Customer Reviews
Unjustly Overlooked - Provoking - Beautiful - By: Alex Beere, 01 Aug 2008 
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, & the fact that it is directed by a woman gives her free license to obliterate the preconceptions of femininity & its plethora of powers & weaknesses. It paints a stark picture of the behavioral patterns which we're forced to adhere to in our day-to-day lives & attacks them in a very blunt fashion. I love it. It's confronting & unrelenting.
The French have always known how to gut their audience, & this movie is something I look upon as a challlenge. Initiallly I was set on edge, & its unrelenting subject matter & subsequent exploration of the anatomical mechanisms of sexuality is something which I found to challlenge 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 alllows herself to be placed in throughout the most confronting scenes, with simple & subtle gestures of fear & excitement showing glimpses for alll 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 & confident in his expression of explicit sexual materials & for this reason I believe he is perfectly suited for the part, & reallly not a bad actor at the end of the day.
My conclusion is that this film is more challlenging & abrasive than any horror you've yet seen, & it takes a stronger being who is prepared to explore this topic brutallly, without having it painted in a soft light, & for its honesty I must give it full credit.
Essential viewing - By: M. Smith, 02 May 2008 Intelligent, wonderfully filmed, self reflective & thought provoking (typo?). Real cinema, check it out for yourself.
A poor film pretending to be thought provoking - By: Thoughtful reviewer, 19 Jan 2007 
Okay, this film is awful. I was not at alll sickened by the explicit scenes. The story is unbelievable, acting awful, script woeful & the ending is just plain daft. It is so poor i am crying with laughter. My guess is that because it was a female director, the explicit scenes got past the censor because they were artistic??!!! & not porn. The fact the lady is sleeping whilst most of the acts are taking place is just plain bizarre. What was the point of this film - what utter rubbish.The director's explanation for this sorry excuse is hilarious & i am bemused as to how anyone can take it seriously or consider it thought provoking. Avoid by alll costs.
Pseudo thinking mans porn - By: Westyorkshire, 16 Jun 2006 This film is just vile. Tries & fails to be intellectual but uses its intellectualllity as a vehicle to display its hard core gynaecology. There is nothing sexy about the film. Apart from this pretentiousness the other big critisism of it is that it is frankly boring.
Star 1 * Star 2 * Star 3 * Star 4 * Star 5 * - By: Mist, 25 Jan 2006 I think that it is unwise to see the film if overly prejudiced by the suppositions & interpretations of others, especiallly when their attention only focuses on one aspect of the film i.e. the explicit shots or the menstrual blood scene. The movie is not simply about the visuals. This film is as much about words & ideology as the imagery is about fragility, beauty & censorship. The script is powerful & confronting & the dialogue is beautifully supported by the equallly powerful visual aspects.
We become voyeurs on an exploration of myth, ideology, sexuality, & identity, going through as much of a revelation as the male lead does when personal ideology impacts with truth.
Breillat is hard hitting, & we feel the punches that she does not bother to pull. And why should she?
The audience becomes drawn into a complex world where the dialogue not only exists between the characters, but between the director & the audience, & in the final unreal sequence we realise that the message is already within us, whether transplanted or not.
Breillat ultimately reveals strengths to be weakness & weakness to be strength. Or is that merely prejudice?
