Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

GamerTab That was an excellent one.

SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Negara I think this movie is in fact an article or an essay on sexuality in the film maker's point of view. It all seems what was turned into a dialog by force was in fact parts of an essay she should have written , or she has and then chopped it up into chunks and fed it into the mouths of the lead/only characters. There are no emotions , except when the female lead tries to look sad (when she's not sleeping while being penetrated).I just don't know why , instead of writing that article she has made this film? Why do the lifeless words have to be accompanied by such images? Oh and if we do have to watch these images and they don't have to be credible or plausible in any way , then why is this not pornography? Surely it's as/more offensive? Why does this kind of movie get labeled as ART and then pornography is obscene? I'd much rather have watched porn.

valis1949 ANATOMY OF HELL is a brooding and vulgar scrutiny of the base nature of Human Sexuality. Catherine Breillat attempts to blend a thoughtfully philosophical film with the shocking details hardcore pornography, and falls far short of the mark. I did not have as much of a problem with the disturbing sexual images, as I did with the absurd dialogue. Nobody talks like this, and it carried the film beyond pretension and into preposterousness. The plot is straightforward, yet odd. A woman visits a gay nightclub, and attempts to slash her wrists in the toilet, however her motive is never revealed. She is rescued by a man who passed her on a stairway in the club, and later she asks the man if she may buy his time for the next several days while she reveals herself to him during her most private moments. What follows is a series of turgid and sophomoric discussions which attempt to elucidate the various differences between Men and Women. Even if these two individuals were more articulate and believable, the director does not show us why these characters are worth our attention. What enduring truths could this gay man possibly have to say about masculinity, and why should we care about the observations of this obviously troubled young woman? ANATOMY OF HELL demonstrates our animal nature as sexual beings in exacting detail, however the opaque reflections of the two central characters ring false, and deaden the overall impact of the work. Many would welcome a cinematic journey in which honest philosophical insight is injected into the very artificial and contrived genre of pornography, but ANATOMY OF HELL is neither honest nor insightful, but only salacious.

MrMarcus Most people who criticise this movie are coming from two anglesThey found it offensive, or They didn't 'get it'In contrast, I simply believe that this is a bad movie. As in, the artistic decisions made by writer/director Catherine Brelliat are detrimental to the film.First up, don't believe the hype. It's not that offensive. In fact, I've never seen a movie try so hard to be 'confronting' and 'controverial' and failing so badly. Brelliat clearly wants to shock and upset her audience, with plenty of explicit depictions of oral sex, wrist slashing and the like, but she goes overboard in this respect. The scenes are so explicit, constant and in-your-face that the audience becomes numb to them. This makes scenes like the 'lipstick' and 'hair-gel' moments come across as silly rather than shocking.And the movie is certainly not erotic. It's full of that cold, passionless 'realistic sex' so favoured by the European art-house.Where the movie really fails is in the plot, acting and dialogue. Brelliat casts Italian porn star Rocco Siffredi and actress Amira Cassa in the leads, but bungles this horribly by giving Siffredi all the important scenes and dialogue. We're treated to him mechanically reciting some impossibly pretentious rubbish while the more accomplished actress Cassa does little but lie down with her legs apart for most of the film. Again, this is more likely to trigger some guffaws rather than the philosophical discourse Brelliat was hoping for.And the plot, such as it is. Our hero can overcome his homosexuality by embracing his combined love and fear of the female genitalia. Or something. The idea that homosexuals are actually repressed heterosexuals and can be 'cured' is both ridiculous and offensive. Being a hardcore feminist doesn't give Brelliat the right to spout homophobic garbage. So, stupid plot, woeful dialogue, wooden acting, and explicit scenes so over-the-top you end up sniggering. Anatomy of Hell is a terribly wrong-headed and unintentionally hilarious film that even devotees of hardcore art-house cinema should avoid.

mar3429 I have recently embarked upon a period where I have invested a great deal of time viewing foreign and independent films. I have reached a time wherein Hollywood's view of life is a bit too sunny and a bit too pat. However.....my survey of many of these films are about to send me scurrying back to the pat and plastic Hollywood answers to love and sex. The Anatomy of Hell is the most extreme example of what I have confronted.Are there bad men? Yes, without a doubt, there are pitiful examples of manhood, world wide. However, they are bad men because they are bad men. They are not bad men only to women. Men who need to control and dominate are equal opportunity offenders, the presence of a vagina or menstrual blood has nothing to do with their idiocy. I have worked twenty-five years, with the victims of misogyny as a social worker/counselor. I have confronted the users and abusers of women and have concluded first and foremost that they are usually men who don't love themselves and incapable of loving anyone, male or female. They are very damaged individuals.The vast majority of men love, like and respect women. We're different. We see things differently. We experience things differently. One is no better than the other. Indeed, I would submit that this is why we work best in pairs. Male/female couples allows us to view the world more completely. Your off-sex partner can interpret, explain, and clarify things to you that we don't quite "get." And how do you form the bond that makes this mutual sharing possible? It's called love.Hollywood tends to peddle romantic idealism, while foreign and independent films tend to sell love and sex as an unending gender war. I have no problem with feminist perspectives. This film, however, is too, too extreme--its indictments too broad. Can we all benefit by becoming better people? No doubt, but I am certain that the real answers that we are seeking lay between Hollywood and The Anatomy of Hell. I'm just not seeing it yet. I guess that I still have other films to watch.