Regie:
Justine TrietCamera:
Simon BeaufilsActeurs:
Sandra Hüller, Swann Arlaud, Milo Machado Graner, Jehnny Beth, Samuel Theis, Saadia Bentaïeb, Antoine Reinartz, Camille Rutherford, Sophie Fillières (meer)Streaming (1)
Samenvattingen(1)
Sandra (Sandra Hüller), Samuel (Samuel Theis) en hun slechtziende zoon Daniel (Milo Machado Graner) wonen sinds een jaar in een afgelegen châlet in de Franse Alpen. Wanneer Samuel onder verdachte omstandigheden dood wordt aangetroffen, wordt Sandra aangeklaagd. Want was zijn val een noodlottig ongeluk, zelfmord of is hij door zijn echtgenote geduwd? In de rechtszaak die volgt wordt hun relatie tot op de pijnlijkste details ontleedt. (Paradiso Films)
(meer)Recensie (8)
This is your quintessential festival film. A seemingly ordinary plot is shot in a supposedly realistic and inventive way. However, it ends up being incredibly cold, grim, and difficult to engage with. While I understand the hype — having seen a few films like this before — it just didn’t do it for me. 150 minutes of pure cinematic coldness.
()
Sandra Hüller turns in another superb performance in Anatomy of a Fall, one of two films featuring the actress in the competition section at Cannes this year (the other being The Zone of Interest). Though she plays the main character, we remain unaware of whether she is guilty or not throughout the film. Her expression and speech are mostly cold and we sense the murderer in her, but she plays innocent absolutely naturally. Casting her in this role was an excellent move. This long, very dialogue-oriented film also includes a trial with an interesting, procedural investigation of a tragic event. Well directed with ambiguity in the difficult search for the truth. [Cannes FF]
()
Flawless, pure dramatic form with the magnetic Sandra Hüller and a fantastic child actor. The film’s strength flows from the way it takes the central detective mystery from the field of a procedural crime movies to that of a character study with the child protagonist at the center. The post-Cannes hype was enormous, though I had mild reservations about Anatomy of a Fall due to the fact that it is in some respects too cold and professorial.
()
God, I am so pissed!! The worst cinema experience of this year. I accidentally stepped in shit when I preferred this to DiCaprio, as I love courtroom movies (what could possibly go wrong?), but to get my Anatomy and Dissection without anesthetics! I really didn't expect it. Anatomy of a Fall is one of those movies that when it ends, half the theater screams with joy FINALLY!!! and goes to buy champagne and get really drunk that this shit is finally over, because I couldn’t believe it anymore! (I thought it was funny to look around the hall half way through the film and realise that half the people were actually asleep). It terms of craftsmanship, it's a cheap film that looks like it was made by a law student (terrible cinematography, ugly visuals, no film look), it has a crazy 150 miinute running time with a painfully slow pace (I've really never seen a worse courtroom film in my life). Moreover, the whole film evoked for me the Michael Peterson case (The Staircase), but that was a level above in every way. The execution for me is almost repulsive and the trial is absolutely bland (the best performance here is by a dog!), and the biggest kick in the balls comes at the very end where you get no explanation. A murder mystery without revelation, that's what I call a bold move, which makes me wonder for what purpose such a film was made in the first place? I want to turn back time, I want to turn back money, I want to turn back the mood. I'm going to go and watch the French film Guilty immediately to fix my mood (which coincidentally has an identical 85%, but the qualities are completely different). This really sounds like a bad April Fool's joke. I was going crazy with boredom in the cinema like I haven't in a long time. For my part, this is the prototypical boring arthouse drama that I heartily hate. Had I played the movie at home, I would have thrown the TV out the window in a huff! Terrible. 2/10.
