Summary

The Acadamy Award-winning film Anatomy of a Fall has been celebrated for its tense dialogue in hectic court drama, begging questions about its accuracy compared to real French courtrooms. French filmmaker Justine Triet co-wrote and directed the film, for which she received the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay. The movie has been celebrated primarily for its writing and for the excellent performances of Sandra Hller and the Anatomy of a Fall cast. Great movies don't need to be entirely accurate to real life, but a film that embraces a candid tone will naturally raise curiosity regarding realism.

Anatomy of a Fall is available to stream on Hulu.

Many of the best movies like Anatomy of a Fall are classic legal dramas like Witness for the Prosecution, which have become ingrained in American culture, defining the mechanics of the cinematic court setting. However, the legal system is obviously different in France, giving Triet's film a unique function that many American audiences wouldn't be familiar with. That unfamiliarity serves the movie's drama, creating a sense of chaos and confusion for Anatomy of a Fall's intensity. As for its accuracy to a French trial, there's a significant amount to break down.

Speaking of the chaos in Anatomy of a Fall, much of the film's potency comes from the disorganized trial conversation. In American legal dramas, it's typical for things to get rowdy and dramatic during a climactic scene or otherwise, with characters raising their voices, lawyers yelling for objections, and judges making threats in order to silence the scene. Those American films have a particularly measured drama, with the conflict remaining mostly static, back-and-forth, until the big outburst scenes. In Anatomy of a Fall, that drama is constant,which is realistic to France's legal system.

In a Vulture interview, Jacqueline Hodgson, a law professor in England, broke down many aspects of the depicted courtroom drama. Anatomy of a Fall may not be based on a real story, but it excels in its authenticity, with very few inaccuracies. One aspect it nails is the open discussion of the court, as opposed to the American legal system, where one person is questioned at a time, and no one is permitted to speak unless directly addressed. There is organization in the film's trial, but it can seem more loose compared to an American trial.

Hodgson compares the two, explaining that the accused/defendant gets to speak out more, even to correct someone when they've made a statement about them. Sandra Hller's character frequently does this in Anatomy of a Fall. Hodgson differentiates the systems' ideologies, contrasting American and French legal systems as adversarial vs truth-seeking, meaning the American system centers more on winning and losing, while France focuses more on discovering information. In that regard, the judges in France are allowed to speak directly to the defendant, as seen in the movie.

The interviewer describes the French courtroom in Anatomy of a Fall as "gladiatorial" due to its rounded head, questioning the legitimacy of the setting. Unlike the square chambers in American courts, where the defendant and prosecutor sit on opposite sides, both facing the judge, the film's court is rounded. Still, some aspects remain consistent, with the judges being at the head of the room and the accused and prosecutor on opposite sides.

Hodgson explains that, like in American courtrooms, the judge is raised to physical and symbolic elevation, presiding over the trial. She explains that the aspect of a lawyer sitting by their client is a North American concept, adding: "In France, the accused will be separated off, and everything goes on around her." She stresses the importance of the rounded architecture and symbolic courtroom composition to the overall process.

Aside from the architecture, the legal attire is a notable aspect of the French courtroom in Anatomy of a Fall. Characters are wearing robes that resemble university graduation attire, which Hodgson explains is something they can throw on over their everyday attire to prepare for the court. Compared to the level of style and presentation that hold a prominent place in American courts in order to sway juries, she explains that French lawyers are often dressed very casually under their robes.

In American legal dramas, the lawyer is almost always the most essential character. From movies like Philadelphia and My Cousin Vinny to TV shows like Better Call Saul, lawyers are depicted as a significant proponent of the courtroom procedure, with their wit and skill often making or breaking cases. However, this plays into Hodgson's description of the "adversarial system," meaning the American system stakes heavily on lawyers winning and losing cases. In France, lawyers don't play as significant of a role.

The defense ultimately relies on Sandra's explanations, which is made more challenging by French not being her native language.

Hodgson explains that in France, "The judge and advocate general are much more important." In Anatomy of a Fall, Sandra's lawyer, Vincent (Swann Arlaud), has a few moments to speak, but the bulk of the trial comes down to Sandra arguing for herself. He helps guide her arguments away from the courtroom, but the defense ultimately relies on Sandra's explanations, which is made more challenging by French not being her native language.

Early in Anatomy of a Fall, a judge visits the house to assess the situation and gather evidence. Again, this is something that would seem atypical to an American audience, as the evaluation of a potential crime scene would be handled by the police. Even more so, Sandra is allowed to go with the judge, providing an explanation from her perspective as they examine the premises. Hodgson explains this is accurate and contributes to the French courtroom ideology of truth-finding.

The judge present in the search isn't the same as in the court, but rather the juge d'instruction, or "pre-trial judge." At the actual court, three different trial judges serve as a panel. Hodgson describes the purpose of Sandra attending the pre-trial judge's examination, saying, "The idea is that you, as the accused person, along with the public prosecutor and the victim, all can feed into that investigation, and both the accused person and the victim can each be represented by a lawyer." Their findings carry significant weight in the trial.

Although Anatomy of a Fall excels in its realism, it's not entirely accurate. Hodgson highlights a few examples. First, she explains that Sandra could have had access to a translator if she preferred to help with her language barrier. However, she adds that using a translator can disrupt the flow, which could be why Sandra decided not to. It's almost certainly why Justine Triet chose not to have one in her film. The other two major inaccuracies revolve around Daniel, Sandra's son, who testifies in favor of his mother in the Anatomy of a Fall ending.

Hodgson explains that having a sitter for Daniel to take care of him while his mother was on trial is not something that the French legal system would be able to afford in real life. Also, she adds that Daniel's climactic testimony was primarily a creative liberty, saying, "Normally, you couldn't sit in on the trial, hear what everybody else says, and then testify." For the most part, Anatomy of a Fall is true to the system, though, like any great film, it takes its freedom for riveting drama.

Sources: Vulture

Anatomy of a Fall is a crime-drama film by director Justine Triet and made its initial debut at the Cannes Film Festival in 2023. Following the death of successful writer Sandra's husband Samuel in the French Alps, she is arrested and accused of murder. With their blind son, Daniel, the only witness to Samuel's death, Sandra must face nearly impossible odds to prove her innocence.

Read the original here:
Are French Courtooms Really Like That? Fact-Checking Anatomy Of A Fall - Screen Rant