Unconventional Courtroom Dramas: Dissecting the Surprising Endings

Article Summary

Justine Triet's Anatomy of a Fall is a gripping courtroom drama that perfectly embodies the essence of the genre, featuring tense moments, unpredictable witnesses, and a lingering uncertainty surrounding guilt.

Setting itself apart from conventional courtroom dramas, this film presents distinctive elements like idiosyncratic performances and a daring approach that allows uncomfortable moments to unfold naturally, without any overt explanations.

Anatomy of a Fall captivates with its enigmatic and tranquil essence, casting a shadow of uncertainty that envelops the entire film and concludes with a restrained and thought-provoking finale.

Justine Triet's Anatomy of a Fall presents a captivating addition to the genre of courtroom drama cinema. On one hand, this production, centered around a trial to determine the culpability of novelist Sandra Voyter (portrayed by Sandra Huller) in her husband's demise, continually reminds audiences why they are drawn to courtroom dramas. The judges skillfully diffuse tension with a mere string of words like "I'll allow it," the exhilaration of witnessing unexpected witnesses taking the stand, and the gripping ambiguity surrounding the question of guilt - all of these elements are abundantly present. The qualities that made courtroom dramas such as Anatomy of a Murder or Witness for the Prosecution so influential are prominently showcased here.

Anatomy of a Fall

A woman is suspected of her husband's murder, and their blind son faces a moral dilemma as the sole witness.

Release Date: August 23, 2023

Director: Justine Triet

Cast: Sandra Hüller, Swann Arlaud, Antoine Reinartz, Samuel Theis

Genres: Crime, Drama, Thriller

However, Anatomy of a Fall stands out from the usual John Grisham-inspired narratives with its unique elements. These elements include Sandra Hüller's captivating and peculiar lead performance, as well as the daring choice to present an extended flashback of a heated argument between Voyter and her deceased spouse without interpretation, creating an intentionally uncomfortable atmosphere. Nevertheless, the true strengths of Anatomy of a Fall lie in its ambiguous nature and embrace of silence. The entire film is cloaked in uncertainty, heightened by the restrained execution of the story. This restraint is particularly evident in the film's conclusion, which offers a remarkable contrast to the climactic courtroom dramas commonly seen.

How Do Typical Courtroom Dramas End?

Image via NEON

Modern entries in the courtroom drama subgenre often conclude with explosive finales, seemingly designed to reward moviegoers after enduring a plethora of relatively restrained legal proceedings. These grand finales serve as the cinematic dessert following a hearty serving of legal vegetables. Furthermore, mainstream courtroom dramas frequently wrap up with a triumphant resolution for the protagonist, evident in the exuberant celebrations that ensue. Take, for instance, the ending of the 1989 courtroom drama True Believer, starring James Woods and Robert Downey Jr., wherein the wrongly accused murderer Shu Kai Kim (Yuji Okumoto) is finally released from prison. As he steps out of the penitentiary, he is met with a jubilant crowd awaiting him. Downey Jr.'s character delivers a line of exposition, stating, "Looks like you've become a hero to your community!" Alongside a soaring score, this sequence signifies a neat resolution and elevates the former prisoner to a mythical hero.

However, mainstream courtroom dramas sometimes deviate from exuberant celebrations of happiness. In certain cases, they opt for inexplicably action-packed finales, exemplified by the 1988 film Criminal Law. In its final moments, Kevin Bacon's character, Martin Thiel, a violent criminal, unexpectedly arrives at a courthouse armed with a gun and a thirst for violence. He unleashes chaos before ultimately confronting his former lawyer, Ben Chase (Gary Oldman), in the courtroom. Their duel concludes with Chase shooting Thiel, providing a grisly finale complete with physical altercations and gunfire. One may question how this dramatic conclusion aligns with the film's origins as a legal drama. Nevertheless, Criminal Law exemplifies the tendency of typical American courtroom dramas to culminate in grandiose and bombastic spectacles.

Even a seasoned filmmaker like Francis Ford Coppola was not immune to these tendencies in his 1997 film The Rainmaker. The movie not only concluded with the "good guys" triumphing in court, but also saw the main villain being apprehended by the FBI. This ending was a deliberate portrayal of justice prevailing in America, a common theme in courtroom dramas that often emphasize dramatic finales. It is crucial for mainstream viewers to witness unequivocal justice being served – racists, corrupt individuals, abusers, and society's scumbags receiving their just consequences. These endings not only provide catharsis, but also suggest that larger forms of corruption will always be dealt with by institutional powers.

