How Snoop Killed Samuel - Anatomy Of A Fall Analysis 

Not sure, because that's pretty standard in conversations involving multiple languages and varying abilities.

I was wondering the same thing! I don't believe the writers would do it accidentally. The only reason I can think of is that this is the moment Vincent decided for himself that Sandra's husband didn't jump, and perhaps wondered for a second if she didn't actually push him, making Vincent fumble his words. But that's just a wild guess.

@@nineteenfortyeight6762 didn't fall accidentally*

@@nineteenfortyeight6762CD’s point though is that the writers only had Vincent slip up like this one time. What was the point? They could’ve had him slip up more, or not at all, but they consciously had him forget an English term exactly once.

The husband was killed by Sandra 's lover, who came to interview her.The only one who knows the truth is the dog.

Yeah Messi and his trainer were awesome!

Don't forget the dog from "The Artist".

hands down

I think Messi was great in this, but my favourite dog performance has to Jed the wolfdog in Carpenter’s The Thing.

1000%

And who hired the hit? :)

@@TheCinemaDetective Maybe the wife. That's why the ending it's her and Snoop

😂❤😂

❤

😂😂

🤣 thanks for watching )

Same! He convinced me. The dog did it.

Snoop has beaten 2 murder cases now

Yes and notice Vincent doesn't know the word for windowsill and has to switch to French indicating confusion! Triet has admitted she deliberately choose when Sandra had to switch from French to English to indicate her emotional state. Maybe Vincent's switch back to his native language is indicating something too... But I can see you don't need further convincing! Thanks for watching!

@@TheCinemaDetective can you explain about Vincent's language swings, im not sure if I understood.

@@icyjaam Firstly, the director Justine Triet has discussed in interviews the meaning behind when Sandra needs to switch from French to English. In the court she can't remember the French word for loudspeaker. There is a reason this was scripted, it was a trick Triet used to signify Sandra's emotional state. When Sandra and Vincent are in the attic Vincent is trying to figure out why Samuel fell. He dismisses the potential for an accidental fall because he thinks the windowsill is too high. But at this moment his English fails him. He can't remember the English word for windowsill. I believe it's the only moment in the film that Vincent's English failed him. And I wonder why was it scripted at this moment? Was Triet trying to signify confusion in Vincent? Sandra's French failing her meant something, so maybe Vincent's English failing him meant something too i.e. maybe he was wrong to dismiss the accidental fall theory because of the height of the windowsill.

It's a theory... I don't think it explains the movie very well or the reason for the ambiguity. My other Anatomy Of A Fall video is a better attempt at that. Thanks for watching!

​@@TheCinemaDetective😂😂

Also, he couldn't sleep at the end ...he felt guilty AF lol

Yeah it fits my idea of the main message of the movie, that human psychology makes our search for truth complicated and error prone, that we are all full of biases that make getting to the truth difficult, and we jump to erroneous conclusions all too fast. We see this in the characters and how the trial has very little actual evidence and is mainly amateur psychology and speculation. If the truth was one of the two main theories it does a disservice to that general theme of the film. As you say it's much more elegant if neither of the main theories are true. I love how she uses our own compulsion to figure out what really happened in the story to illustrate the general message of the movie. Here we all are, amateur detectives, happy to make our minds up on the most flimsy of evidence. Triet has described the court as a kind of delirium, and the court of public opinion, the film's audience, are little better. It's genius! Thanks for watching!

OMG there's even dog in the name of the key song 😳🐕

The Snoop Dogg connection is nuts!!! 🤯

As Vincent says... I don't give a f*ck about what is reality. OK. You need to start seeing yourself the way others are going to perceive you. The trial is not about the truth. Also Justine Triet said in an interview that the court is a kind of delirium. It's supposed to be a place where the truth is revealed but it's where fiction is created. So it fits with the more general themes of the movie if neither of the two offered explanations were the truth. Thanks for watching and commenting!

I totally agree with you. She never seems sure about a suicide. Also when Vincent says in court that Samuel's editor didn't replying his email was a hard hit to his self-steem so it was logical for him to commit suicide, Sandra told him "That was not Samuel." I didn't understand why she said that then but now makes totally sense.

Best comment 😂

Snoop Dogg the rapper was also accused of murder :) Thanks for watching!

I tried hard not to get involved in speculation but it's impossible not too! :) Thanks for watching another video!

Daniel did it as revenge for the accident and because Samuel had hurt his mom the previous day :p

@@TheCinemaDetective i think this theory deserves its own video now 😃

🤣@@boyanaplamenova8325

Oh stop )) My head will explode ) Thank you )

Yes you're right but my assumption is just that the ball lies on the floor at Samuel's feet for some time before he stands on it. Daniel was out walking for about a hour, but I guess it would need to happen pretty soon after they left because the song was still playing on repeat when Samuel was discovered. Yeah that Justine Triet quote doesn't look good for the "Sandra did it" theory. Also, I never believed that she would make Sandra a murderer when she is trying to tell a feminist story with a reversal of stereotypical roles and where in a way Sandra was on trial for being more successful that Samuel. Thanks for watching!

@TheCinemaDetective If you watch the part where the ball falls down the stairs (about 1 min 30 seconds into the film) you can hear that Snoop is playing fetch with Daniel. Snoop picks the ball up in his mouth, we hear Daniel say 'Snoop?!' from upstairs and then Snoop goes back upstairs to give the ball back to Daniel. I.e. it is Daniel who is playing fetch with Snoop. In my opinion. Having said that one could also argue that Daniel is shouting Snoop up for his bath. But I see your point. Samuel could have slipped on the tennis ball. Nevertheless, even if this was the case Snoop would not know that Samuel had slipped on the tennis ball and that as a result Snoop had some part in his death. So I don't think you could accuse Snoop of looking withdrawn or 'guilty'. I think the main communication we get from Snoop is the very last moment when he cuddles up to Sandra. His instincts tell him (and us) that she is not a killer.

No one is saying Snoop had intention of causing the fall. Merely that Snoop dropped the ball by the window, and that resulted in a hazard. No suicide. No murder. A third possibility that no one considers, which is that a ball landed by the window and, later, Samuel stepped on it and lost his balance and fell. Daniel calling to Snoop might have nothing to do with the ball. Daniel might be calling to Snoop for the bath. It could be that no one is playing fetch. Snoop might have dropped the ball down the stairs himself. We do not know who dropped the ball. We do not know why Daniel is calling to Snoop. Fetch? Bath? We only know the ball fell down the stairs. Snoop's name was called. The ball was carried back upstairs. The point is that might have all been an accident.@@joeb5765

@@tuckerplum8085 Yes I agree with you, that's pretty much what I have written in my comment. Although I did edit it so perhaps you saw the earlier version?

@@joeb5765 At some point Justine Triet worked with Messi the dog and his trainer to get him to pose in a certain way after Samuel was discovered. It could be that he was supposed to look sad or it could be she wanted him looking like that for the reasons I explained. My mentioning Snoop's body language is more about questioning the intentions of the director than how I think a real dog would behave in the situation. Let's be clear, I don't think Snoop killed Samuel. I don't think he witnessed anything or has anything to feel guilty about, but I do think the idea that he dropped a ball at Samuel's feet and that's how Samuel fell through the window is more believable than murder or suicide. I actually think the strongest implication for Snoops involvement is when the newsreporter learns of the trial result we are listening to Snoop. For me that's a clear editing decision and the question is why?

I think Samuel thought Sandra was the P.I.M.P that's why he was playing that track ) Thanks for commenting!

Yes but feeling like something makes sense and has been clarified doesn't make it true. Your torment and trauma and your strong desire to find a story you could believe in was the subject that Justine Triet wanted to explore. I think AOAF was about the lengths we'll go to find a narrative that eases our mental discomfort. Check out my other Anatomy of a Fall video "You can't handle the truth" to explore that idea and how it was represented in the film. The real mystery to be solved is not "how did Samuel die" but how our own psychology can leave us blind to the objective truth. Thanks for watching and you're right Messi was fantastic!

