It is kind of a shame that movies that consist of "lots of talking" are often considered dull. It all comes back to an "art is subjective" mentality, but there is proof that a film with a lot of "talking" can be highly gripping when done well.
This year, we already have Oppenheimer showing us that you can truly make an epic film that is based around a lot of scientific and political discourse along with a deposition...even if there was a bomb explosion during it. Films surrounding depositions or legal cases can often prove to be a tightrope walk between "riveting" and "boring".
A lot of this comes down to these very key factors: the plot, the filmmaker's execution, and the performances.
Over the years, we have gotten films like 12 Angry Men and The Verdict which benefitted greatly from great pacing and character work. The former, in particular, was particularly impressive in how the majority of the film is set within one room and relies solely on the personalities of the men in that room and their opinions on the case they are set to reach a verdict on.
While I wouldn't consider this to necessarily be on the same level as these two films, I would say that Anatomy of a Fall is one of the better courtroom-based dramas I have seen in quite a while.
If you look at Anatomy of a Fall, it is a pretty straightforward story:
A novelist named Sandra (Sandra Huller) is living in a chalet outside of Grenoble, France (right in the middle of the Alps) with her husband Samuel (Samuel Theis), their nearly blind 11-year-old son Daniel (Milo Machado-Graner), and his guide dog Snoop.
After an interview for a publication is interrupted by loud music played from above by Samuel, Sandra cancels on the reporter and suggests they meet in the village sometime soon. Shortly thereafter, Daniel takes Snoop out for a walk only to return to find Samuel on the ground outside the chalet dead with a gaping wound on the side of his head.
Without any real witnesses, Sandra poses that this was an accident but there is a growing suspicion that she pushed him out the window from above.
She enlists the help of her friend Vincent (Swann Arlaud) who just so happens to be a lawyer to help her prove her innocence. The plan is to say that he committed suicide even though Sandra doesn't believe he did so...although little hidden incidents and beliefs from both Sandra and Daniel begin to make the authorities question the validity of Sandra's innocence and the case goes to trial a year after Samuel's death.
With that setup, it doesn't exactly sound like anything overly original. What the film does manage to do to make it effective is that we aren't entirely sure at first if Sandra is innocent because we did not see what actually occurred...and this also isn't exactly anything new. A whodunit courtroom drama is a classic form of entertainment, but it all comes back to the execution as I mentioned earlier.
Justine Triet is a filmmaker that I was not really aware of prior to this film, but I really like what she did with this material. She co-wrote the screenplay with Arthur Harari, who just so happens to be her real-life husband.
The film's first act sort of slowly evolves where we only get fed certain pieces of information about the characters...and the atmosphere amongst the chilly snowy French Alps does make for an aesthetic I very much loved. However, where the film managed to take off even more was once Sandra's case goes to trial.
Watching the process of the French courtroom system was rather fascinating, but also the treatment of Sandra was rather volatile. The prosecutor (Antoine Renartz) has a rather brash and hateful misogynistic energy toward Sandra...but I think a lot of this has to do with Sandra's background.
Sandra, like the actress herself, is German. As a novelist, we learn that she met her French husband Samuel in London, and she became fluent in English while living there. French became her third language, and her son Daniel primarily speaks in French...but there is certainly a sense that those around her almost resent that she'd rather speak in English...even though she considers it a middle ground. The courtroom certainly seems to prefer she stick to French....despite the fact she can articulate herself far better in English.
In a way, this disconnect makes Sandra appear as lot colder of a human being than she actually is...and perhaps she does feel a little unfulfilled. In a way, I almost viewed her as a mild example of Lindy Chamberlain, the lady portrayed by Meryl Streep in A Cry in the Dark who was viewed as being cruel and emotionless following the death of her young child at the mercy of a wild dingo.
I do want to discuss the performances in the film, so this seems like the right time to bring up Sandra Huller.
While not an actress known to the masses, Sandra Huller is quite respected in film circles. She made a splash back in 2006's Requiem but established herself as a force to be reckoned with in 2016's Toni Erdmann.
2023 seems to be her year in a lot of ways, because not only does she have Anatomy of a Fall, she also plays the matriarch in Jonathan Glazer's The Zone of Interest, a film I am very eager to see soon. She has the potential to become a double Oscar nominee this year, too...and for an actress of her caliber, that would be richly deserved.
Huller is a fascinating performer. She is quite strong and sterling in how she appears, but she is absolutely brimming with vulnerability; not to mention she can switch from playing warm to bitter in the blink of an eye.
The Best Actress category this year is a bit of a bloodbath at this point, and the sad truth is that Huller could be left off the list...and I think that would be a shame. While a mostly subtle performance, she gets a couple of great monologues and explosive moments that are truly lovely and masterfully performed.
