Egy zuhanás anatómiája

Sandra Hüller újabb kiváló színészi alakítása, akinek két filmje is találkozott idén a Cannes filmfesztivál versenyszekciójában (a másik a The Zone of Interest). Bár ő a főszereplő, végig nem tudjuk, hogy bűnös-e vagy sem. Arckifejezése és előadásmódja többnyire hűvös, érezzük benne a gyilkost, de teljesen természetesen játssza az ártatlant. Már a szereposztása is tökéletes húzás volt. Egyébként egy dialógusokkal teli, hosszabb játékidővel rendelkező film, melynek része egy tárgyalás is, a tragikus esemény érdekes, eljárás szerinti nyomozással. A nehéz igazságkeresés kétértelműségét tekintve kiváló minőségű rendezés (2023.05.27)

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. (2023.07.06)

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. (2023.10.23)

So a little different crime drama than what we have been taught to know by distribution. It does not move forward through plot shocks or emotional flip-flops. It always speaks to the viewer quietly, impersonally, but never insensitively. It machine-like accurately follows the lines of investigation and trial, and factually questions what we think we know - without ever fully answering what we think we need to know. This way may seem unentertaining and peculiar, but despite its unjustified length, it became more and more endearing to me. (2023.12.05)

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. (2024.02.05)