Anatomy of a Fall (2023)

[Anela]

 

[StatisticalOutlier]

And?

[Browncoat]

I saw it a couple of months ago.  I can't say I enjoyed it, because it's not an enjoyable movie.  A man is found dead on the ground outside the home.  Was he pushed?  Did he fall?  Did he jump?  It was an interesting journey, and I liked it quite a lot.  It was quite well-written and very well-acted.

[StatisticalOutlier]

I don't remember if they were clear how he ended up on the ground.  I think they weren't, and there are people who don't like that kind of ambiguity.  I'm not one of them.  (I obviously don't care about the resolution if I can't remember it.)

[kiddo82]

I wish I liked this as much as some of the reviewers I follow who I really respect.  I *liked* it in the theater, but it wasn't something that stayed under my skin.  It's a shame France chose not to submit it to the academy for international film though. (A country may only choose one film for consideration.)  I kind of hope it gets a best picture nom just to stick it to them.

 

I think the 

Spoiler

Dog laying next to her at the end was a sign that she didn't do it.  Always trust the dog.

Edited January 24 by kiddo82

[AngieBee1]

Absolutely loved this film. And a much better courtroom film than France's 2022 submission SAINT OMER (though Guslagie Malanda was mesmerizing). Sandra Hüller gave a stellar performance and Milo Machado Graner more than kept up with the adult actors.  I'm hoping it gets a slot in Best Picture like ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT did last year.

[Anela]

13 hours ago, StatisticalOutlier said:

And?

What? It's been nominated for big awards, and someone I follow, said it's her favourite of the year. I started to watch it, but didn't get very far, because I was too tired. I've seen others just add a trailer, so I thought that was okay. 

Edited January 23 by Anela

[kiddo82]

5 hours ago, AngieBee1 said:

Absolutely loved this film. And a much better courtroom film than France's 2022 submission SAINT OMER (though Guslagie Malanda was mesmerizing).

I'm still mad they didn't submit Portrait of a Lady on Fire.  

[Milburn Stone]

The hearing and the trial were so suspenseful. 

[Black Knight]

Agreed. I watched it last Sunday, and promptly re-watched it with my parents who were interested after hearing that I had watched it. It holds up very well on a rewatch. And as an American, for me it was really interesting to see the way a French trial is conducted (albeit probably some liberties taken as is common with depictions of American trials). I particularly like how they can ask questions of the defendant during the examination of another witness. It's a more free-wheeling format and yet in a way feels more efficient despite the potential for it to spiral out of control.

[Scout Finch]

I just finished watching it at home and, yes, it was interesting to see the French judicial system. A few times I interjected with an, "Objection! Calls for speculation." Also, apparently there's no such thing as therapist/patient confidentiality. I like the idea above that the dog snuggling up to her was a sign of her innocence...or maybe she's just the lesser evil than her canine-poisoning kid! Justice for Snoop!

[Milburn Stone]

On 3/2/2024 at 7:14 PM, Black Knight said:

And as an American, for me it was really interesting to see the way a French trial is conducted (albeit probably some liberties taken as is common with depictions of American trials). I particularly like how they can ask questions of the defendant during the examination of another witness. It's a more free-wheeling format and yet in a way feels more efficient despite the potential for it to spiral out of control.

All of this. With the one exception that for me, the near-Kangaroo Court nature of the French judicial system terrified me. Its no-doubt greater efficiency would make me very nervous as a defendant--which is why I was so nervous for Sandra. I wonder, non-rhetorically, if the central tenet of the French justice system is not, as in the U.S., "innocent until proven guilty" but "guilty until proven innocent." It could be. In any case, remind me not to get in trouble in France.

[MaggieG]

If I had to listen to that version of PIMP on loop, I probably would push my husband out of a window too

[SlovakPrincess]

On 3/4/2024 at 9:40 AM, Milburn Stone said:

All of this. With the one exception that for me, the near-Kangaroo Court nature of the French judicial system terrified me. Its no-doubt greater efficiency would make me very nervous as a defendant--which is why I was so nervous for Sandra. I wonder, non-rhetorically, if the central tenet of the French justice system is not, as in the U.S., "innocent until proven guilty" but "guilty until proven innocent." It could be. In any case, remind me not to get in trouble in France.

Seriously, that was giving me so much anxiety to watch.  In the U.S. system, you can't be compelled to testify or answer questions at all if you're a criminal defendant.  And witnesses are only supposed to answer the direct questions posed to them.  I was jumping out of my skin wanting to yell "objection!" when Sandra and the psychiatrist just started arguing with each other and exchanging accusations.  Holy hell.  I would have an aneurysm if my client ever started word vomiting all over the place in court and I couldn't stop them and then it opened up a whole avenue for the prosecutor to question them.  

[heatherchandler]

I thought the movie was really good.  I was waiting for Sandra and the lawyer to hook up.  My husband didn’t like it but he said it was mostly because of the awful version of PIMP blasting through the first half hour.

[aghst]

Seems like the movie left a bit of uncertainty about what really happened.  Seems unlikely that Sandra could hit Samuel with enough force to cause such a head injury unless he allowed it to happen or she snuck up on him.

Also for her to throw him off the balcony?

But the trial delved into their marriage and to a lesser extent, her writing career, to try to explain whether she could have killed him or he committed suicide.

In fact it was litigating the marriage far more than going into the forensic evidence.

Now did the kid have enough guile to try to tilt the verdict towards his preferred outcome, presumably wanting to keep his mother out of prison as opposed to being sent to live with some relatives or even strangers?

I thought he was up to something when he fed all those pills to Snoop but I guess he never wanted the dog to die.  I don’t know that the dog almost dying would be proof that Samuel attempted suicide previously as Sandra attested.

But was there a jury?  I don’t recall seeing shots of jurors but I may have missed it.

Edited June 8 by aghst

[Rickster]

 

 

Now did the kid have enough guile to try to tilt the verdict towards his preferred outcome, presumably wanting to keep his mother out of prison as opposed to being sent to live with some relatives or even strangers?

In the end, I thought this was probably the most intriguing unanswered part of the movie.

I saw this a few months ago. Thought it was OK, like a lot of movies could have been edited down to a tighter story.