Film – Anatomy of a Fall

Much of this film is set in the conduct of a trial for spousal murder in the French inquisitorial (cf common law adversarial) trial procedural mode. In truth, however, it is a film about relationships and their imperfection.

The deceased husband, Samuel Maleski, is a teacher and struggling aspiring author. The accused wife, Sandra Voyter, is a successful author. An argument which ensued the day prior to the fall from their home balcony which killed Samuel – such argument illicitly taped by him – is adduced in evidence at trial and retro-viewed in the film. So much is a pivotal part of the screenplay.

Sitting as the proverbial fly on the wall, the viewer can well appreciate the merits of each side of such spousal argument, going to their perception respectively of the life they lead as a family with all its travails. In effect, they conduct their own trial of the cause that is their marriage, but with the viewer as judge and jury.

Commenting upon such exchange in her evidence at trial, Sandra muses:

Sometimes a couple is a kind of chaos and everybody is lost. Sometimes we fight together and sometimes we fight alone, and sometimes we fight against each other;  that happens.

In consequence of this exchange, Sandra’s attorney, Vincent Renzi, submits to the court – more harshly – apropos of Samuel:

In his final days, this man isn’t facing a war in his marriage. He’s facing his own failures. Sandra Voyter is only guilty of succeeding where her husband failed.

Further, although the trial procedure is very different to that to which Australian criminal lawyers would be accustomed, the sentiment expressed by Sandra – as to her success or failure at her trial – resonates:

It’s just, you know, when you lose, you lose. It’s the worst thing that can happen. And if you win, you…kind of expect some reward…but there isn’t any. It’s just…It’s just over. Maybe sometimes, we expect too much…

The viewer is left in real doubt as to Sandra’s guilt or innocence.

This is an outstanding film. It’s abiding quality is its authenticity: a film set in picturesque Grenoble in alpine Western France, but bereft of beautiful country or city scenes, flash cars, beautiful people, fashionable dress, romance, sexual intimacy or sumptuous food.

To the contrary, the characters and extras are plain looking people in casual dress (even in court), going about the drudgery of their drab lives, including eating what the rest of us would whether at home or out (Chinese food, no less, in one prominent restaurant scene). Even the family home is in a state of chaotic renovation. The media coverage of the trial is shallow and lurid.

The lead character Sandra is played by Sandra Hüller, an accomplished German actor.  Swann Arlaud plays the defence lawyer Vincent, running a defence case theory of suicide by the husband and constantly hounded by the judge and the prosecutor. Milo Machado Graner plays the couple’s visually impaired 11 year old son, Daniel, who engages on his own investigation of his father’s death and gives evidence (twice) at the trial. Without derogating from the quality of other cast members – the writer’s spouse was particularly  impressed by the prosecutor’s performance (played by Antoine Reinartz) – those three lead actors are outstanding in their roles. Even the family dog Snoop is good, and ultimately plays a critical role in the trial outcome.

Anatomy of a Fall’s Messi: The dog who deserves an Oscar

In an apparent appeal to a non-French audience, the lead performers speak often in English to accommodate Hüller’s character Sandra being a German, with diminished fluency in French, who previously lived in the United Kingdom.

The film’s director is the accomplished Justine Triet. Running time is a lengthy 152 minutes.

The writer gives the film a rating of 4.75 (out of 5).

The film was awarded the Palme d’Or at the 2023 Cannes Film Festival, and subsequently Academy Award nominations in the categories of Best Film, Best Actress in a Leading Role, Best Director, Best Film Editing and Best Original Screenplay. It is rated highest in the last category. This review was written prior to the 11 March Oscars’ Award night.*

A trailer to the film may be seen here.

*Postscript: The film was awarded the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay.