Anatomy Of A Fall Review - A Detailed Study Of A Husband And Wife's Unspoken Strained Relationship

Anatomy Of A Fall Review: Justine Triet's French-English legal drama, Anatomy Of A Fall, is gaining a lot of hype across the globe. Starring Sandra Hüller in the lead role, the film is about a husband and wife's strained relationship that becomes the subject of a trial in court. With every passing hearing, a new detail is revealed, and we learn something more about the couple. We can't choose one side and look at the smartness of the writer and director because they did not show the actual event that happened. The entire legal drama revolves around a death, and we don't know how it happened. That's why the investigation and testimonies become more important. Anatomy of a Fall really cared a lot about explanation and positivity but paid very little attention to the pace and climax.Sandra Hüller (Sandra Voyter), a German writer, is giving an interview to a student, while her husband, Samuel (Samuel Theis), is playing music loudly on the next floor. Due to a distraction, she wraps up the interview and reschedules it somewhere else. Their son, Daniel (Milo Machado Graner), returns from a long walk with his dog Snoop to find his father dead. Sandra calls her lawyer friend, Vincent (Swann Arlaud), and tells him that the "fall" (of her husband) must be an accident. The case goes to the court, and Vincent makes sure that their story is proven with facts, while the prosecution attempts to destroy their theories by exposing several insights from the husband and wife's private conversations. The trial gets complicated when their son, Daniel, gives two different testimonies and then makes a strong one at the end. To know that, you'll have to watch the film.Anatomy Of A Fall isn't extraordinary writing considering the fact that courtroom dramas have been much more thrilling way back in the 1950s. The team attempted a different theme of subtle storytelling through every human character who will simply speak and argue, but there won't be any filmy drama. Yet, there are some characters who go contrary to the main theory, such as the psychiatrist and the interviewer girl. From Sandra's sexuality to her personal satisfaction, every secret is exposed in front of the crowd sitting in the courtroom, and still, there was no emotional attachment. Those leaked audio clips should have concluded the point, but again, they were so vague and misleading. Every accusation was baseless, and the prosecution and defender were both just trying to win the war of words. That's where the film fell flat. However, the detailing in the screenplay and characters pulled it over the safe line.Sandra Hüller has done an amazing job here. It's good to see when the actors really perform well when the film is looking slow; otherwise, there is no saving grace for you from having a nap. Sandra's happiness, sadness, and depression are captured so well by the actress that you really want her to see them in every single frame. Swann Arlaud mostly speaks French and less English, so I felt detached from him because the accent made it difficult for me to convey what he was trying to do. But yes, he was good—good enough to get your attention. There is one scene when we see Milo Machado Graner breaking down in tears and making a loud speech. What a fantastic act that was for a child artist! Flawless Antoine Reinartz plays a prosecutor and literally makes you believe in every word he says. There are a few scenes of Samuel Theis, but that one verbal fight scene with Sandra was superb. Not much of Jehnny Beth, Anne Rotger, Saadia Bentaieb, Camille Rutherford, and Sophie Fillières, but strictly enough.Simon Beaufils handles the camera well, whereas Laurent Sénéchal's editing doesn't hold you enough. 152 minutes are too much for a legal drama with less investigation and more verbal segments. The screenplay was subtle about every character. But I'd like to question whether it was really encouraging for Samuel Maleski's life. We never get to see much of him; we rather get to only hear about him. That's not the way to explore the problems of one of the most vital characters in your story. The child really stunned the judge with one of his comments, but was he really that intelligent when it came to judging his own mother? Such misjudged characteristics seemed problematic to me. Justine Triet's vision for a legal drama can be called brutal as it unfolds many unspoken things between a couple while their handicapped son is listening to all of it. Sandra's personal life is put in the public domain, too, by revealing some objectionable material. One can feel for her because you know that even after winning the case, she may have to walk on the road with some shame as society's eyes will be looking at her all the time. Justine Triet's drama is also about that pain and lifetime loneliness and, therefore, makes its subtlety clear and advanced. Do watch it if you don't mind watching slow burners.