Up 15,560 this week

Hell (2006)

 -  Drama  -  1 March 2006 (France)
Your rating:
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -/10 X  
Ratings: 4.9/10 from 422 users  
Reviews: 3 user | 1 critic

Add a Plot



, (novel), 1 more credit »
0Check in

User Lists

Related lists from IMDb users

a list of 292 titles
created 03 Jul 2011
a list of 73 titles
created 26 Sep 2011
a list of 137 titles
created 14 Jan 2012
a list of 619 titles
created 22 Dec 2012
a list of 27 titles
created 1 month ago

Connect with IMDb

Share this Rating

Title: Hell (2006)

Hell (2006) on IMDb 4.9/10

Want to share IMDb's rating on your own site? Use the HTML below.

Take The Quiz!

Test your knowledge of Hell.


Cast overview, first billed only:
Didier Sandre ...
Le père de Hell
Christiane Millet ...
La mère de Hell
Anne-Marie Philipe ...
La mère d'Andrea
May Alexandrov ...
Sarah-Laure Estragnat ...
Shirley Bousquet ...
Pascale Arbillot ...
La gynécologue
Valérie Trajanovsky ...
Serveuse restaurant (as Valérie Trajanovski)
Benjamin Bellecour ...
Matthieu Boujenah ...
Tom Hygreck ...
Corentin Koskas ...


Add Full Plot | Add Synopsis




See all certifications »




Release Date:

1 March 2006 (France)  »

Also Known As:

Hell  »

Company Credits

Show detailed on  »

Technical Specs


See  »

Did You Know?


Yvan Attal was the first director of this film See more »


Features Paris dernière (1995) See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

Another terrible adaptation
23 April 2007 | by (France) – See all my reviews

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.

15 of 25 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you?

Message Boards

Recent Posts
to anyone who has seen the film or read the book juicylover13
Discuss Hell (2006) on the IMDb message boards »

Contribute to This Page

Create a character page for: