002 |title=''Human Nature'' |work=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |publisher=[[Roger Ebert|RogerEbert.com]] |date=April 12, 2002 |access-date=August 28, 2020}}</ref>

In a 2009 review as part of his "Year of Flops" series, critic [[Nathan Rabin]] argued that the screenplay, as well as the collaboration between Kaufman and Gondry (the first before ''[[Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind]]''), had all the ingredients for a sharp social [[satire]].<ref name=":1">{{Cite news |last=Rabin |first=Nathan |date=October 14, 2009 |title=Undomesticated Case File #148: Human Nature |work=The A.V. Club |url=https://www.avclub.com/undomesticated-case-file-148-human-nature-1798218053 |access-date=December 4, 2022}}</ref> Rabin wrote that like Kaufman’s scripts for films like ''Eternal Sunshine'', ''Being John Malkovich'', and ''[[Adaptation (film)|Adaptation]],'' ''Human Nature'' "uses a fantastical conceit to explore the fresh hell of existence and our desperate attempts to deny who we are and what we want."<ref name=":1" /> However, Rabin stated that Kaufman’s other works<blockquote>"…are grounded in visceral human emotions and feel gloriously, painfully alive, [whereas] ''Human Nature'' feels strangely hermetic. Ifans, Robbins, and Arquette breathe incredible melancholy, pain, and confusion into their characters, but they cannot make them human. That is perhaps the tragedy of ''Human Nature'': Despite its title and abundance of brilliant ideas and clever lines, it feels strangely abstract and theoretical. Rewatching ''Human Nature'' eight years on, the film’s bone-deep sadness resonates more strongly than its cerebral [[comedy of manners]]. It’s a profoundly flawed and strangely affecting film about what Arquette refers to as the 'waywardness of humankind' and the sublime agony of being human."<ref name=":1" /></blockquote>