After winning the Palme D'Or at this year's Cannes Film Festival, Justine Triet's courtroom drama Anatomy of a Fall has emerged as one of the must-watch films of 2023.

Advertisement

The film stars Sandra Hüller as Sandra, a successful author who is charged with the murder of her husband Samuel after his dead body is found at the foot of their chalet in the Grenoble mountains.

Sandra insists that she is innocent throughout – even as prosecution lawyers paint a picture of a turbulent marriage that was at breaking point – and insists that the death was a suicide and not a murder.

Eventually, it is Sandra and Samuel's son whose evidence the trial hinges on. Read on to have The Anatomy of a Fall ending explained, but be warned that there are major spoilers ahead.

Anatomy of a Fall ending explained: was Sandra innocent or guilty?

Sandra Huller as Sandra in The Anatomy of a Fall
Sandra Huller as Sandra in Anatomy of a Fall.

Sandra has always insisted that the death was suicide, and, during the trial, she explains to the jury that Samuel had tried to take his own life six months previously by deliberately overdosing on aspirin.

More like this

She claims he had been in a depressive state ever since he had accepted blame for an accident that had caused their son Daniel to partially lose his sight, while he had also been dissatisfied with his lack of success as a writer.

However, at certain points during the trial, things are not looking good for Sandra. This is especially the case after a recording is played to the courtroom of a violent argument between her and Samuel the day before his death – which the audience then sees playing out in flashback.

The argument highlights many points of conflict between the pair, including accusations of infidelity on Sandra's part and a claim from Samuel that she had stolen his idea for one of her successful novels, while it also contradicts some evidence previously given by Sandra, especially about how she had got some bruising on her wrist.

Meanwhile, the prosecuting lawyer also reads a passage from her latest (fictional) book that he claims could well mirror her own murderous thought process, especially given her previous novels have included elements taken from her own life.

Eventually, the case hinges on a piece of evidence put forward by Daniel, who reveals that he wants to testify for a second time after the undoubtedly nasty experience of witnessing all his parents' issues play out in public.

The night before he is set to give his testimony, he insists on staying in a different house from his mother, and it soon emerges that this is so he could carry out an experiment.

Daniel has remembered that not long after Samuel's supposed previous suicide attempt, his guide dog Snoop had become sick. And so he has the idea to feed the dog aspirin, finding that this causes him to display the same symptoms as when he was previously sick.

Put together with his recollection that Snoop had smelled of sick on the previous occasion, he concludes that the dog must have fallen ill after eating Samuel's vomit that had contained high quantities of aspirin, therefore proving that the previous suicide attempt really had happened.

Daniel explains this to the jury the next day and also adds a kicker – that on the way to the vet, Samuel had told Daniel to prepare himself for the possibility of the death of a loved one. At the time, he had assumed he was talking about Snoop, but he now realises he was actually talking about himself.

Following this evidence, Sandra is acquitted, and so, legally, she is definitely innocent of the crime – but the audience is never told explicitly whether the version of events that is accepted by the court is definitely what happened, and, indeed, this theme of subjectivity is key to the whole film.

Speaking about this in an interview with The Wrap, writer-director Justine Triet explained that many people have come up to her after seeing the film seeking clarity as to whether Sandra was really innocent or not.

"Well, what can I say? It’s the same thing as in life," she explained. "Who knows the real truth? To me, I think maybe Sandra could be not guilty of murder but responsible for pushing him to commit suicide. Maybe?

"It’s a question of 'What are we all responsible for in our lives?' The film is opening so many other doors. And in a way, I think, well, she lied two times in the movie. So maybe we can cast doubt on her and say, 'Hmm, is it possible she did do it?', but I don’t want to say that."

Anatomy of a Fall is released in UK cinemas on Friday 10th November 2023. Check out more of our Film coverage or visit our TV Guide and Streaming Guide to find out what's on.

Advertisement

Try Radio Times magazine today and get 10 issues for only £10 – subscribe now and celebrate the 60th anniversary of Doctor Who with a special issue of Radio Times. For more from the biggest stars in TV, listen to The Radio Times Podcast.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement