Alan in Belfast: Anatomy of a Fall – Did he fall or was he pushed? A jury decides, but so too can the audience. #bff23 (returning to Queen’s Film Theatre from Friday 10 November)

Samuel (Samuel Theis) plunges to his death from the attic window of a snowy chalet. The police identify his wife, Sandra (Sandra Hüller), as their chief suspect, the only person known to be in the house when he fell. The first act of Anatomy of a Fall – the shortest – covers the lead-up to the fall and the discovery of the body by Daniel (Milo Machado-Graner), their blind son, who was out walking the aforementioned dog, Snoop. We then move onto the investigation, with Sandra employing a one-time flame, Vincent (Swann Arlaud), as her lawyer. He tries to prepare her to defend herself: innocence won’t be enough to overcome the case the police will build.

The third and longest act is set in the courtroom. The camera work becomes much more fluid, with single shots focussed on the witness stand the change point of view as the questions swing from prosecutor to defence lawyer. We see only the important parts, but get a real sense of the difference between hoe UK courts operate and the process in a French court (which it feels much more emotional, and the suspect can be interrogated in the middle of questioning a witness).

Anatomy of a Fall revels in complexity. Sandra is originally German, though lived in London before returning to Grenoble. She speaks English at home with her French husband and multi-lingual son as a compromise, so no one gets to use their home tongue. The dialogue – even courtroom scenes – very naturally flicks between languages as characters reach for the best words to express themselves and answer questions.

While the plot is trundling towards finding a resolution to the question of whether Samuel fell on his own or was pushed, the real drama comes from the drip drip revelations about the state of Samuel and Sandra’s relationship. A recording from Samuel’s phone is played to the courtroom and we get to jump back in time to watch all but the crucial disputed final seconds acted out.

Young Daniel and his testimony are being supposedly being protected from any tampering from his mother. Yet the lad, who insists on sitting in court each day, is getting a crash course in many previously unknown elements of his parents’ dysfunction, and he becomes a crucial determinant in the case’s resolution.

Director Justine Triet makes Hüller play Sandra as an intensely unlikeable woman. She interrupts, dismisses, undermines, takes what people say and throws it back in their face rather than internalise their criticism. She lacks honesty. And her twisted ways may be infecting the next generation.

One of the central tenets of Anatomy of a Fall is the question of whether a small number of specific incidents – like those that are delved into in great detail during a court case – can totally misrepresent the wider context of someone’s behaviour and actions. This partly explains why the trial dominates the action.

As the Anatomy of a Fall credits roll, it’s hard to know whether the trial result was just. Like the jury – and son Daniel – each audience member needs to make their own mind up. The inclusion of a dog as a full member of the family ultimately doesn’t compensate for the two and a half run time that felt like two and a half years by the end of Anatomy of a Fall. Is the 151-minute investment in the characters worth it? I’m not sure I learned anything about Sandra in the final three quarters of an hour that hadn’t already been thoroughly hammered out.

Anatomy of a Fall was screened as part of Belfast Film Festival and will be coming back to the Queen’s Film Theatre from Friday 10 November.