However, not all exaggerated elements in courtroom movies are unfavorable or motivated by malicious intent. For instance, Jack Nicholson's iconic "you can't handle the truth!" line in A Few Good Men is captivating, and My Cousin Vinny's abandonment of subtlety yields hilarious results. Nonetheless, American courtroom dramas tend to gravitate towards theatrical endings, irrespective of whether they align with the bigger picture of the story. This inclination often leads to forced attempts at retaining viewer engagement and neatly resolving gripping dramatic situations. Even Al Pacino, known for his larger-than-life performances, could not elevate the "this whole system is out of order!" speech from the end of And Justice For All to its intended impact (although the film as a whole suffered from excessive bombastic detours). It seems that courtroom dramas are often built upon an insecure creative foundation that believes audiences require a grand finale or risk losing interest. However, such insecurity is not evident in the French film Anatomy of a Fall, especially in its explosive conclusion.

What is the Ending to ‘Anatomy of a Fall’?

Image via NEON

Viewers never witness the court verdict for Sandra in Anatomy of a Fall. Instead, it is revealed when she walks out of the courthouse surrounded by media reporters, indicating her innocence. This deliberate choice focuses the ending on Sandra's real-life experiences rather than legal matters. After the verdict, Sandra and her legal team celebrate at a restaurant. During the meal, she sits next to her close confidante and lawyer, Vincent Renzi, in silence. Sandra admits feeling surprised that she doesn't feel relieved after the verdict. She had hoped that being declared innocent would alleviate her burdens, but she still feels sadness and uncertainty in navigating life. Renzi offers an insight into Sandra's mind by suggesting that perhaps expectations are set too high. Their genuine conversation is captured in an extended single-take without accompanying music, creating an incredibly authentic atmosphere. The momentary awkwardness when Sandra leans in for a kiss with Renzi emphasizes the relatable human emotions portrayed on-screen. Unlike neatly wrapped endings in movies like True Believer or Criminal Law, Sandra's emotional struggles continue despite her legal innocence.

Sandra returns to her snowy home and reunites with her son, Daniel (Milo Machado-Graner). Trier captures this moment in great detail, focusing on Sandra as she navigates her way through the house. As she settles back into her normal life after enduring a long and arduous trial, one can't help but wonder if there will be a sudden revelation or twist. Will Sandra stumble upon an item that proves her guilt or implicates her son in the murder? However, instead of any dramatic developments, we simply witness Sandra cozying up with the family dog, Snoop, on the couch. In Anatomy of a Fall's conclusion, Trier highlights the return to normality, which sets it apart from other courtroom dramas that often end with chaotic and melodramatic scenes.

The hauntingly realistic feel of Sandra's attempts to return home in these scenes is intensified by the minimalist musical landscape. Unlike typical courtroom dramas that use triumphant and reassuring scores, Anatomy of a Fall's conclusion maintains a largely empty sonic landscape, allowing the after-effects of the devastating trial to linger in the air. This departure from the norm contrasts with the opening of Fall, which prominently features 50 Cent's "P.I.M.P." blaring from the soundtrack. With the uncertain future and the complexity of Sandra's internal emotions, a sense of sparseness dominates the closing scenes of Anatomy of a Fall. This departure from the audio norms of typical courtroom dramas exemplifies Justin Trier's quietly subversive filmmaking finesse.

‘Anatomy of a Fall’ Adheres to Reality, Not Courtroom Drama Norms

Image via NEON

While the bombastic endings of courtroom drama movies have their appeal, they often stray from reality. These conclusions provide an escape from the complexities of our justice system, with verdicts that can spark controversy. Serving as a counterbalance to the harsh realities, courtroom dramas tend to portray powerful speeches that leave no doubt about the heroes and definitive justice delivered to vile characters. They provide a sense of closure that real legal cases often struggle to achieve.

Anatomy of a Fall remains deeply connected to the complexities of real life, even in its conclusion. Unlike typical courtroom dramas, there is no triumphant resolution for Sandra and her family after enduring traumatic experiences. Instead, there is a sense of exhaustion and quiet sadness, a lack of pure joy. Justine Trier effectively captures these intricate emotions through subtle portrayals of Sandra's initial actions following her declaration of innocence. While other courtroom movies would opt for dramatic and theatrical endings, Anatomy of a Fall chooses a subdued conclusion, allowing Sandra's conflicting emotions to simmer.

This ending may not align with the expectations of a 1990s studio executive overseeing a typical John Grisham book adaptation. It diverges greatly from the bombastic standards of courtroom drama finales. However, by defying these expectations, Anatomy of a Fall achieves a profoundly realistic and ambiguous closing sequence, maintaining its compelling nature until the credits roll. Audiences will likely be caught off guard by this unique approach to concluding a courtroom drama, but it is precisely what makes the ending of this film a thoughtful triumph.

Editor's P/S

As a Gen Z netizen, I have mixed feelings about the unconventional courtroom dramas. On the one hand, I appreciate the fact that these films are trying to break away from the traditional formula and offer something new and different. On the other hand, I sometimes feel like they go too far in their attempts to be different and end up losing sight of what makes a good courtroom drama in the first place.

I think the most important thing to remember when making a courtroom drama is that it is still a drama. The story needs to be engaging and the characters need to be relatable. If the film gets too caught up in trying to be clever or different, it can easily lose sight of these essential elements.