()
Justine Triet delivers a superbly written and filmed study of family ties at a moment of the greatest test of trust, but to be honest, it passed me by in a big way. This long, largely procedural drama is unfortunately as cold as the snout of the dog starring in it, and consequently as cold as the mountain setting in which it takes place. It was a creative choice, of course, but all those pivotal dramatic moments that I had to wait a long time for didn't work and didn't interest me at all. Though I somewhat enjoyed the ambiguity of some of the messages, I am still far from enthusiastic as a viewer. [KVIFF 2023]
()
I was quite curious about Anatomy of a Fall due to the positive reviews and its success at all kinds of festivals, and after watching it I can agree that it is definitely a noteworthy film. It skillfully mixes relationship and courtroom drama and thanks to the suspenseful story, in which the pieces of the puzzle are gradually and efficiently put together, it manages to keep the viewer extremely interested for almost the entire duration. Anatomy of a Fall is first and foremost an acting tour-de-force by Sandra Hüller, whose character is incredibly plastic, you don’t really doesn't know which "judgement" (guilty or innocent) to lean towards for most of the time. Among the other performances, the young Daniel and the slick Antoine Reinartz also deserve praise. I would criticise the film for its somewhat tedious conclusion and also the form of the decisive testimony in the case – I guess I was expecting "something more". But if you look at it from a certain point of view, the film can seem ambiguous and open at the end, which can certainly be assessed positively. Either way, Anatomy of a Fall is definitely worth a watch. P. S. (Spoiler alert!) Poor dog!
()
Ordinary, yet chilling. Solid filmmaking but still close to reality. A film that benefits most of all from its "ordinariness" and the fact that it could easily happen, which makes it all the more intense and harrowing. It is Sandra Hüller's brilliant performance and a terrific one-woman show that deserves the most credit for the authenticity of the experience, which rightly earned the film the Palme d'Or. The film goes by like water, for the whole two hours we are practically only in the courtroom and all the scene there are intense. The prosecuting lawyer is a sleazy, pushy thug, the court evidence is nail-biting, the mother-son tension gradually escalates, and the further the plot gets, the more uncertain it makes you and your own theories about the truth. Most of all, I like the impeccable work with the presentation of evidence, the element of the viewer's own interpretation and the conclusion, which each viewer can interpret in his or her own way and which more or less just outlines "what could have happened", but leaves the final picture up to each of us. It's good to see, after a long time, a work that doesn't need excessive CGI and a million-dollar budget to be perfect, but makes do with a clear creative vision and authentic acting. Strong.
()
I'm incredibly happy that my internal assessment agreed with the main jury of this year's Cannes Film Festival, headed by Ruben Östlund (Triangle of Sadness, The Square), and that Anatomy of a Fall won the main prize, the Palme d'Or. I was incredibly surprised by Justine Triet because I found Sibyl, the last film she presented at Cannes, rather mediocre. On the other hand, it was the first time I saw Sandra Hüller and I was immediately attracted to her, her scenes are the best of the film. Anatomy of a Fall jumps to the top of my rating system and I consider it a masterpiece that I will definitely want to see again. Sandra, Samuel and their son Daniel live in the mountains, not far from Grenoble. The opening scene already suggests that Sandra and Samuel's relationship is likely to be strained, and a few minutes later, Samuel is found dead. The investigation into this mysterious death, which basically admits only two theories, and the subsequent trial, leads to a deep analysis of the couple's relationship. Daniel, who, despite his visual impairment, is a key witness, also has to take part in all this. So far, it doesn’t look like an original and innovative story, right? But Justine Triet manages to present this theme seen a thousand times before in a fresh and unusual way. I can say for myself that I loved every minute of the long running time, I wasn't bored for a second and I can't find a single dead spot. A lot of credit goes to all the actors, whose performances are breathtaking. Sandra Hüller is undoubtedly the queen, but Milo Machado Graner is equally fabulous, and I have to give credit to Antoine Reinartz as the prosecutor. The screenplay and the dialogues also deserve credit. The gradual unraveling of the relationship dynamics between Sandra and Samuel, the revelation of their pasts, problems and disputes to help reveal the truth, as well as Daniel's contradiction between his own memories and what he hears in court, which leads to his utter confusion, are absolutely brilliant. The figure of Daniel, tormented by uncertainty and doubt, is of crucial importance for the denouement, and at the same time it is a mirror of the viewers themselves, who also cannot say for sure how it all happened. A very important moment is the dialogue between Daniel and the social worker: When we are in doubt and unsure, we have no choice but to make a decision... and so, in the end, must we. [Festival de Cannes 2023]
()
Reclame