Anatomy of a Fall

[Prrambulate]

I just finished watching this. Truly excellent performances, especially from the child actor! And one of the most realistic, agonisingly accurate domestic conflicts I’ve seen unfold on the screen.

Has anyone else seen it? What do you think ‘actually’ happened, or ultimately, does it even matter?

I love this film. - so original somehow and excellent cast. The boy and the dog were wonderful! It was all very atmospheric and the steel band music very powerful. I feel like it’s the kind of film I’ll remember for a long time.

It's an excellent film

You forget you're watching a film you're so drawn into the reality of it

If I'm not mistaken there is a Best Dog Acting award at the Cannes Film Festival, and the dog in this film won the prize (deservedly so). Other nominees were the dog in Aki Kaurismaki's "Fallen Leaves" (lovely dog but very little screen time, nice film though), and the dog in "The Old Oak" by Ken Loach (again a lovely dog but I wouldn't recommend that film if you get sad when bad things happen to dogs.)

I loved this film. The way the marriage was revealed was my favourite aspect of it. Wonderful acting and I loved the juxtaposition of a high drama staple - the courtroom- with the forensic analysis of a relationship.

I've seen some crackers lately: this one, American Fiction, The Holdovers, All of Us Strangers

Anything for cats? Or dolphins?

Didn’t enjoy it. Dh thought it was excellent. Yes a good film but was glad it was over I like feminist films but found watching normal looking people having horrible vicious realistic arguments not my idea of a fun evening.

Really enjoyed American fiction though.

I was pretty underwhelmed by it though the acting was superb. I ultimately didn’t really care about the characters and thought it was too long.

I think an award should go to the cat in the Netflix serial Ripley. They play Luci (just realised that means “light”, which is a recurring theme in the narrative). Luci’s cold accusatory stare at Ripley was brilliant, and I loved their attempt to give him away.

It's sad that France didn't send this as their Oscar selection. It would still have been up against Zone of Interest (which of course Sandra was also in and which beat it to the Bafta) but the French entry The Taste Of Things only made the 15 film shortlist, not top 5.
I did feel for Sandra - she speaks German, English, French and Spanish fluently - but doing all that dialogue in English rather than in her mother tongue/or French which she had offered, is a huge accomplishment in itself. Getting double nominated for the Baftas but beaten in both categories was a great shame.
She was also in a supporting role in Ich bin Dein Mann, which I can heartily recommend for those of you who do not mind subtitles (Dan Stevens speaks fluent German in this, talking of accomplishments).

Watch I'm Your Man | Stream free on Channel 4

She's amazing. Loved Toni Erdman so much.

This was my interpretation too.

On the balance of probability I don't think she did it as it was unlikely he would have fallen like that. But we don't know.

I loved the film and her performance but found the court stuff really strange. So much gossip and insinuation that I don't think would be allowed in a UK court. Is that how they go on in France?! Very odd.

Also the shaven headed Prosecutor looked as unlikely a legal professional as I’ve ever seen. Might be because I’m used to the U.K. system where Barristers wear a wig.

@April25istheperfectdate I listened to a Podcast about why France didn’t submit it to the Oscars in the Best Foreign Language category. It was apparently a very controversial decision. The suggestion is the Commitee who decide which films go forward might have thought it was too complicated for the US panel to understand and so they opted for The Taste.. as a ‘classic’ French film instead with familiar themes such as French gastronomy, romance etc. Such a pity.

I've been thinking about this film a lot since I finished watching it last night and I can't help thinking she was guilty. I think the fight they had the previous day made her worry for their future as a family as he seemed determined to provoke her. When he was playing the music so loud to disrupt her interview, she clearly couldn't just go and ask him to turn it down, it was impossible to continue. I think that said a lot. It was so loud I just find it unbelievable she didn't go and say something to him about it once the interviewer had gone, and then it's easy to believe that turned into another violent fight. She carried her son upstairs at the end with no difficulty, so she was a strong woman! He was blaming her for everything wrong with his life and that was really not true - she was taking in extra work as a translator to make ends meet because he couldn't settle to do anything himself or finish anything. She was sick of supporting him when she got very little back. I think she was fiery and had a temper when pushed, so I can believe she killed him as it had all built up. He seemed too egotistical to kill himself.

I thought it excellent, the child was incredible

And the dog

I too, was blown away by the acting.

