November 27, 2023
FILM: ANATOMY OF A FALL
DIRECTED BY: JUSTINE TRIET
STARRING: SANDRA HULLER, SWANN ARLAUD, MILO MACHADO GRANER
RATING: 3 ½ out of 4 stars
By Dan Pal
At the start of Anatomy of a Fall, Sandra Voyter, played by Sandra Huller, is being interviewed by a reporter in her French home while a loud instrumental version of 50 Cent’s P.I.M.P. plays in the distance overtaking almost anything the two women say. It’s a noticeable cacophony of sounds that is at once beautiful but also wildly distracting. This may initially seem like a bit of a throwaway scene but it actually proves crucial to the ultimate development of the film’s central plot. Soon after, Sandra’s husband Samuel is found dead outside by their son Daniel. This leads to a trial in which Sandra is implicated in Samuel’s death, a presumptive fall from the home’s attic that she may or may not have caused.
On one level, we could call this a courtroom drama and, for a good portion of the film’s 2 ½ hour running time, it is just that. Yet, there is so much more going on here from past trauma to complex marriage issues, mental health, reality vs. fiction, and the use of technology in today’s courtrooms. Since the film takes place in France, the court proceedings operate very differently than what we’re used to here in the U.S. Cross examination occurs in a less structured manner. The defendant is called to respond to comments made by people on the witness stand while they are still there. Rebuttals occur on both sides of the case, seemingly at random. Also at play during the trial is the use of recordings and videos on large screens. All of this makes for an interesting look at a different type of legal system. Of course, there is the usual aggressive interrogation of Sandra by the prosecution that we’re all too familiar with from many American films. I was reminded of the scene in Kramer vs. Kramer when Meryl Streep’s character is emotionally and physically effected by lawyers during one of the film’s major trial scenes.
Like that 1979 film, this is also a portrait of a marriage under close scrutiny. Much is learned throughout the trial about the competition between the couple (both are writers), infidelities, and feelings of guilt due to an accident years earlier which caused Daniel to lose part of his vision. The film nicely builds to a climactic scene in which Sandra and Samuel, via a flashback of sorts, have one of cinema’s great marriage arguments. The scene is brilliantly constructed and acted, rivaling a related scene in Noah Baumbach’s Oscar-nominated Marriage Story a few years back. Part of this is due to Sandra Huller’s work as Sandra. The way she reacts to accusations made by the character Samuel is beautifully modulated and increasingly intense. It may be the scene (of which there are truly many) that could get Huller an Oscar nomination for Best Actress this year.
Also intriguing here is the courtroom’s discussion of the writings composed by the main characters. A question is raised whether a work of fiction, such as a novel, reflects the psyche of the person writing it. If so, should that be used to implicate a writer on trial? Of course, there are also recreations within the film of the events surrounding Samuel’s death. Are these any more valid to include?
Anatomy of a Fall won the Palme d’Or at this year’s Cannes Film Festival. Some might say it isn’t as adventurous of other such films in the past as it is, after all, about a mystery needing to be solved. Films have been made for a century that attempt to do the same thing (not to mention a myriad of television series.) However, there is something very fresh about the characters, setting, and development of this particular plot that makes it feel fresh, original, and definitely worth-seeing.
Anatomy of a Fall is currently playing in limited release, including the Music Box Theater in Chicago.
FILM: ANATOMY OF A FALL
DIRECTED BY: JUSTINE TRIET
STARRING: SANDRA HULLER, SWANN ARLAUD, MILO MACHADO GRANER
RATING: 3 ½ out of 4 stars
By Dan Pal
At the start of Anatomy of a Fall, Sandra Voyter, played by Sandra Huller, is being interviewed by a reporter in her French home while a loud instrumental version of 50 Cent’s P.I.M.P. plays in the distance overtaking almost anything the two women say. It’s a noticeable cacophony of sounds that is at once beautiful but also wildly distracting. This may initially seem like a bit of a throwaway scene but it actually proves crucial to the ultimate development of the film’s central plot. Soon after, Sandra’s husband Samuel is found dead outside by their son Daniel. This leads to a trial in which Sandra is implicated in Samuel’s death, a presumptive fall from the home’s attic that she may or may not have caused.
On one level, we could call this a courtroom drama and, for a good portion of the film’s 2 ½ hour running time, it is just that. Yet, there is so much more going on here from past trauma to complex marriage issues, mental health, reality vs. fiction, and the use of technology in today’s courtrooms. Since the film takes place in France, the court proceedings operate very differently than what we’re used to here in the U.S. Cross examination occurs in a less structured manner. The defendant is called to respond to comments made by people on the witness stand while they are still there. Rebuttals occur on both sides of the case, seemingly at random. Also at play during the trial is the use of recordings and videos on large screens. All of this makes for an interesting look at a different type of legal system. Of course, there is the usual aggressive interrogation of Sandra by the prosecution that we’re all too familiar with from many American films. I was reminded of the scene in Kramer vs. Kramer when Meryl Streep’s character is emotionally and physically effected by lawyers during one of the film’s major trial scenes.
Like that 1979 film, this is also a portrait of a marriage under close scrutiny. Much is learned throughout the trial about the competition between the couple (both are writers), infidelities, and feelings of guilt due to an accident years earlier which caused Daniel to lose part of his vision. The film nicely builds to a climactic scene in which Sandra and Samuel, via a flashback of sorts, have one of cinema’s great marriage arguments. The scene is brilliantly constructed and acted, rivaling a related scene in Noah Baumbach’s Oscar-nominated Marriage Story a few years back. Part of this is due to Sandra Huller’s work as Sandra. The way she reacts to accusations made by the character Samuel is beautifully modulated and increasingly intense. It may be the scene (of which there are truly many) that could get Huller an Oscar nomination for Best Actress this year.
Also intriguing here is the courtroom’s discussion of the writings composed by the main characters. A question is raised whether a work of fiction, such as a novel, reflects the psyche of the person writing it. If so, should that be used to implicate a writer on trial? Of course, there are also recreations within the film of the events surrounding Samuel’s death. Are these any more valid to include?
Anatomy of a Fall won the Palme d’Or at this year’s Cannes Film Festival. Some might say it isn’t as adventurous of other such films in the past as it is, after all, about a mystery needing to be solved. Films have been made for a century that attempt to do the same thing (not to mention a myriad of television series.) However, there is something very fresh about the characters, setting, and development of this particular plot that makes it feel fresh, original, and definitely worth-seeing.
Anatomy of a Fall is currently playing in limited release, including the Music Box Theater in Chicago.