Anatomie d'une chute

Anatomy of a Fall is a French film that explores the ambiguity of how we create notions of the truth through complexity of a criminal case. The film refuses to answer the question of guilt or innocence, but rather examines how people construct their own narratives based on partial and biased information. The film shows how gender, media, and personal motives influence the interpretation of the facts. The son of the accused, who is the only witness, admits that he does not know what really happened, and that he has to make a choice about what to believe. The prosecutor, who seems to have a personal vendetta against the accused, also relies on assumptions and speculations rather than solid evidence. The film is a compelling and nuanced study of human psychology and social dynamics. The film is well-acted and directed, but it could have been shorter. Some scenes in the courtroom are repetitive and drag on for too long.

... the performance of the child actor: Milo Machado Graner. All the other actors were brilliant and amazing in their own ways, especially Sandra Hüller and Swann Arlaud. However, due to the demanding nature of the task at hand, Graner did superbly. He never phones it in. It's a calibre I've never witnessed before to this degree from a child actor. Surely I haven't seen all the classics and films in the world to make such a statement as there is still so much left for me to watch. Regardless, Graner's performance gives me so much confidence in proclaiming the following statement: this is the best performance I've witnessed from a child actor (ever?). There is mastery exhibited both in the quiet moments and dialogue-heavy scenes. Just from his body language, things can be inferred and implied. Graner is subtle as much as he is unsubtle. It's quite hard to put it into words, which is a sign of something great. You feel things that words cannot describe. That's art.

As for the film itself, I think it's pretty good. I was expecting something more due to the critical buzz and its success at Cannes, so I can't say I wasn't a little disappointed. I feel like the movie was a bit too long and/or slow, which I usually don't feel if the plot and narrative is as gripping that the film presents (I'm a fan of courtroom dramas). I think the film wants you to be second-guessing the characters' actions and motivations, which is a clear choice by the director and that is fine. However, personally I would've liked it to be more critical of the French legal system with a clearer voice. What Anatomy of a Fall boils down to is the law vs truth in the face of a tumultuous marriage between two writers.

Rating might go up on a rewatch but doubt I'll be watching it anytime again soon due to the pacing.

Also: loved the instrumental that plays on repeat in the beginning hahah.

The beauty of the film truly lies in how delicately it's paced throughout. Even when it takes the shape of a courtroom drama with great attention to detail, it still rests firmly on the emotional bonding between the lead characters - in this case, a mother (Sandra), her son (Daniel), and their dog. That never takes a backseat, despite the film turning into a murder mystery (of sorts) at several points. I absolutely loved the performances here, be it Sandra Hüller, Swann Arlaud, Milo Machado Graner, and Samuel Theis. And for all it's worth, the standout here is Snoop (the dog), and his presence not only drives the story forward at a pivotal juncture, but this wonderful canine also takes the audience's perspective in the beginning and at the end of the film. He's travelling with these characters just like us, while also playing the role of an unconditional guardian angel to Daniel.

When the writing digs deep into the intricacies of a marriage, it is poignant, relatable, and hard-hitting. Both the husband and the wife are writers essentially, and that makes their struggles and little victories all the more accessible. The changing dynamics in their relationship is brought to light through superbly shot flashbacks (just as their audio recordings are being played in court), and we as audiences, understand what each half of the couple is going through. The journey is dramatic alright, but since the outcome determines whether the mother gets to reunite with her son after a long, drawn-out trial, it always remains riveting to watch. The "lesser" moments - like a scene that depicts Sandra and her lawyer friend drinking together, are also beautifully staged.

It's a great movie, without a doubt. Excellently directed with the best handling of the shots and the cameras of the year. The acting of Sandra Huller and the boy (whose name I'm forgetting) are impressive, worthy of award nominations. Not in vain the actress was in two of the best movies of the year. Her handling of languages and how she makes each dialogue credible is fascinating.

It's a hard and pure trial movie, in my opinion it has 2-25 minutes left over and I lack a soundtrack. In the end it leaves me wanting more because I was expecting a plot twist that would surprise. For the rest, highly recommended.

A lonely chalet in the French Alps. A dead man laying in the snow in front of it. Apparently he fell out of the third floor window under the roof.

Was it an accident? Suicide? Or a murderess attack? Whoever expects a conventional crime thriller with a final simple solution will be badly disappointed by this complex psychological drama about a female author fighting for her independence, dignity and her own truth in the courtroom, where she stands under suspicion to have killed her husband. But beware: truth has different aspects and different sides, depending on whoever tries to catch it. It comes in disguises, often invisible, always subjective.

In the end it's up to the viewer to make up his own mind about the case. While the investigation is unfolded Triets movie proudly walks in the footsteps of Ingmar Bergman, a classic analyst of complicated couple relationships and she truly succeeds in doing so.