Anatomy of Hell Reviews
[font=Century Gothic]"Anatomy of Hell' is not a bad idea for a movie. For example, it is always a good thing when men and women exchange sexual information about their respective genders.(I learned a good deal about sex from my women friends in college.) But the movie wallows in pretentiousness and neither performer were apparently cast because of their acting ability. Catherine Breillat had already covered similar territory in the superior "Brief Crossing." I did think the tampon scene was informative, though. [/font]
Its problem was its stationary anatomical dissection. I deduce simply from the title because I had some effing bad fansubs (Need to rewatch), which means a lot of the dialogue I didn't fully comprehend. But I saw enough to make me decide it's badly put together. The script and ending have no true dedication, the actors are there so that Breillat can just teach audiences with them, as though they were puppets.
In the end the movie seemed like a waste of time and mild disappointment, since it did a poor job at delivering what was trying to be portrayed, nor did it stimulate any interest in me to search for deeper meaning in the plot.
It will put off all but the most dedicated of film watchers as (and I don't usually include spoilers) they have sex (erect penises and all) during her period, tampons going in and out and he withdraws covered in her blood.
As I said, it's not for everyone...
Is it gratuitous?
Probably; in equal amounts to its pretentiousness. But that doesn't leave it completely without merit.
Give me a while and I might come up with the merit.