Swann Arlaud is also a standout as Vincent, her lawyer friend who ends up defending her in court...and honestly, while not a badly written role by any means, this easily could've turned into a rather thankless part. He was able to give the role a lot more weight thanks to his presence.
However, I actually think young Milo Machado-Graner should be in the discussion for awards consideration along with Huller.
I am going to avoid a particular spoiler during this portion of the review, but I will say there is one major plot point moment where his character did something I had extreme issues with and it might really upset people, but despite this, I found him to be a very captivating screen presence and his emotional work was quite lovely for someone of his age. In a just world, he would totally get a Best Supporting Actor nomination. Both he and Huller would make my personal lineup rather handily.
As for the film's Oscar chances in general, Anatomy of a Fall is yet another victim of France's strange submission history for the International Film category.
It has been reported that Triet is viewed by some as a pariah in France for actively protesting against French PM Emmanuel Macron following his repression of Pension Reform...and that this led to her film not getting submitted at the expense of The Taste of Things, a film featuring Oscar winner Juliette Binoche.
I think despite of this, Anatomy of a Fall has enough of a profile that it could still slip into Best Picture, Director, Actress, and Screenplay...but it is still too early to tell if the support will lead that way or not. Unlike some recent foreign films that got nominated, like Drive My Car or Parasite, which built up an insane amount of support following extensive sweeps at regional critics awards, it is unsure how well Anatomy of a Fall will do in that regard.
After Parasite became the first film to win Best Picture that also won the Cannes' Palme d'or in over 60 years, there seems to be a bigger focus on the film that wins this award in the last couple of years.
France was wise to submit Titane for the Oscar after it won the Palme d'or, but that film's extreme nature undoubtedly turned a lot of people off...but last year's winner, Triangle of Sadness, managed to make the Oscar lineup...including a surprise Director nom for Ruben Ostlund.
With that in mind, I do think Anatomy of a Fall stands a good chance of making the Best Picture lineup. It is certainly a lot more accessible than those films.
I have mentioned Triet succeeding well with the film's execution (along with her husband Arthur Harari's script contributions), but I do want to stress that she does an exquisite job with the film's direction. At times, the film takes on a documentary/French New Wave/Cinema Verite style...and even utilizing clips from what would be local news broadcasts since the idea of a novelist being on trial for murder would undoubtedly be a story that would get a lot of media attention. Her placement of the cameras, along with cinematographer Simon Beaufils, makes for some truly wonderful shots...and the use of zoom ins only aided to that documentary feel. You could even compare some of the moments to Succession in that way.
I recently raved about the pacing and editing of Oppenheimer, which was about a half hour longer than Anatomy of a Fall. I do think that Fall could've benefitted from a little trimming here and there...and I do have one quibble I want to make. This is going to go into SPOILER territory, so I will give you a heads up once I finish:
---------
SPOILER ALERT:
Sandra is acquitted of Samuel's death...and as the film progresses, it becomes increasingly clear that she is, indeed, innocent even though Triet and Harari throw us little crumbs that could show that maybe Daniel might know more than he originally let on. However, the ending results left me slightly cold. It didn't feel like there was any kind of grand character arc nor any kind of dramatic shift. I am still uncertain whether or not I like it. I am not saying that I hate it necessarily, because on one hand, it does feel more realistic. It also feels a bit tepid...so perhaps maybe it isn't a thrilling ending, but it feels true-to-life.
Also, on a completely random note - the vile prosecutor seems almost obsessed with talking about Sandra's infidelities as she is revealed to be bisexual...and due to her being a novelist, the court seemingly wants to tie in plot points from her novels as a means to justify that she is capable of murder. I am not bringing them up as issues I had with the plot, but more like little details I found fascinating with how the French courtroom system played out and also just further deepening the relationship that Sandra had with Samuel.
--------
END OF SPOILERS!
As it stands, I think Anatomy of a Fall made for a compelling watch and that its compelling nature came from rather surprising places. The stylistic flourishes weren't exactly grand in nature, but they helped the film feel a little rougher around the edges in the best possible way.
On top of that, you have Sandra Huller giving a wonderful leading performance and a young Milo Machado-Graner giving one of the best child performances I've seen in a film.
Oh yes and it must be said.
When it comes to animals in films, the doggy playing Snoop is practically the new Lassie. Some reviews I have read on Letterboxd say the dog gave the best performance and while they may be a little coy about that statement, the dog is VERY well trained.
And also - who knew that 50 Cent's P.I.M.P. would be so prominently featured in a French film set in the Alps?
RATING FOR ANATOMY OF A FALL:
9/10
No comments:
Post a Comment