Through incredible performances and well-established characters, Justine Triet’s immaculate Palme D’or winner Anatomy of a Fall explores an extreme breaking point of a relationship while raising questions of facts versus narrative and the ability (or disability) to understand other people’s emotions and relationships as an outside party.
Justine Triet’s Anatomy of a Fall follows Sandra, a successful writer, wife of failing writer Vincent, and mother to their blind son Daniel. Under Vincent’s wish, the family recently relocated to a distant mountain cabin in France. After another fight the couple had, while Daniel went out with his dog Snoop to avoid listening to his parents’ shouting, he came back to find his father’s lifeless body lying in the snow.
Did he fall? Has he jumped? Was he pushed? These are the questions Triet leaves open for the viewers to try and decide for themselves, regardless of Sandra’s trial outcome, being the only suspect. The theme of the truth and facts versus narrative, stories and emotions is explored throughout the film both during the trial and in real life and home situations.
The highlight of the film is the incredible casting and acting with Milo Machado Garner as son Daniel, showcasing an incredible performance as the only objective witness. The film could have easily turned into another courtroom drama, but Sandra Hüller portrayal of Sandra as a realistic woman in the harshest sense of the word – she is incredibly strict, not afraid to show the ugly side of married life, and stoic to a fault – which makes her both such a sincere character you can easily identify with, not despite but thanks to, her roughness, and at the same time she leaves room for doubting her innocence. Though the most impressive performance would be by Messi, the dog that portrays Snoop. There was no need to verify this dog has won the Palm Dog, granting Anatomy of a Fall the honor of being the first film ever to win both Palme d’Or and Palm Dog.
When it comes to camerawork, it is traditional for the most part, but at times it is contrastingly “confused” and jittery during the appropriate occurrences when new information is revealed, and it feels as though the cameraman says “wait, what?” and abruptly turns the camera to the new subject at hand like when Vincent’s psychiatrist and Sandra are debating over Vincent’s true nature during trial, as each of them pokes holes in each other’s image of him, the camera is indecisive and can’t decide who to believe.
The usage of the mostly diegetic music through Daniel’s piano playing is used not only to present his inner emotions, but also to show the passage of time as Daniel’s piano skills improve. He uses the piano to try and process his own thoughts playing a single unsettling note during the night before he appears in trial, clearly understanding his testimony will make or break his relationship with his mother.
The film might as well be called “Anatomy of a Relationship”, as Triet implies that trying to decipher a breaking point in a relationship could never truly reveal the complexity of each individual and the elusive qualities of what exists between them. This juxtaposition creates something that could never truly be understood by any outside party – not even those who are closest to them like Daniel, or lawyers, analysts and psychiatrists who do this professionally.
While the movie is undoubtedly great and complex, I have higher expectations of Palme d’Or winners. I expect them to not only be immaculate, but to elevate and push the boundaries of cinematic storytelling, and I don’t feel as if Anatomy is all that (unlike its contender The Zone of Interest).
It unfortunately slightly overstays its welcome with some story bits moving too slowly and don’t add much to the characters, plot or atmosphere, but it doesn’t spoil the experience and I do find myself still thinking about it.
The review was written by Illy Levi and Itamar David Leshman.
One Comment