★ 5 / 10
Interesting as always ... but not one of Breillat's best.
snoozer1
I am a great fan of Catherine Breillat. I have seen many of her films now and have enjoyed each and every one. She is an interesting film maker, always…
I am a great fan of Catherine Breillat. I have seen many of her films now and have enjoyed each and every one. She is an interesting film maker, always provocative, always prepared to push the boundaries of cinema. 'Anatomy of Hell' tho left me somewhat bored. It seems to me that with each new film, Breillat is becoming ever more compartmentalized. Here, her mission is to specifically explore the female sex organ and the affect this may (or may not have) on the male sexual and emotional psyche. The problem is, since she's chosen such a narrow subject (no pun intended) to examine, there really isn't enough material here to sustain an entire film ... even one with a brief running time as this (approx 80 mins).
Another downside also is that the film is totally reliant on the 2 leads, and frankly, Siffredi is just not up to the task. On the other hand, as always, Breillat casts an interesting female lead. Amira Casar, with her porcelain white skin, her voluptuous curves and her pitch black hair certainly holds ones interest. I get the feeling Breillat, when making the female casting choice, looks for younger and more glamorous versions of herself -- you'll rarely see a blonde.
There are the trademark 'pluses' of Breillat in this film tho. Her thoughtfully conceived set design for example ... her minimal editing .. sparse use of lighting. These all add up to good story telling techniques in my book. But alas, there is just not enough substance to the narrative to make this a good film.
I really do wonder where she is going to go from here ... ?
★ 4 / 10
This is the anatomy of a really bad movie.
ironhorse_iv
Sorry, Director and writer Catherine Breillat, but this movie Anatomie De L'enfer is awful. This film shows the intellectual bankruptcy of an modern feminist.…
Sorry, Director and writer Catherine Breillat, but this movie Anatomie De L'enfer is awful. This film shows the intellectual bankruptcy of an modern feminist. The symbolism in this art film nearly mean nothing, but a horrible movie made by a horrible and possible militantly disturbed person. Dramas like this that explore female sexuality in a clinical, bleak style and with unconventional explicitness are just self-hatred filth. This is depressing porn in my opinion. The movie opens with title cards telling us that it is a work of fiction and the lead actress had a body double. Wow, great way to ruin the film before it even started, by telling us that we're watching a movie. That would work better at the end pass the credits, not the beginning. Di This film is basically opens up with two characters, one female and one male who are complete strangers and come together to discuss and perform sex. It's too bad, the movie starts out with two random people giving each other oral sex that are not the main characters. The camera spent a few minutes on people, before moving on. We'll never see them or they will mention any more in the film past this point. There was no reason for them to be filmed. It was just a random porn scene. Anyways, we meet Amira Casar as the woman and Italian porn star Rocco Siffredi as 'the man' in a gay club. The girl is on her way to the restroom to slit her wrists with a razor blade because she's angry that none of the men are paying her any attention to her. Stupid woman, it's because they are gay. I have no clue why a gay man is representing all-men or a self-hating woman as all women. I only have a theory that she trying to get a gay guy horny for her nude body. The woman is obviously after male approval and into celebrating her womanhood; and she probably picked a homosexual to do it with because she knows that he will not become emotionally involved with her and remain nonthreatening. I also felt she wanted to be rejected by the man so she picked a gay man. She wanted confirmation on her self-loathing that she picked the man who hate her the most. The movie gives a camera shot of a clit surround by hair for a long time, follow up with a scene of Rocco as a kid trying to take care of a baby bird. The baby bird surround a nest is supposed to represent the vagina. When the baby bird dies, the boy stomp on it. Awful metaphor for his homosexuality, but interesting. What is the film trying to say? That men or gay men can't take care of children. Only women. That's deeply mistaken. I saw many fathers able to take care of their kids. Then the movie has the nerves to show child pornography. This is a no-no. I don't care if it's an art film, showing nude children is wrong! Somebody call 'To catch a Predator' on Catherine Breillat! There are lots of graphic close ups of private parts and various scenes involving a garden rake, and lipstick. Then there is the infamous scene dealing with menstruation. The movie is telling us that men are evil, because they are horrified by menstruation. First off, women hate and fear periods too. Some women are disturbed talking about semen, so does that make all women evil. No. Let's not forget urine or feces. Are people evil because they don't want to see urine or poop around? No. Let's not forget that everybody bleeds. Sorry, Catherine Breillat, you're mistaking, guys again. Ms. Breillat's only motivation by having these scenes is for shock value. The dialogue is stroppy, rigid and pretentious, with lots of references to feminine subjugation and male domination. It's actually hard to figure out what the director is trying to say in this film. The acting is passable, although I thought Siffredi was surprisingly worthy. Still, the characters are preposterous and boring. Breillat's use of tracking shots create a wonderfully dreamlike quality in the exterior scenes. The scenes of the raging ocean, in particular, are hauntingly stunning. The music is awful. The disco pop is annoying. I don't like how the movie unfairly portrays men as being lustful, violent idiots that women should throw rocks at. She also unfairly portrays women as martyrs who let themselves be victimized and revel in the dichotomy of brutal sex acts being both objects of desire and disgust. Still, I give the movie props for making me think and interpretation what she meant by the scenes. Whether the character wanted to have sex with Amira's character or not is left to be debated later. Anatomy of Hell is a hard film to watch and it's filled with images you're not likely to see anywhere else, even in pornography. The more conservative viewer should be well warned to stay away, but I think the more open-minded viewer might not like it, too. Dehumanization movies such as this have no baring for normal audience, unless you already depressed, or hateful. Unless you're curious about sex relations, or having sex issues. Don't watch.
•••
thank you...