Anatomy of Hell (2003)

Anatomy of Hell

another good example of the french cinema.
if you really want drama/sex and realism, just get a good french film December 24, 2008

Made me think! Had to give it five stars.

Anatomy of Hell- I don't know why I rented it, but I did, and I am pretty homophobic, so I did not know what to expect. I did not think I would like it. I knew Rocco Siffredi as a European XXX rated star, so did not think it go much deeper that that. The character played by Rocco (No names were used by the key actors.) is a gay man hanging around a gay club. A women played by Amira Casar. Amita's character interacts with to get him to observe her in her most intimate (female) moments. (I won't go into detail for those who have not seen the movie.) Some question were left as to why things happened the way they did, and why Rocco's character became her target.
Basically a very human female character (seemingly weak) takes (pays) a very antithetical gay Rocco and causes him to re-think why he is like he is, and his dislike of women. In director Breillat's words "it is the meeting of the first man and the first woman." The interaction is very graphic and explicit at times- but I could not turn away from it. I have added it to my collection.
"Director Catherine Breillat explores female sexuality and men's darkest fears about women's sexual power." French with English subtitles- A movie that left me thinking, I had to give it five stars! -Brilliant!
September 6, 2008

Unjustly overlooked by those with a healthy biblical fear of femaninity

This movie is a sexual holocaust, but I'm still a believer that such rites of dehumanization do have a place in modern cinema. Someone had to do it, and the fact that it is directed by a woman gives her free license to obliterate the preconceptions of femininity and its plethora of powers and weaknesses. It paints a stark picture of the behavioral patterns which we're forced to adhere to in our day-to-day lives and attacks them in a very blunt fashion. I love it. It's confronting and unrelenting.

The French have always known how to gut their audience, and this movie is something I look upon as a challenge. Initially I was set on edge, and its unrelenting subject matter and subsequent exploration of the anatomical mechanisms of sexuality is something which I found to challenge my previous views in many ways.

Amira Caser is immaculate in her role, her simple facial expressions portray the complexities of the vulnerable state she allows herself to be placed in throughout the most confronting scenes, with simple and subtle gestures of fear and excitement showing glimpses for all those who choose to absorb this film fully.

Perhaps the fact that this movie stars prominent porn actor Rocco could taint its subject to the general audience, but the role he fills demands than he be comfortable and confident in his expression of explicit sexual materials and for this reason I believe he is perfectly suited for the part, and really not a bad actor at the end of the day.

My conclusion is that this film is more challenging and abrasive than any horror you've yet seen, and it takes a stronger being who is prepared to explore this topic brutally, without having it painted in a soft light, and for its honesty I must give it full credit.
August 1, 2008

Narrow Focus

I've seen a few Catherine Breillat films now. I saw Romance when it originally came out in theaters and was a big controversy, NC-17, banned in U.S. theaters (the uncut version) due to graphic nudity. Well Anatomy of Hell has its share of graphic nudity which is typical in Breillat films. The problem with Breillat films; especially this one, is that she is fixated on the idea that men find certain aspects of female anatomy and physiology such as their menstrual cycle, unpleasant or distasteful and she keeps reiterating this theme over and over ad nauseam in each film she makes because apparently in her world (that is in her mind) this is the case. So she keeps trying to make a big feminist statement to enlighten the average primordial male as well as traditionally stigmatized women, that it is not this unclean curse to be feared and loathed but rather just nature and femininity and is not unpleasant but on the contrary; tasteful (no pun intended but if you chose to see this film you'll understand my choice of words) So the film is not as good as Romance because she goes too far to make a point which most people; both men and women already have a pretty good understanding of but Breillat thinks she's pioneering into some kind of untouched territory here. Well perhaps she is but maybe there are just some things that should remain more subtle and vague and do not need to be exploited. I think to some degree Breillat actually exploits women in her films while trying to liberate them. July 31, 2008

Slow and Weird

Some scenes are odd and better off not watching. It's interesting i guess, i do give these people credit for making this film. It depends on what you're into ... wether you will enjoy this film or not. Try not to go by others reviews and opinions always judge for yourself. July 15, 2008

More reviews at Amazon.com ...