Although it relies on mystery. However, it's easy to predict the ending. You'll watch the movie knowing how it will end, almost. It's a movie that supports women, their ambitions, and their right to succeed.
The movie is about a match between a couple. The wife is a writer who has succeeded in her literary work, while the husband is still trying to find his way and faces failure after failure.
What I wrote in the previous lines is not the original plot of the movie. This is what we learn during the movie. The real story of the movie is about a German wife who lives in an isolated cottage with her French husband in France. They both work as writers and take care of their son, who was injured in an accident that left him blind.
In the first scenes of the movie, we discover the husband's body on the ice. The events continue as the wife is accused of killing her husband and their son becomes the only witness.
The movie is a match in delving into the human psyche of the wife in particular, as we discover her dreams, hopes, and how her life goes, as well as her mistakes. There are also snippets about her husband who suffers from a guilt complex because he believes he played a role in his son's injury. He seeks help from a psychiatrist.
The trial takes up most of the movie, which is over two and a half hours long. However, despite the fact that the movie won an Oscar for Best Screenplay, awarding it the prize was an exaggeration because the screenplay has clear flaws in the way the trial is conducted in French courts.
Throughout the movie, the prosecutor tries to prove that the wife killed her husband, while the defense tries to prove that the husband committed suicide. The screenplay should have addressed important loopholes in the trial that anyone with legal knowledge can easily discover. These include the lack of clarity about the wife's motives for killing her husband and relying solely on a story that the wife wrote in one of her literary books in which she talks about the wife wishing for her husband's death.
There are also flaws in the screenplay in explaining how the husband fell from the window and accusing the wife of pushing him and hitting him with a sharp object. The trial did not address the absence of the murder weapon and their inability to identify it, and how the husband is larger and stronger than the wife who they assumed hit him and pushed him. It seems that the screenwriter has never been in a courtroom before.
The most notable observation about the movie is its length. The movie would have been very good if it was less than two hours long. It seems like a director's cut. Version!! It's a boring extension for no reason.
Although it's a good movie, I'm surprised at all the hype about it despite its flaws."
2 out of 13 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Tell Your Friends