<추락의 해부>Although the title appears to be a somewhat abstract and philosophical film, the content is about a very specific and tangible event. This is because it is a story about a man who died after falling from a three-story height, and his wife is framed as a suspect and a tedious court battle ensues. The man’s fall and death are thoroughly dissected. The case of her husband’s death now goes beyond analysis and begins to go back and forth between speculation, prediction, prejudice, and distortion. A woman has no time to mourn over the death of a man. She or she cannot afford to pretend to be sad. The truth is I don’t know. Everyone is trying to talk with only fragments of the truth. The moment every case goes to court, the truth disappears and only legal principles remain. Why is the statement at that time different from the testimony now in court? Why did you make a false statement then? Did you hear that sound before or after leaving the house? The truth is inevitably destroyed in the process of dissecting the case piece by piece. People are also increasingly less interested in the truth. At some point, the truth becomes entertainment.
Famous writer Sandra Poyter (Sandra Wheeler) came from Germany. She meets a French man, Samuel Malesky (Samuel Tay), and they marry, and the two speak English, an intermediate language. They have an 11-year-old son, Daniel (Milo Machado Griner). Daniel permanently lost his eyesight in a car accident when he was four years old. The child lives with the help of a guide dog named Snoop.
The incident happens suddenly. Sandra receives a visit from a young woman (a female student) who admires her writing at her mountain home (which was originally her husband’s vacation home). She wants to interview her Sandra. Sandra treats her women kindly. She says it would have been better if they had met somewhere other than at home, such as in her town of Grou Noble (near Lyon in southeastern France). At that time, music blares from upstairs. The instrumental made from rapper 50 Cent’s song ‘Pimp’ makes conversation difficult. 50 Cent’s original song is filled with misogynistic lyrics (this is being interpreted by some). The woman leaves the house feeling a little puzzled, not only because of the music, but also because of Sandra’s suggestion that they meet again next time. Her son Daniel goes for snowy walks with Snoop, his guide dog for the blind. Sandra felt a little tipsy from her glass or two of wine and went into her own bedroom. Daniel, on his way home, finds his dad dead, having crashed and cracked his head (possibly caved in by something). To be exact, Snoop finds it and Danielle calls her mother Sandra. The police arrive and the case gradually moves towards pointing out Sandra as her killer.
▲<추락의 해부> ⓒGreen Narae Media
Is his wife Sandra the culprit? Of course, she may or may not. After her child lost an eye in an accident, her husband suffered from self-blame, shifting responsibility, and psychological pressure. Naturally, they often fought. Sometimes violence may have been used, but it is unknown whether it led to murder. There are no witnesses. There is no direct evidence. The murder weapon was not found. It is only circumstantial, but evidence of everyday life, especially recording files, was found to support it.
Her husband, Samuel, wanted to become a successful writer like his wife, Sandra. Sandra gets most of the ideas for her novels from everyday life. Samuel recorded their daily lives to make items, and the recordings were stored on his PC USB. The conversation between the two is revealed explicitly. It is revealed how immature Samuel behaved as he confessed his hardships, and how coldly Sandra treated him, as she was her Sandra. Did the couple love each other? She probably didn’t always love like any other couple. Nevertheless, public opinion is not in Sandra’s favor. Her people don’t care if she really killed her husband. As one panelist on a TV debate program said, ‘The setting in which a female writer killed her husband is much more interesting than the setting in which a man committed suicide.’
movie <추락의 해부>At first glance, it pretends to be a mystery thriller or a psychological thriller (in that it shows the bottom of a couple’s relationship), but that’s not the point. Sandra’s shrewd lawyer Vincent (Swann Arlord) tells reporters, “Sandra is innocent because there is no evidence of guilt,” but to Sandra, “It doesn’t matter what is true. Now it’s in the eyes of others (the eyes of the prosecutor).” “You have to look at (this case) with a positive attitude to win (this trial),” he says. As there are concerns that Sandra and her son Daniel, a powerful witness, will kiss each other, even Justice Department inspector general Marju (Jennie Beth) must stay in the house. Marju tells Daniel, ‘When you can’t make a decision because you don’t have the information to judge, you have no choice but to choose one of the two.’ In effect, it is a baby being asked to choose between mom and dad.
Sandra’s private life and life fall apart. It is revealed that she is bisexual, that she had an extramarital affair with a woman other than her husband Samuel, that she brought a story written and discarded by her husband into her novel, and that she was accused of plagiarism and was often criticized by him, etc. . The prosecution is persistently trying to derive a motive for Sandra Poyter’s murder. The law is equal for everyone. It is so sadistic and cruel to the point of being cruel. People increasingly feel pleasure in the performance of sadism carried out by the prosecution. Sandra tries to fight back. Attorney Vincent’s assistance and back-up are effective. Motherhood to protect her son Daniel is also a great driving force. Sandra tells Daniel. You should not become obsessed with a small part of your memory and doubt the entire memory. Sandra experiences a cruel court and says this to her lawyer, Vincent. ‘A blank space must be left blank.’
▲<추락의 해부> ⓒGreen Narae Media
They say that the effort to find out the truth is more important than the truth itself. But that is just words and rhetoric. What is more important is what the effort looks like. How you try to find out is very important. We need to look back and see if we are making an effort to take a fragment, a small piece, or a small part of the incident and expand it to interpret it as a whole. Patiently solve each puzzle one by one, but what may be more important is whether you can sit face to face and do it even if you are the other person you are suspicious of. What this cheeky new female director, Justine Trier, wants to talk about is not whether there is a substantive truth that is being spread out in the face of fiction, but about our attitude toward the truth. this movie <추락의 해부>is a dissection and clinical report of that very attitude.
The sequences in this movie are particularly long. For example, the main scene in this movie is the courtroom sequence. The two main courtroom sequences each run 30 minutes. The reason this movie’s running time is 150 minutes is because these court scenes cannot be left out. (A sequence refers to several scenes coming together to form one episode. Also, the scene is made up of cuts from a wide variety of angles. Author’s note) In the case of such a relatively long sequence, it relies entirely on the actor’s acting skills rather than filming techniques. Should be. An actor’s acting skills depend purely on the director’s directing skills. When the actor’s belief in the work he or she is starring in is the same as that of the director, the work becomes better. Actors must have confidence that the director’s (political) judgments and decisions regarding this work are correct. Otherwise, method acting cannot occur. <추락의 해부>The director, actors, and staff of created the best production in that regard. Cannes did not give this work the Palme d’Or for nothing. This is because the dissection of the truth, our attitude toward the truth, and the way it is done are more desperately important than ever in today’s society.
One of the shocks of this movie is that we thought it was just us. The film shows that France is also a country where prosecutors and courts can distort the entire truth in a strange direction with just one piece of truth. But is this something to be disappointed in, or is this something to be relieved about (it’s the same here and there)? <추락의 해부>will have a lot of resonance in our society. Movies are crossing eras and borders.
▲<추락의 해부> ⓒGreen Narae Media
I would like to subscribe to this article.
+1,000 won added
+10,000 won added
-Add 1,000 won
-Additional 10,000 won
Payment may not proceed smoothly in some Internet environments.
343601-04-082252 [예금주 프레시안협동조합(후원금)]Account transfer is also possible.
