L'Enfer

L'Enfer

Paul, an irritable and stressed-out hotel manager, begins to gradually develop paranoid delusions about his wife's infidelity...

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:100 minutes
  • Release:1994
  • Language:French
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:rape,   murder,   jealousy,  

Paul, an irritable and stressed-out hotel manager, begins to gradually develop paranoid delusions about his wife's infidelity. As he succumbs to green-eyed jealousy, his life starts to ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

L'Enfer torrent reviews

Khalei A (de) wrote: What a waste of time. Poorly made. Not funny. Painful to watch. Would not watch again.

Gaspar O (de) wrote: This is likely one of the worst of all the low budget shark movies out there. The CGI is horrendous, the acting is terrible, the story is awful...BUT, the script is horrid. However, it's friggin' sand sharks! They swim...in the sand! Extra half star for being friggin' sand sharks!

Hariharan B (nl) wrote: super movie... very funny.. all the artists have given their best.. but plaudits go to genelia for the awesome performance that she put up. hats off..!!

Michael H (au) wrote: just saw this one, and while i thought the movie was generally okay, i didnt like two things: a) the boy didnt look scary enough. watch case 39, the last exorcism or orphan to see believable scary kids. and b) the wolves. totally unnecessary in my opinion, they didnt add anything. still a nice one.

t w (au) wrote: I know it's redundant but it's not as good as the book

Amber D (us) wrote: This movie had me saying things constantly like, "Are you stupid??!?" and "Stop wasting time!". Midway through the movie, I was hoping that none of them became FBI agents because their decisions and actions were so irrational. A lot of them had serious attitude problems. There were times where they all had the same personality. I was slamming my head against the wall the entire movie. I gave it 1.5 stars because the quality was actually decent; the characters just weren't.

Zach M (de) wrote: Ahhh....Ben Affleck.

Peter M (us) wrote: If you don't laugh and yell at this cheesy masterpiece, I dont think you'll ever be truely happy. Really try to understand what this movie is and appreciate how it encapsulates an entire genre of film.

Critic M (gb) wrote: "SubUrbia" is a 1990's indie film that is fun, raw and in many ways true to life. What I loved about this film is that it showcased and explored that uncertain gray area that is in between adolescence and adulthood. The transitionary phase that some take much longer than others to get out of and that some people never grow out of. "SubUrbia" has a talented cast and a very good script that, for me, was relatable. The characters in the film were so different from each other, yet all shared a common bond. They all grew up together and were each at a sort of crossroads waiting for change. The fascinating thing about Richard Linklater's "SubUrbia" is that currently (2014) it is not available on DVD or Blu-Ray. You can find some copies of VHS online, or what I did was stream it on Amazon instant video. Thank goodness there are digital versions of this 90's gem available. I highly recommend downloading this unique film and experiencing it.

Stuart Y (au) wrote: After the successful Quatermass Xperiment, Hammer wanted the character to be in this movie, but Kneale wisely refused. This isn??t on a par with any of the Quatermass tv shows, or movies, but it??s still an interesting sci fi movie, and often amusing look at how naive the writers were, when it came to writing about radiation, and how scientists supposedly handled radioactive properties, without wearing any protective gear, or house radiation in a proper environment. But this was made in the 50s, and no one (well script writers) really understood the nature of radiation other than it was used to build a bomb. However this is an enjoyable and an nostalgic trip to an innocent age, with a fun story of a radioactive creature stalking a sleepy village in Scotland.

Tiberio S (it) wrote: I was confused about the genre of this film - did it really need so much musical for a western adventure flick? After enough of Marilyn Monroe's pouty face and lip singing, the dwindling rear-screen projection (which started out good, but couldn't handle speedier scenes), and the improbability of these characters surviving situations where their assailants seemed to act clumsy, allowing them to escape, my thumb got tired of sitting up and started tilting. But the gorgeous cinematography and staging was a serious draw. Mitchum arrives amidst the chaos of Gold Rush, tents swarming a firelit plot of land where hooligans behave badly; we feel his strength of character as he walks through tall, not necessarily judgmental but not indulging either. He has one objective: find the son he lost and get the hell out. They have a few near-misses, but before too long they're reunited. Not much is done to satisfy their relationship developing through the story - they're happy to be together and when they encounter obstacles about why his father was missing for so long, they resolve them quickly. Preminger is such a master painter, taking inspiration from the wide landscapes of John Ford, always pitting the smallness of man and his quarrels against the everlasting backdrop of our American west. But it's Joseph LaShelle who fills it in with such pristine quality, from the smaller yellow highlights on trees to the massive color and contrast of deep blue sky and rustic mountain. Any moonlit scene with running river in the background moves the film from it's thematic title and contextualizes it - that serene background noise. It's as effective with natural sound as it is with the exciting classic Cyril Mockridge score. The scenes are patient, they allow us to see actors form a scene without excessive cutting, forcing Monroe to do real acting beyond mere sexy poses (which are plentiful). But her performance is one note, she has one face she keeps going back to with her upper lip extending out and lower jaw moving back, trying to talk with a toughness that gets as redundant as Hermione Granger yelling in Harry Potter 3. Mitchum is arguably one note, but with such presence that I find acceptable. There's a controversial near-rape scene which seems very easily forgiven by today's standards, she loves him and doesn't really mind him forcing himself on her. But they aren't a thing yet when that happens, and today that would not pass. I felt like the kid was more of a Short Round sidekick than a dramatically integral plot device, it could've almost been done without him. But it gave the two future lovers a common link of concern and care which drove them to survive, literally as Monroe identifies Mitchum is doing this all and surviving out of love for his son. Their adversary, Rory Calhoun, is driven by pure capitalism, and as usual, it catches up to him when the son mirrors his father, giving them a little poetry and bringing the story full circle. The son understands why sometimes, out of desperation, a man gets killed.

Natsuki O (gb) wrote: The seen of playing piano is so impressed.

Shawn R (gb) wrote: Felt like an autobiography. Actually kinda depressing like Johnny got his gun or train spotting. The editing was artsy and the movie in general was very refreshing.

Shane J (it) wrote: fun 80's horro with a party going on in a haunted houser,bit of a cult fav. the effects are pretty good for quite clearly a lower budget and not one person is a teenager which they should be as per usual in 80's teen storys. watch this over the dreadful remake any day of the week.

Grant H (us) wrote: Pretty bad movie. While certainly an improvement upon the original in story, style, and execution, it still is not a good story, the performances are still corny, and the film as a whole is not good.