“Anatomy of a Fall”: The Best Dramatic Film of 2023

A brief review of Justine Triet’s legal drama, nominated for five Academy Awards.

Summary

For the last year, Sandra, her husband Samuel, and their eleven-year-old son Daniel have lived a secluded life in a remote town in the French Alps. Everything changes the day Samuel is found dead in the snow below their chalet.

The solitude of the place, and the strange circumstances of the incident, will make Sandra the main suspect in a presumed murder.

The movie takes us through the investigation and trial, shedding light not only on the particulars of the victim’s death, but also on the conflicts in Sandra and Samuel’s relationship.

Critically Acclaimed

This film has received glowing reviews from both critics and the public, and it’s easy to see why. In a historically bad year for cinema, Anatomy of a Fall shines thanks to Justine Triet’s direction, a careful, interesting, and well-written script, and the magnificent performances of the small cast.

Sandra Hüller has received multiple (and well-deserved) award nominations for her role as a wife accused of a horrible crime. The movie spends a lot of time in the courtroom, where the character has to go through a rollercoaster of emotions every day, as the most personal details of her life are publically exposed and discussed, with the threat of a hard prison sentence, while still having to maintain a semblance of calm and being as composed as possible. Hüller’s performance manages to express that inner turmoil in a subtle and believable way.

But the star of the movie is, without a doubt, Milo Machado Graner, playing Sandra’s son. Young Daniel has to deal with the loss of his father and, possibly, his mother. We see him trying to make sense of everything that’s being revealed in the trial, forcing himself to hear every detail and come to some sort of conclusion.

The doubts about his mother’s innocence are devastating to him, as he realizes he may be the only person capable of helping her. Graner got through a lot of emotionally challenging scenes, capturing the character’s desperation, and making the audience connect with him. I hope to see more of him in future projects.

An Interesting Vision

The script makes sure the audience gets a mostly objective perspective—at least as objective as a public criminal case can get. That seems to be the director’s intention.

The way the camera moves, and the silence that prevails during most of the running time, make us feel that we’re also there, in the courtroom, witnessing the trial and feeling the same tension the characters are experiencing.

In a real-life trial, especially one that has gathered a lot of media attention, people tend to side with one of the parties involved. And this same media, whose job it is to be objective, also picks a favorite, and builds a narrative that sometimes has little to do with the truth.

Choosing a Villain: The Media’s Job

Sandra has to face the exposure of her personal life, and be questioned about her rocky relationship with her late husband, her infidelities, her writing career, and her role as a mother. All this information may or may not be related to Samuel’s death; it doesn’t necessarily make her a murderer, but it leaves us with the impression that she is not a very good person.

On the other hand, everything we’re told about Samuel, presents him as an unsteady individual. His true character and intentions remain a mystery.

I found myself constantly changing my mind throughout the movie, unable to settle on one of the two characters to side with. I didn’t really empathize with anyone except Daniel, who is the main victim of the whole situation.

More Questions Than Answers

I can’t help but find the lack of clear answers a little frustrating. I personally prefer stories to have a clear account of who did what, so I can draw my own conclusions.

The most interesting scene is when a recording, found on Samuel’s computer, is presented in court. We can hear an argument between the couple, shortly before the tragedy. In it, Sandra comes up as a cold-hearted and selfish woman, who does not care about her husband’s feelings, but the lack of context leaves us wondering if Samuel’s accusations are justified. The audio ends in what seems to be a physical fight, but what’s happening is unclear.

Sandra would later explain that most of what can be heard is her husband hitting himself, which initially doesn’t sound convincing.

If Sandra is telling the truth, why is Samuel doing that? Why was he recording the fight? Did he start the fight on purpose so he could record it? And under those circumstances, wouldn’t it be plausible for Samuel to kill himself, and leave everything in place to try to frame his wife as revenge?

And if Sandra is lying, and she is the one violently hitting Samuel, wouldn’t it make sense for her to lose her temper and push his husband out of the window in a moment of fury?

We can only guess which one of these options is correct, or maybe the truth is something else that we didn’t get to grasp.

Innocent or Guilty?

In the end, Sandra is absolved, but we’re not given a clear answer to the main question of the film: Is she innocent? Did Daniel invent a story to save his mom from being charged? Does he actually believe that Sandra is innocent?

In the final minutes of the movie, when Sandra wins and goes back home, I was almost expecting Daniel to look at her dead in the eye, and tell her, “Dad and I never had that conversation.” It would have closed the story with a much darker vibe.

Nonetheless, Anatomy of a Fall’s merits as a production are undeniable, and it makes the list of my favorite films released in 2023.