I figured that this was just a random image-memory response on my part, since Magritte was a surrealist painter, and the movie was about existentialism.

But the more I thought about it, the more I’ve settled on this conclusion (probably completely wrong.):
“I (heart) Huckabees” is actually a surrealist movie detailing several persons struggle with existential dilemmas. Think about it. How can this film possibly be considered an existential movie? It is knee deep in personal and interpersonal responses and reactions. All begging to be defined. This doesn’t follow the existentialist model. Too much self denial.
“La Grande Guerre” translates into “The Great War”
Between that title, The imagery of a persons identity being hidden (By such a random element as an apple)
and the intentions of the Existential Detectives (Where the Bowler was seen) I feel even more drawn to this explanation.
I thought I would have more to say about this… But apparently, I’m dumber than I thought. So I’ll leave you with a quote from Magritte, that I think also sums up “I (heart) Huckabees” pretty well (Because I know you really really care):
“My painting is visible images which conceal nothing; they evoke mystery and, indeed, when one sees one of my pictures, one asks oneself this simple question ‘What does that mean?’ It does not mean anything, because mystery means nothing either, it is unknowable.”

Thanks for waiting. Please tip the bellhop.

-AAA (Yeah, I’m still hanging around… I’m just real short, and people don’t notice me too often…)