Hell

The most moving, intelligent and touching film of the year! I was completely overwhelmed by this film. The actor and the directing are great...i just loved the performance of Sara Forestier, I'm sure this film will be considered cult in the next few year... and it is strange to say that I didn't liked the book very much, I found it easily provocative. The film is much more deep than the book...

This film starts like a very superficial comedy and slowly gets into a dramatic highway to HELL, our two heroes will both be entrapped by their own demons, and we follow them in this self-destructing journey. It is one of the best french movies I have ever seen in my life, the actors are just fabulous and the director manages give to the film a very bizarre atmosphere: sometimes we don't even now if Andrea really exist or is just a creation if Hella's imagination.

This film is a very accurate portrait of the youth today. I do agree that this film could become cult in a few years. Unfortunately it hasn't been promoted enough to bring it to the public. The film is set in Paris where two people, Elle and Andrea meet, both are hopeless and hope to find in each other what they seem to miss. Whoever has read the book which was written by Lolita Pille, who claims to write form personal experience, beforehand will not be disappointed; whoever will read it after might understand more about the film since the film is based accurately on the book and hardly contains any "independant" episodes.

All in all -brilliant work!

In Paris, Ella, a.k.a. Hell (Sara Forestier), is a promiscuous and reckless teenager with absent upper class parents that does not study or work and spends her time going to night-clubs, using cocaine and drinking booze with her idle high-society friends. She has recently made an abortion without knowing who the father could be. When she meets the playboy Andrea (Nicolas Duvauchelle), they have a torrid and crazy love affair with a tragic ending.

"Hell" is a romance with a crazy love that does not work well since the characters are non-charismatic, futile and idle. There is nothing special or attractive with the story or characters and it does not worth watching this movie. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): "Hell"

The French community of filmmakers present us with yet another terribly adapted film: Hell, based on the book by Lolita Pille. As the book itself wasn't really fantastic to begin with, there was still something to make out of it: the sound, the fury, the depravity, the recklessness and immorality of the French XVI-district youth could have been brought to the screen into a film either better than the book, or at least just as entertaining. But here's the problem that prevents this film from being that film: everything. It's all done wrong from the start, beginning with the actors. As in the book the main characters are supposed to be parts of a so-called glamorized, sexy, attractive and unattainable youth, here the actors are obviously not in character, looking way too common to be the "angel" and the filthy rich low-morality "pétasse" that they are in the book. Sara Forestier is neither shot by the director in an attractive way, nor made to look attractive by makeup or other artifacts that are present in the book: she looks plain, and with her "gamine" looks, remains miles away from the manipulative girl that her character should be. Nicolas Duvauchelle lacks charisma, as he usually does in most films he's in, but also brings with him the feeling that he is miscast, looking more like a numb tattooed homie from the suburbs than like the pristine yet cultivated product of the rich quarters of Paris. The same can be said about other characters: while in the book they have an important position, in the film they are more than cast aside, and miscast too, most parts landing onto very common actors with little or no previous acting experience. The worst for last: the director. He also doesn't seem to have much experience, neither as a director or as a film enthusiast: it seems that his references are Chabrol, Rohmer and Godard, and while there's nothing really wrong with that, there is a world apart between the book and these directors. I couldn't help but think while I was watching the film of what a visionary and talented director like Darren Aronofsky would have done adapting the book, using exciting photography, brilliant camera moves, gifted actors even in small parts, etc. Here, Chiche ("scanty" in French) delivers an almost politically correct vision of a book that most relies on sex, debauchery, violence and lust, and takes a malignant pleasure in erasing all that makes the book enjoyable, including the climaxing scene at the end of the book which reminded me of Requiem for a Dream when I read it, and here is simply not even shown. This feels quite like turning on the radio and putting earplugs on, or leaving half-way through The Usual Suspects: it ruins all the fun. From the beginning to the end nothing in the film retells how the book feels, it looks like a cheap TV movie (most of it is shot with hand-held camera, "caméra à l'épaule" seems to be highly praised among French filmmakers nowadays). Where the books offers a scene in a night club with plenty of noise, drugs, manipulation, crowded with people and excitation, the film offers a one-shot scene in a cheap dancing joint with maybe no more than 15 extras, bad soundtrack, terrible photography, lame camera-work, etc. The whole film painfully lacks ideas or creativity whatsoever, is a total waste of money, means, and time - for those who made it and those who watched it. I advise to not watch this film if you enjoyed Requiem for a Dream or any film from a talented director pertaining to depraved youth, or maybe to read the book first and see how much of a shame this adaptation is.