‘Anatomy Of A Fall’ director Justine Triet on learning new skills after winning Palme d’Or that sparked a ‘mini-revolution’ for women

Justine Triet Anatomy of a fall gave her a unique experience in her 15-year career, including winning the Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival. “I would say the work I’ve been doing since May is work I’ve never done before. It’s a completely new craft,” she says. Anatomy of a fallCo-written with her partner Arthur Harari, the book eschews traditional courtroom drama and explores family relationships as an ambitious, sexually confident writer, played by Sandra Hülser, is tried for the suspicious death of her husband Samuel in their home. home in the French Alps.

DEADLINE: You wrote the role with Sandra Hülser in mind, having worked with her on your previous film. Sibyl. Was there anything you brought to the role that surprised you? A moment you might not have expected?

JUSTINE TRIET: When we wrote, we had Sandra in mind. Even though Arthur and I were very clear that we wanted to avoid certain stylistic tropes associated with genre film, we still had certain reflexes as writers that Sandra’s performance never really erased. for each. Because she had a very interesting paradox that I think exists within herself, also in the way she is as a person and in the kind of honesty and transparency she exhibits. She is an extremely sincere person. She always says exactly what she means. So when you play this one character, a character that’s quite opaque in such a raw way, the way you focused on that transparent opacity really did something that took the character to a new level. I think while it was something that I guided her to do in the way that I guided her, it’s also really something that she brought to the role herself.

More specifically, if I were to give a specific scene, an example: The scene where she cries in the car was one where I was really amazed. Because this is exactly an example of something that is quite annoying about actors. Getting actors to cry can be quite difficult. And the way she did it is hard to experience – her eyes were crying, but there was something else; it’s almost like a child crying. It had an incredibly authentic quality. It was only one day on set where I remember being blown away by the kind of performance I got from her.

DEADLINE: The sound design of this film is crucial to the story. They show us how much the visually impaired Daniel relies on sound, and we as viewers also rely on it to a certain extent. What made you decide, early on in the film, to use the instrumental 50 Cent song “PIMP,” which Samuel repeats at full volume?

SORRY: I distinguish between two different theories of sound and two different types of sound in film. sound was [important] from the beginning. This was always a central concern for us in making this film. The question of the song, the song that is the “PIMP” song, which is obviously the basic standard at this point that is so recognizable to so many people. It can and will eventually be taken to court to be analyzed for its linguistic content and misogyny; it is possible to read into this. It is not that the number itself has no semantic value. But more generally, and I think more importantly, the song generally becomes: the words of the absent, the words of the dead. This is the only direct sound produced by Samuel during his lifetime.

The choice of this type of music was important because it brings this tension; There is aggressive compassion in this and perhaps in Samuel’s whole character. It’s very different and for us much more effective than the kind of aggression you would express through, say, metal music. Or, even more clichéd, through the use of classical music, which of course has been used since the 1990s to stage scenes of violence and torture.

And more broadly, in terms of the sound we hear in the courtroom, and in general the relationship with sound based on a lack of vision, it was a very different story for sound in our eyes. We wanted to create this relationship between sound and the absence of images and make it clear to the audience that in the absence of images, the imagination comes into focus. That is, if any trace of truth remains, it must be filled with judgment and interpretation. And that’s one of the ways to illustrate the point of the film, which is that getting to the truth is very complex.

DEADLINE: Another image we see a lot in the film is that of the dog, who is actually the fourth member of the family. We can’t hear anything from him, but we can almost see what he sees. Can you tell us more about how we can incorporate him into the story?

SORRY: I think the idea of ​​this dog was very much the original core of this film. It was always clear to us that this dog would be treated as an independent point of view. And that his appearance and, I would say, his personality – it’s not quite like that, but that his status as an observer would also somehow provide the link between the different family members. And also the fact that he’s probably the only one who actually saw what happened… That was something we found early on in the process, that the lack of judgment towards the animal was perhaps the closest thing to the complexity and his have the situation.

And on a more selfish note: I really love working with animals. Because of the discomfort they cause me and the way their presence brings me and everyone else back, the work we’re trying to do is absurd. It levels and diminishes the seriousness of our profession. The dog can’t help but look at the camera; In this way, he cannot understand the challenges of this illusion. It’s always a real addition to the set dynamic.

DEADLINE: You are the third woman to win the Palme d’Or. This is a great achievement and also shows how far the industry still has to go to reverse the imbalance of gender exclusion. As a filmmaker, what do you think about the industry and is it evolving the way you want it to?

SORRY: To say that I am honored with this award does not do it justice. This award and the manner in which I would receive it is a mystery to me. It was obviously moving and surreal to receive this award and to hear that I was the third woman to receive it. I was incredibly proud of it. But it is also an extremely worrying statistic. When I was younger, I felt that I didn’t have female role models in the movies and beyond. I had to learn, as I’m sure many of us did, to discover the women behind the men I admired. And to find all the places and ways in which women were constantly present, but just outside of public view and recognition. Today it is being rehabilitated, which is fantastic, but also comes with a lot of social guilt.

Related to this are less interesting and sometimes downright stupid attempts to transmit and restore past history, which can emerge in a kind of virtue signaling. Whether it’s stories we see from men that are so clearly arranged that we find a way to make it the right kind of story that needs to be heard today. Or of women who sometimes just get involved in these stories of power transitions, which to me is just not what collective progress and collective process should be about.

Still, I think this is just the beginning; I’m sure this is the start of the mini-revolution that’s happening. Some of these unfortunate forms of it are exactly what we need to move forward. And when I joined the 50/50 movement, a movement for equality in cinema, it was really just about looking at the numbers. When I saw the numbers after #MeToo – which was the logical conclusion of #MeToo – I was stunned. I realized that I was also complicit in the ignorance of the true extent of women’s absence in this field.

Of course, I dream of a day when these things will no longer be a question. That one’s gender is not discussed in the moments of creation, because I will be allowed to argue for the universal view, just like everyone else, like men today. I believe we will. I think that something is really happening and changing in the countries where I live, where there has been some progress in women’s rights. What we’re seeing now is that people between the ages of 10 and 15, I think, are really growing up with a different sense of something.

So I am very confident that the integration of this new knowledge can soon be taken for granted and that we can really move forward from there.