Just caught up with this. Absolutely extraordinary film, and DH really loved it too. We are still talking about it several days later.

I think it was filmed in that very realistic style because it wanted to show how messy real life can be.

I definitely don't think she killed him. He was a long term depressive who was trying to come off his meds, he had great guilt over his son's accident, he felt he was a failure as a writer, especially compared with Sandra - the plot twist he had been unable to make anything of after struggling for years, she took and made into a success. In the recording of the argument he ended up beating himself up. At the beginning of the film his wife is emotionally stronger than him, more successful, she's fed up and unhappy because he's brought them back to his home town and it's not working out and costing them money they don't have, now she's sitting downstairs flirting with a young woman, BAM!

I think if she had killed him (and it would not have been easy as he was a big powerful guy) she wouldn't have just left the body lying there for the son to find, and she would have made up some sort of cover story for the police to explain things away.

I think the key to everything is Daniel saying 'I cannot imagine my mother killing my father, but I can imagine him killing himself'. He did lie, but not because he thought she had killed him, but because he was afraid that she might be found guilty anyway because of a lack of clear evidence.

The trial process in France looks awful, utterly brutal.

I think whether she did it or not wasn't the question in the end. It was that line from the boy's court appointed guardian who told him the truth was what he believed. I think the boy decided that he wanted to believe his mum. I think he invented the conversation in the car with his Dad and that helped sway the court.

I can see the attractions in that interpretation, but I just can't see a child of that age making up a conversation like that, particularly given how ambiguous it was. If he wanted to invent something to make people believe his father was suicidal, it would never be as subtle as that.

The number one character trait of Sandra was her honesty and integrity, a whole lot of the the film and her approach to and understanding of the court case is her adherence to the truth. I think the only time she lies is about her bruise. She is brutally honest and as a person is able to take complete responsibility for herself and her life in a way that her husband can't. He struggles to accept his life as a choice he made and externalises the blame to his wife while at the same time taking on more shame and blame than he needs to which then bleeds into everything else.

She did not kill him, he fell or killed himself which is in keeping with the fact that he was always choosing his life for himself, she wasn't forcing anything on him he just couldn't accept responsibility.

I’m glad the more clichéd suggestion wasn’t utilised, often film makers pan away to show the person has got away with it

It was more difficult than that, she said she won but it was hard, it really stayed with me as a film

I thought it was superb! Acting was amazing, Huller is an amazing actress and it's a shame she did not win any ward for the role (which I think she deserved more than Lily Gladstone who although amazing, did not have to carry the whole movie).

I'm late to this thread but I thought the film was amazing. So well written and acted, long (and I usually hate long films) but held my interest throughout. I think Sandra Hüller was phenomenal and the boy was really good too.

I don't think she did it and I don't think the boy made up the story about what his dad said to him on the way to the vets; I don't think he would have been able to lie so convincingly. Of course what made it so fascinating was that her portrayal of the character meant that there was always a niggling doubt. I like that there was ambiguity at the end; I wonder if a tiny bit of doubt would linger for her son and her lawyer/ex too.

I watched it with a friend, and neither of us could be sure whether or not she did it.

But, we both really enjoyed the film, and the discussion continued on the journey home!

Anatomy of a flawed marriage.

Does anyone think the boy did it? Crossed my mind a few times.

I don't think the point of the film really is who did it but more a focus on a marriage falling apart and blame.

The lead actress was excellent

Anatomy of a flawed marriage.

Indeed. Same as Marriage Story.
I always think the same about recordings.
Whilst you might not be able to blame the edit, any recordings without context, without being one of those two people in that dynamic, you can never say for sure that they reflect the relationship properly.
Clearly - whenever there's a recording made like that - in fiction or in real life, it's dysfunction and an unhealthy dynamic but in AOAF Hueller's character does make that point effectively: that one argument in one moment of time doesn't or shouldn't define the relationship in its entirety. We are at our worst when in a row, saying what we know will push the other's buttons or hurt them.
I dread to think what a jury would make of the rows in some of my past relationships. ("Guilty" probably <gavel> ).

I think it was as much about what is justice as anything else. The boy actually gets to decide the outcome, and he has to decide what he wants for himself. If she did kill his father, does he still want her to be his mother? Is that just?

I did really enjoy it, and thought it was very well scripted.