Anatomy of a Fall - Review

Following the early year film festivals as close as I have this year has been a rollercoaster for my expectations, some films delivering, and others being a rollercoaster where the track hasn’t been completed, and I metaphorically crash into the ground and metaphorically die with my non metaphorical expectations. Anatomy of a Fall was one of the last major festival films that I was waiting to see. Obviously it having won the top prize at Cannes, it had some prestigious and likely pretentious shoes to fill. Thankfully, the rollercoaster I was on was only one of emotions, dropping expectations off the ride within the first 10 minutes.

The film pretty much begins with the inciting incident of the film, with Samuel (Samuel Theis) falling to his death outside his snowy house. He is found by his visually impaired son Daniel (Milo Machado Graner). Him and his triumph of a dog, Snoop (Messi) return from a walk to find him lying there, blood pooling at his head. This is only minutes after Sandra (Sandra Hüller) has to stop an interview she is having because of her husband’s loud music.

There is an immediate tension felt in this opening scene, with Sandra sitting down to be interviewed by a literary student, clearly feeling confident and accomplished in herself that she would be interviewed like this. Her poise is shaken when Samuel starts to play an instrumental version of P.I.M.P by 50 Cent upstairs, drowning out the recording of the interview. She is holding back annoyance at this, brushing it off as a regular occurrence. It’s a perfect introduction to their marriage, one we will deeply analyse throughout the film.

From then, we aren’t privy to the details of what happens next, only following Daniel on his walk, and coming back to find his dad lying on the floor.

We’re also introduced to the filmmaking style here, as the camera takes a bird’s eye view of the scene, shown in the posters for the film. So far, we have seen an almost documentary style of presentation, with zooms, focus breathing and shaky camera movement as it walks along or adjusts the angle. This style, along with the cinematic and sleek style, continue throughout the film, most prevalent in the courtroom, where we spend a majority of the film. We spend a lot of the film in the courtroom, poring over the details of the death and the marriage between Sandra and Samuel. Sandra is accused of the murder, with some of the details and motives being questioned throughout the film.

One location cinema can oftentimes feel like a slog to get through, especially with a two and a half hour runtime, however with this dynamic style of camera, blended with the impeccable writing and constant movement of characters, the film feels alive with action.

In particular, the attention paid to ensuring the actors use the space entirely builds tension in a situation that you are constantly changing your opinion on. With Sandra being stuck in one place, the movement relies on Vincent (Swann Arlaud) and The Prosecutor (Antoine Reinartz). Both playing great parts in the story, helping to break down the marriage between Samuel and Sandra.

For me, The Prosecutor is a standout in a film filled with excellent performances. His breakdown of their marriage is so simplistic and one dimensional, obviously to strengthen their case. He glides around the courtroom, with unwavering confidence in his arguments, talking down to the defence and witnesses in his cross examinations. His portrayal was one of the closest to concrete feelings I had throughout the film, growling, snarling and tutting at his accusations, simplifying their relationship.

Sandra Hüller earns every bit of praise she has received for this role, being picture perfect in every line delivery and reaction. There has been a lot of focus put on a particular scene about halfway through the film. I had not and was not prepared for it. It is hard to describe good acting other than getting goosebumps while it's happening. Her poise through the trial and restraint not to over perform a grieving wife who is having intimate details of her personal life and marriage be dissected by those who have no context or nuance for those situations. She holds back outbursts for the sake of understanding what’s at stake. You see her realising the intensity of the situation and watch her hold back from reacting when seeing her son in the pews of the courtroom.

Milo Machado Graner as Daniel is also breathtaking at points, showing a level of maturity as a character that I can only strive for. He is suddenly exposed to a traumatic loss and then further difficult emotions by watching his mother’s love for his father be questioned. There is also an expectation for him to be distraught in his reactions, wailing at the loss of his parent - and potential loss of the other - but I think that his reaction is actually more realistic to how a child of his age would react. He is nowhere near equipped to deal with a situation like this so almost becomes numb. We see glimpses of his feelings through some realisations of revelations revealed through the trail.

There is a particular scene where I was the most stressed I have been in a long time involving Snoop. Both Snoop and Daniel’s performances in these moments are so visceral and emotional. I felt almost along with him, as we learn these things for the first time too.

Snoop side note, he is the best actor in the film. The things this dog does are actually confusingly impressive, and I have decided to begin the Acadogemy Awards in order to give Messi the highest honour in the canine performers world.

Speaking of awards, we could be staring down the barrel at a 50 Cent EGOT after the use of P.I.M.P in this film, being the perfect background beat for the initial tension in this snowy marriage. Other than that fitting needle drop, we don’t get very much music after that, with about five to six pieces of music being played throughout the rest of the film, as far as I remember. The film is confident in the story and acting to carry the emotion of the scene rather than relying on the music. Music can often enhance a beautiful scene, but knowing when and where its needed is also impressive. Just covering my base for the next time I compliment music in a scene.

Justine Triet presents a really complex look at a marriage in the film, flipping a tired stereotype of the mother staying at home and the father being slightly absent for the child. Sandra and Samuel are both writers, with Sandra finding more recent success as Samuel found it difficult to write again after blaming himself for his son’s accident, causing his vision issues. There is a really mature conversation between the couple about guilt and owing time to the other partner in the couple. It is not cut and dry in who is “correct”, I think your outlook would reflect who you have sympathy with. You understand the complexities of their emotions here and throughout, as you hear details of the marriage being picked apart in the courtroom, being used as motive.

This film lives up to the praise its getting, keeping you on edge for this non mysterious mystery. It doesn’t hold back reveals to “viola” at the audience. The story unfolds in a manor that is more concerned with the analysis of the relationship, rather than the big revelations. Emotionally, this felt like a smart choice and even for the lack of wow, I think it is hard to argue that this film is slow. It is so densely packed with things and feelings and moments that I feel like I missed nothing by being in the dark about certain aspects. I appreciate the ambiguity we are given in regards to the actual fall but am glad that the outcome is not the focus. In conclusion, Messi has revolutionised dog acting and Sandra Hüller has revolutionised German housewives in the French Alps.