I read he did win an award at Cannes. 🖤

Come back and let us know what you think after a rewatch ) Thanks for commenting and subscribing!

@TheCinemaDetective Ooooooh, I can't un-think it... The four-legged culprit is not even on the movie poster! Well played, Justine Triet, very, very well played... And the movie was already a heartbreaking roller-coaster. 💔

My pleasure!

Thanks!

How about "Doubt" please. Was the priest guilty? Hoffman/Streep 2008 THANKS 🙂

Yes this works too and is a good alternative theory for why Snoop features so heavily. I think the main point of the movie is that we are all 'blind' to the truth because if the way our minds work. Triet mentioned in an interview that "Snoop has a gaze" in this movie. Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment!

Snoop probably feel guilty as heck knowing he accidentally involve in the crime scene and the end scene is him kinda apologising to sandra :'(

Well I don't think Snoop would have any idea but maybe the director was trying to say something )) Thanks for watching!

Yes the director wanted us all to be confused and in the shoes of Daniel. Triet is delighted when she hears viewers are undecided or reaching different conclusions, but it wasn't just to torture us, she wants to shine a light on human psychology. When we have a mystery and we cannot figure out the truth from the facts we resort to imaginative, creative, speculation and storytelling, because ours minds hate to in this place of doubt. This rush to find an answer, and how we might twist things to create a coherent narrative might give us something that feels like truth but isn't objectively true. Thanks for watching and commenting!

Ah now that's a fun theory too!

I have a letterboxd account but I only rated like 3 or 4 movies. I find rating movies difficult. I didn't rate AOAF that highly on first watch. I watched it late at night, I was tired, I wanted it to finish faster. The ambiguous ending annoyed me a bit, I wanted answers and I didn't really understand the film. So my initial rating would have been like 6.5 out of 10. Then I watched again, thought about it, understood the meaning behind the film, and my rating would have been 7.5 Then I figured out the Snoop theory and it's probably at least 8 now. From the movie I covered I loved The Holdovers the most. Thanks for commenting!

I'll try! :)

Thanks Logan!

lol just do what he says and you'll be ok ) Did you ever see The Banshees Of Inisherin? There's a border collie in that too ) If I ever get a dog I think I'd like a border collie, so intelligent )

In the same way Daniel wanted resolution, and the jury, and the court of public opinion too. Our strong desire to complete the story, along with our existing biases, can often lead us to the wrong conclusions. I think that was the main point of the movie. That the subjective feeling of truth is not the same as the objective truth. Justine Triet brilliantly uses our own response to the ambiguous ending to make her point, because now we have people certain that Sandra did it, that Samuel jumped, that it was the ball, plus some more wild theories, and there isn't enough genuine evidence to prove any of them. We're too ready to believe in dubious evidence if it supports our interest in resolving a mystery. We find it very hard to live with doubt... so you know... maybe it wasn't Snoop, maybe some of the things I picked out as evidence for this theory were just coincidences ;) Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment!

Yes this is the best alternative explanation for the heavy focus on Snoop.

@@TheCinemaDetective Thank you! 🙂

You're welcome!

I'm not sure how much I really believe it... What I can say is Sandra murdering Samuel and leaving his body there for Daniel to discover doesn't fit because she does seem to care about Daniel. Likewise, Samuel deliberately jumping has the same problem. If he was suicidal he'd go off and do it somewhere quiet where Daniel wouldn't be the one to find him. Both those theories require us to believe they don't care about Daniel very much and I don't see any evidence of that. So for me some form of accidental fall is the most plausible whether it's the ball or some other reason that we can't imagine. Thanks for your comment!

I did see one comment on reddit AFTER I made the video blaming Snoop and the ball. But it was just a brief comment and didn't mention the unfinished flooring, and the sound of Snoop when the verdict was announced etc Thanks!

