Cortechba Overrated

Orla Zuniga It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

Adeel Hail Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.

Lachlan Coulson This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

nobbytatoes Anatomy of Hell arrived in Australia in a time with a current state of rage against films featuring explicit sex. Ken Park banned, Irriversable and 9 songs slipped through the war zone. What is it about sex in films that causes such controversy. The main argument is that its porn, sexual acts to eroticses the audience, rebutted to its art, an exploration of humanities sexuality. Irriversiable examined the terrible repercussions and one mans war of retribution of a tragic rape. 9 Songs retrospectively showed a man's most cherished parts of a broken relationship; the love he made during sex. Another film Intimacy examined the wordless love affair of two people during speechless sex. There's subtext and a conversation to be had with these films.Anatomy Of Hell is slapped with controversy all over it. It's sexually explicit without a lot of sex. Sex is quite minimal, two very short sex scenes to be held. The explicit current running through Anatomy of Hell is it's exploration of one woman freeing herself from mens sexual over hold. The Woman invites The Man to her place for consecutive nights to explore her body. The Man in question is a misogynist gay man. Over the nights, their exploration of the female builds, with acts that draw the massive controversy it has attracted. The Woman wants to understand the anger men feel against women. Why they hate women and their constant need of power over them. It's no surprise actually she chose a gay man who loathes women. The Man struck with facing his demons head on.Anatomy Of Hell is director Catherine Breillat analyzing the meaningless of sex. The film is laced with ideas of feminism, misogynist, the female body and the power of the female genitals that empower and repulse men; the hell. Breillat wants to have a conversation with you, stuck as the voyeur of these two people. The deterring part is Breillat writes such a black and white perspective of both people's ideals on the opposite sex. Men are pathetic to The Woman and woman are repulsive to The Man. No middle ground to walk, just two polar states pulling away. Breillat's dialog is far from the poignant and symbolic level she aims, it's to didactic.The sexual acts themselves are at the heart of this film. Of the original argument, this is hardly porn, as nothing about this is erotic nor pleasurable to watch. Acts with garden tools and toys, and menstrual blood are hardly erotic, when Breillat take such a detached approach. Though you are the voyeur, your not a fly on the wall, your looking from a great distance trying to figure why they're doing this.What Catherine Breillat is trying to say with Anatomy of Hell has depth and there is a conversation to be had, but it's dull and banal; it's time to change the subject.

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.

tedg Some of us are more nimble than others at being so and some of us hide it well, but it is the human condition to be stupid. We all are and that's that. The best we can hope for is to find those that do it gracefully.Make no mistake, Breillat is stupid. She would bring any gathering down and to have her as a friend would be a burden. And yet she has given me images that I carry around (with other gems) to serve as touchstones into the world of women. Her films are poorly composed but there really are some cinematically perfect moments in every one. So what you want to do is watch this (or any of them) and avoid at all costs any of her own interviews. I know what she intends. Its uninteresting, not worth the effort. The dialog is similarly a waste of life, but you cannot get to the images without it, so drudge through, please.The reason is that she knows the power of vision and she moves the imagination of image with grace. All the droll theorizing I can forgive, even credit as bravery because she knows how the eye and mind work as tractors to the soulThere's a truly disturbing act of cowardice though at the very beginning, before the credits. We are told that the more "disgusting" things weren't actually done by the actress, but by a body double. Now why?You might want to see this before "Loss of Sexual Innocence" which is equally banal in the same way, and as powerful.Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

Colette Corr Although the confrontational images in this film only make it suitable for a select audience, I recommend it for armchair philosophers and those interested in gender politics.Amira Casar plays a young woman who pays a gay man (played by real life hetero porn star Rocco Siffredi) to watch her for four days. Over that time, he confronts his own revulsion at the intimacies of the female body.You will probably have heard of the various extreme images in this film (a garden rake being inserted into the woman's vagina, for example) but surprisingly, the film does not titillate. Every action is designed to develop the characters and reveal a deeper truth.On one level, Anatomy of Hell blasts the misogynistic attitude towards women that can still exist. What is most interesting about this film is the man's journey towards accepting women, and his feminine side, revealed through the use of a female voice-over for his character.By confronting taboos, for example the taboo against menstruation, Breillat's characters become closer to each other, all the more telling because the man is gay and has no basic need for women. Yet, this film is not simply a rant against men, because the male character is the only one that is fully realised. He develops throughout the film, whereas the woman remains static and is more of an archetype of female power rather than a human being.I found Anatomy of Hell fascinating and far less shocking than I anticipated. In Australia, the film was banned until the decision was overturned. I agree with the latter decision, there is a a second of footage featuring a naked young girl in sexual play that should be removed from the film. Some taboos exist for a purpose and that is one of them.