Anatomy of a Fall (2023) Review

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUXawkH-ONM

THE FOLLOWING REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS OF THE DISCUSSED FILM. READERS DISCRETION IS ADVISED.

If the truth was so easy, everyone would get their hands on it.


PLOT


Anatomy of a Fall or ‘Anatomie d’une chute’ takes place near Grenoble and begins with novelist Sandra Voyter having to reschedule an interview with a student when her husband, Samuel Maleski, plays music loudly in the attic being disruptive. Only after the student drives away does Sandra’s visually impaired 11 year old son Daniel and guide dog Snoop find Samuel dead from an apparent fall. Sandra herself believes the fall to be an accident while her lawyer Vincent suggests suicide since he knows Samuel had an overdose attempt on antidepressants six months prior. When an investigation is open, there is multiple layers of evidence against Sandra due to how it’s been noted her husband had head trauma before the fall, and there is an audio recording of an argument they had the day before that Daniel remembers. She would inducted on homicide and released on bail. When the trial begins a year later, Sandra’s defense team would claim her husband fell from the attic and hit the shed as it happened, while the prosecution suggest Sandra must’ve pushed him after hitting him with a blunt object. When Samuel’s psychiatrist is brought to the stand, Sandra admits she did blame her husband of their son’s blindness because it was his and a babysitter’s tardiness to pick him up from school that led to him getting struck by a motorcycle at the age of four. One flashback shows the perspective of the recorded argument where Samuel called out Sandra for plagiarism, infidelity and accuses her of controlling his life. Cutting back to the trial do we hear their argument get physical, whereas Sandra admits she struck admit but says he was self harming right after. When she also admits to being unfaithful the year before Samuel died, which leads to the prosecutors arguing maybe the day he died happened over jealousy with the interviewer and suspects his death to mirror actions from her latest book, which she protests. With Daniel scheduled to testify in a few days, nobody is allowed to see him to influence his testimony except his court monitor Marge. He asks his mom to leave so he can be alone and the next day, Snoop is found collapsing to aspirin. Marge does help Daniel revive the dog, resulting in the boy to admit he gave it to him intentionally to align with Sandra’s testimony that Samuel vomited as part of his overdose attempt and remembers Snoop collapsed eating his vomit. Upon this explanation does Marge reply that he should decide what’s true for him. On the day of his testimony, Daniel says he can’t imagine his dad being murdered because when taking Snoop to the veterinarian one time, he spoke to him on how it’s important to prepare for losing a loved one because life will still go on, interpreting it now as a suicidal thought. This is enough to get his mom acquitted and they embrace when the trial is over, admitting both were afraid of what would become of her homecoming. The film would end with Sandra lingering of a photo with her and Samuel before falling asleep.


THOUGHTS


I love courtroom dramas because for the most part, it’s a constant chase for the truth until all the facts are in play to make one. Director Justine Triet and cowriter Arthur Harari were aware of this formula and made a bigger spin to it by leaving it all to interpretation, leaving us all guessing on what happened where we couldn’t see it. There was a smart combo of Laurent Sénéchal’s editing and Simon Beaufils’ cinematography because it created that atmosphere that the truth could be found anywhere when not paying attention. With such a feeling that you’re not gonna wear off, you’re gonna wonder how does this stand out from the rest of the excellence of 2023? In my case, I would say because in any situation where nothing is exactly clear after possibilities are acknowledged, the best way to approach it is by taking a leap of faith with judgement since it’ll take more time or never to be certain. If you leave yourself desperately relying on what others say first, then you won’t be pleased with the final result. As long as you remain unbiased, then the end result won’t be as disappointing. This is the case here because the fact we don’t know how Samuel fell or how the remaining argument actually appeared, we can’t guaranteed if he was the true victim some would deem him to be. At the end of the day however, you’re gonna be floored when it’s all over because that’s how intense a trial can be. Sandra Hüller feels untouchable in her Oscar nominated performance as Sandra Voyter because even when some layers are peeled, she’s still just a mom wanting to protect her son from her imperfections, nor does she want him to be alone. If she did do it, then of course she doesn’t want him to know how selfish she is and if she didn’t, then she just doesn’t want him confused with the world around him. Her argument with Samuel Theis as the self loathing Samuel Maleski is an acting lesson because it felt like just a more raw look at how complex relationships are. As you can point out Swann Arlaud makes a loyal friend out of Vincent Renzi who knew how to be professional as Sandra’s attorney and Jehnny Beth knew how to be neutral while still empathetic as Marge, the true victim of this story is young Daniel. Breakout Milo Machado-Graner was incredible portraying the kid as one so confused & observant due to his condition that he put his dog at risk to see if he can back everything he’s learned of his parents. He doesn’t want to lose his mom after already losing his dad, but maturely was willing to have said leap of faith in order to decide for himself what is reality. Although he does find a form of an answer, it doesn’t really change what has happened. The ending of Sandra staring at the photo is the final task for us to leave to interpret, which can either be satisfying of a conclusion that she’s glad the nightmare is over and she can try to pick up the pieces if innocent or she’s relieved the source of her stress is out of the picture if guilty. However one can decide, all we can do is hope one truth exists. In conclusion, Anatomy of a Fall is one of 2023’s many standouts for being a thrilling courtroom drama that leaves you guessing long after the credits have rolled, earning the Bets Picture nomination in the process. If those are the kind of movies you prefer, stop waiting and see this now.