You know what is unwatchable–this film. The bad side of the European art house film: filled with allusions to vagina dentata, old stereotypes about gay men hating women & a rationale for intellectuals to film porn all while the Man & Woman utter faux lofty pronouncements while standing around naked. Filming alleged taboos does not equal a good film. Eye roll. Reminds me of the lows of film theory.” “Also did you know that ALL men want to to kill women? Well, they do. All of them. Because of the power of female sexuality. Yup. So he becomes a full human by killing a woman! Oh, Cathy, you are a true feminist. I disagree because first, man involved is allegedly gay so why did the director choose a gay man & NOT a heterosexual man would be used to explore misogyny. That perpetuates a stereotype that I’m not cool with it & I don’t think every man is a misogynist so if you want to explore misogyny, choose the stereotype of a frat boy or a serial killer. It didn’t make me feel uncomfortable. It made me think, “Really?” I’ve just seen films deal with these issues & they were more interesting without being hateful. You can’t stop misogyny by using more stereotypes about men. If I had known before hand about the subject matter of Anatomy of Hell, I would have avoided it, but now I’m just angry because not only was it explicit, but I think that Anatomy of Hell didn’t have a point & reduced both women & men to old stereotypes & that outrages me more when it comes from someone who is allegedly supposed to be fighting that.