supervised by the so-called “ juge d ’ instruction ,” visits the actual scene at the chalet and tries to reconstruct the incident as exact as possible , engaging the actual protagonists , in this case , Daniel and Sandra , who are instructed to replay what was happening on the day of Samuel ’ s fall .
Or , the prominent role of the “ Président ”, the presiding judge on a panel of three judges , at the actual trial . Of course , the lawyers engage in verbal fights ( and are allowed to talk over each other !), and Swann Arlaud as Sandra ’ s defense lawyer — who director Justine Triet called “ the sexiest lawyer in the French Alps ”— and Antoine Reinartz as relentless and pushy prosecutor certainly showcase their zealous advocacy . But there is no jury . It is a panel of three judges who examine and evaluate the evidence in the record , guided not only by the presentation of the attorneys , but also the defendant , Sandra , who is not under oath but whose right to silence is obviously limited ( in fact , a refusal to respond will result in a strong inference of guilt – phew !).
Following the so-called “ inquisitorial ” model , meaning a single inquiry into the truth — as opposed to the U . S . adversarial system of two parties presenting different versions of the perceived truth —, the Président alternatively directs her questions to the prosecutor , the defense attorney , the witnesses , and Sandra , who , in turn , is allowed to “ correct ” and comment on any testimony given . Rules of evidence , such as hearsay , basically do not exist . With judges clearly leading the way from beginning to end , this option for the accused to participate and “ self-advocate ” seems to be an extra layer of protection of the presumption of innocence , which is a fundamental principle also in French law . And Sandra does need protection . Weirdly enough , she is forced to testify in French , while her native language is German and her French rudimentary which limits her ability to express herself ( the lack of an interpreter seems to be a stylistic liberty taken by the film maker ). And she also struggles with what to say . Because her marriage to Samuel , as we learn in painful flashbacks , was everything but happy . Failure , guilt , and betrayal resulted in frustration , alienation , even violence . But murder ?
The entire movie seems to be centered around the question of guilt and innocence , but it turns out that finding the answer , why , finding the “ truth ”, is not the most important issue . Instead , Triet challenges our
COMMUNITY perception of reality . Can we be certain that what we see is real ? Can we be certain that what we see is the truth ? Or , even more unsettling , can we be certain that the truth even exists ?
As lawyers , we are constantly searching for facts and evidence , eagerly trying to make our case and convince the other party , the judge , and the jury that what we present is “ the truth .” In “ Anatomy of A Fall ”, the truth does not come easy . Every individual has a different , often opposite perspective of the same experience , and each of these perspectives is valid and “ real ”. Sandra , the German expat who gave up her life to join university lecturer and aspiring writer Samuel in France , despises her husband ’ s self-pity and lack of ambition and seeks satisfaction in sex with women , while Samuel makes Sandra ’ s selfishness and lack of support responsible for his own failure and depression . Add to the mix the tragic incident in which Daniel lost most of his eyesight – and for which Samuel is blamed –, and the lines of guilt and innocence become blurred , our vision of the truth clouded . Ironically , it is Daniel ( beautifully portrayed by Milo Machado-Graner ) who brings back ( some ) clarity . ( If you want to know how , watch the movie .)
The quality of a movie depends greatly on the screenplay , and this film is no exception . The dialogues , whether sparking fireworks or entertaining intellectual debates , are carefully crafted and carry the suspense that stretches from the beginning to the final scenes of the movie . But even more powerful is what is not said . At the end , when we think the mystery has finally been solved , we cannot help but notice a trace of doubt , lingering in our minds as we close the metaphorical file . When asked if Sandra did it , Triet responded : “ I will tell you in 10 years .” Can we hope for a sequel ?
Photo credit : Daniel Cole / Invision / AP
The winner of our hearts , without doubt , is the eightyear-old French Border Collie named Messi ( named after Argentinian soccer superstar Lionel Messi ) who plays the family dog Snoop . Messi won multiple awards for his performance , including the Palm Dog Award at the 2023 Cannes Film Festival .
www . atlantabar . org THE ATLANTA LAWYER 21