@@TheCinemaDetective Yours is an excellent and in-depth analysis. The unfinished flooring is one aspect of a bigger metaphor -- the story's central metaphor: an unfinished home -- a home in the making -- a home they're trying to build, a life, family (which often includes dogs), careers, and all the complexities, intricacies, and vicissitudes that go along with building this sort of life. The who-did-it mystery extends the central metaphor when the home and life they're trying to build hits hardship, beginning with Daniel's accident -- after which, their home-life crumbles more and more. And who's to blame? The writers are obviously too sophisticated to resolve such complexity by a facile murder-or-suicide-or-accident solution. And you're absolutely right: there's FAR too much focus on Snoop -- and Daniel -- to be unintentional. The sophistication of the story is the total giveaway to all this. Such sophistication -- both stylistic sophistication and sophistication of storytelling -- and such careful attention to detail would never in such instances leave any aspect accidental. Nothing in this movie is accidental. Also, as anyone who's ever tried her or his hand at writing mystery-stories knows, you never make the solution facile or obvious but keep the audience guessing right up to the very end -- or even after -- and you infuse it as much as humanly possible with a twist of monumental proportions. Of course not every writer is able to pull this off, but this story from the beginning displayed a depth and mastery which made it clear to me from almost right off that the ending and solution would equal the entire story. Which it does.

Thank you!

Sure he wouldn't know but I was more questioning why the director worked with Messi and the trainer to strike that pose and hold the shot for 23 seconds as we discover "he's not breathing". These editing decisions usually have reasons. You could be right... maybe she REALLY wanted us to know that Snoop was sad, but that would seem like a strange emphasis to me. Likewise, when the verdict was announced and the audio of the news reporter cuts and we instead hear Snoop padding about and drinking water maybe Triet just wanted us to know in this pivotal moment that Snoop was thirsty )) Anyway you don't need to buy it if you don't want. It's not provable and just speculation and the main point I wanted to make was that an accidental fall was possible.

Because he's sad waiting for the ball to thrown back 😂

Thanks for watching!

I found that strange too!

lol enjoy your peace of mind... but just because a story might sound plausible doesn't make it true :)

Thanks for watching and commenting!

Justine Triet definitely thinks she knows the answer. She joked she might reveal it after 10 years. Thanks for watching!

It is a legal drama... but I think the best way to view the film is as an exploration of the human psychology of the subjective experience of truth and understanding. How in the absence of facts, even in the courts and especially the French system, we might strive to reach a feeling of truth by speculation, by twisting memories, by employing amateur psychology and so on. This rush to the feeling of truth might make us blind to the objective truth. The meaning of the film is revealed not only on the screen but in our own responses and compulsion to find a believable version of events when the facts alone don't give enough information. Most courts around the world only have "guilty" or "not guilty" verdicts. Which I think reflects an overconfidence in a courts ability to get to the truth. In Scotland we also have a third "not proven" verdict which I think might have been a more suitable verdict in the case of Sandra. Thanks for commenting!

@@TheCinemaDetective Well, if you put it like that it sounds smarter than "Wife gets blamed of dog's murder of husband"

Thanks!

He didn't do it at all... he just might have left a hazard lying around but dogs will be dogs. It was Samuel's responsibility to watch his feet and that window shouldn't open in that style.

Logic can only take us so far. I think the theory is coherent but not proven. We'd really need more facts to get to the truth. A good story doesn't always equal truth, which was sort of the subject of my other AOAF video ) Thanks for watching!

@@TheCinemaDetective Anatomy of fall is not that kind of film which needs to be solved and it may be rewatched with pleasure, unlike some other films loosing its charm after you know the clue. And still it's very comforting to have a theory to complete the story!)

I think you're not remembering correctly. There is an audio recording of a fight that happened the day before the fall. We hear the recording played in court. We see images, presumably from Daniel's imagination, as the audio recording is played. In the audio recording we hear hitting but at that point we are back in the courtroom only listening. Sandra claims she slapped Samuel once and that the sounds were then Samuel hitting his own face, but we only have audio.

You'd better keep on the right side of your Collie ) Or sleep with one eye open ))