I'm not the one calling it a courtroom drama--that's what the critics picked up on. And I found the courtroom scenes kind of tepid, perhaps because they seemed so far from the American system of jurisprudence (I kept wanting to scream at the screen: Aren't you going to object? That's pure speculation!). I agree about the son's manufactured story, because he was plainly thinking about that all weekend and hence didn't want his mother around. Whether she pushed him or not--I don't know--but for sure I hope she hooked up with her adorable attorney after the snow settled.
I certainly don't think there were "universal truths" to be drawn from this particular marriage; I'm only saying the acted-out argument was the point in the film where I thought it really came to life. And maybe that was the director's aim.
I believe all marriages are power struggles that wax and wane over the years, ideally held together by love but sometimes, as in my parents' union, I wonder if "co-dependence" isn't a more accurate descriptor. One of the best books on the subject is Phyllis Rose's "Parallel Lives," about five Victorian marriages. I keep meaning to reread it. Highly recommended.
Anatomy of a Fall isn't a courtroom drama per se, but Tried brilliantly uses the courtroom structure to draw us from the surface of the "action" to the messy roots below. I did not try to draw universal truths about marriage from the savagely broken one depicted in the film. Judging from my own experience and every novel, history book, essay or article I've ever read that touches on marriage, modern marriage is an ongoing, far from awful balancing act, performed over decades, where power, friendship, sex, love, hate, shared experiences and shared habits of daily life form some kind of goopy glue that holds the couple together where each feels there's more good in it than bad.
By the way, I think Sandra murdered her husband. The kid made up the story about his father's suicidal tendencies because he'd already lost his father and didn't want to lose his mother as well. The final scenes, where Sandra picks up her sleeping boy and and carries him upstairs (demonstrating she is an extremely strong woman capable of pushing her husband out the window), and the way she snuggles up with the dog with a satisfied smile on her face, say it all.
The " schmaltz" sp ? is the nonsense that is postulated to popularize and sell a film to the masses , for maximum profit. ie. Bernstine was a " loving devoted family man", who adored his wife and children, who just happened to have this "little tic": an innocent attachment to other men. ClearLY IT TOOK A TRAGIC TOLL ON HIS WIFE. Caps not intended.
I’m not sure but I think he didn’t mean to kill the dog at all…I’ll think on it..
I'm not the one calling it a courtroom drama--that's what the critics picked up on. And I found the courtroom scenes kind of tepid, perhaps because they seemed so far from the American system of jurisprudence (I kept wanting to scream at the screen: Aren't you going to object? That's pure speculation!). I agree about the son's manufactured story, because he was plainly thinking about that all weekend and hence didn't want his mother around. Whether she pushed him or not--I don't know--but for sure I hope she hooked up with her adorable attorney after the snow settled.
I certainly don't think there were "universal truths" to be drawn from this particular marriage; I'm only saying the acted-out argument was the point in the film where I thought it really came to life. And maybe that was the director's aim.
I believe all marriages are power struggles that wax and wane over the years, ideally held together by love but sometimes, as in my parents' union, I wonder if "co-dependence" isn't a more accurate descriptor. One of the best books on the subject is Phyllis Rose's "Parallel Lives," about five Victorian marriages. I keep meaning to reread it. Highly recommended.
Anatomy of a Fall isn't a courtroom drama per se, but Tried brilliantly uses the courtroom structure to draw us from the surface of the "action" to the messy roots below. I did not try to draw universal truths about marriage from the savagely broken one depicted in the film. Judging from my own experience and every novel, history book, essay or article I've ever read that touches on marriage, modern marriage is an ongoing, far from awful balancing act, performed over decades, where power, friendship, sex, love, hate, shared experiences and shared habits of daily life form some kind of goopy glue that holds the couple together where each feels there's more good in it than bad.
By the way, I think Sandra murdered her husband. The kid made up the story about his father's suicidal tendencies because he'd already lost his father and didn't want to lose his mother as well. The final scenes, where Sandra picks up her sleeping boy and and carries him upstairs (demonstrating she is an extremely strong woman capable of pushing her husband out the window), and the way she snuggles up with the dog with a satisfied smile on her face, say it all.
The " schmaltz" sp ? is the nonsense that is postulated to popularize and sell a film to the masses , for maximum profit. ie. Bernstine was a " loving devoted family man", who adored his wife and children, who just happened to have this "little tic": an innocent attachment to other men. ClearLY IT TOOK A TRAGIC TOLL ON HIS WIFE. Caps not intended.
Sounds delicious this recipe, plan to try it. The film Mastro was also disappointing. Too much "smalsch" on his marriage not enough on him !