Anatomy of a Fall

I’m blown away. I enjoy courtroom dramas but I feel like sometimes they are hit or miss. This was a massive hit. What I love is how little of this film is the incident, it happens so quickly into the film, you feel as if you’re not able to really make a judgement of whether or not she’s innocent as you simply don’t have enough information. This is simply genius, as it places you in the position of being on the jury, long before the trial even begins.

It’s in the aftermath of the incident where you learn about Sandra and her life. The narrative framing of her however is having to care for a grieving son, while also grieving herself, and dealing the constant barrage of integrations from numerous people. Perhaps this is just my read but I think the film place you in quite an obvious position for how you view the situation, but there is enough doubt there to cast over your conclusion.

I love how the film places you in such a position and then enters the trail. The construction of characters and how they are acting in the trial I feel furthers your position on her being innocent or guilty. What I think is genius about this however is how self aware the film is. In the third act there is a speech from Daniel’s supervisor that I feel perfectly encapsulates how the film made you feel.

For quite a chunky movie which is very barebones in plot this flew by. I think it’s edited to perfection. Lingering on shots long enough for you to form opinions, and really sink yourself into the story. Part of the reason the film is so compelling is because of the stellar performances. I mean across the board everyone is just giving their best. Every single performance feels real. Points of the film it really just doesn’t feel like you’re watching a film, it feels like you’re in a court casting your opinion on the situation.

Sandra Hüller is just unreal. Many shots just linger on her face and it’s saying so much and also is incredibly hard to read in the right way. She’s very restrained and composed but it’s hiding something underneath, what that is, I don’t know but I think that’s the point. She’s such an enigma but that’s what makes her so enthralling. Milo Machado-Graner also giving perhaps the greatest child performance ever, I mean he’s just as compelling to watch. Perhaps the greatest performance however was the dog, I have no idea how he did what he did.

An incredibly sharp screenplay, incredible performances and one of the best argument scenes ever. Let down I feel like by some odd camera choices and sloppiness that pulled me out of what was such a tense, satisfying film.

Spoliers

I just want to add a quick read I have on the film. In the first act we’re basically told whether or not she’s innocent is not the point and I don’t think it matters but I just found something so interesting in the last act. When Daniel asks to speak to the court again he presents his dog theory, which is most likely true, but he feels it hasn’t convinced the court. He proceeds to tell a story about how him and his dad were in a car and he basically implied that his dad would kill himself. The film cuts to this conversation however keeps Daniel’s dialogue.

I feel like using the film language this movie set up, this was clearly a lie. We don’t get many flashbacks but when we do they’re Daniel imagining the different scenarios his dad was killed. His flashbacks are fictional as Daniel hasn’t seen either of these scenarios. I feel like this, mixed with it only being Daniel’s dialogue and the fact he could recall it so well implies he was lying.

Further supporting this is when Daniel wakes up to his mum and cradles her and it clearly looks like he’s supporting her. Now this isn’t a question whether or not she’s innocent, I actually think she is, but I find it fascinating that over the course of the case, Daniel has been hardened so much that he feels like he needs to be a protector. It’s deeply sad