The name of the French director and screenwriter Barbe Schroeder is not well known to the general public, but there are several successful films on his account. This job is undoubtedly the best of his career. It has earned great recognition among professional film critics, as evidenced by a very high rating. The film also earned Academy Award nominations in the Best Screenplay and Directing categories, which undoubtedly speaks to quality. However, among ordinary viewers, the reviews are not so unanimous.
The picture is based on real events. British aristocrat – millionaire Klaus von Bülow was accused of attempting to murder his rich wife. The story was shrouded in mystery and caused a public outcry. The film is based on a book by law professor Alan Dershowitz, who defended the entrepreneur during the trial. Together with their students, they will try to understand this mysterious case and justify their client. The film combines elements of biographical cinema, judicial-legal drama and detective, but does not fully correspond to any of the above genres, but rather is a kind of mixture of these trends.
The story underlying the film is very confusing and could become the basis for a steeply twisted cinematic puzzle. But the director goes a different way, primarily focusing on the legal side of the case, although doing it in a very original way. Instead of the usual court hearings, we mostly observe the preparatory work of lawyers. Collecting all the elements of the puzzle in a single picture, the team of specialists is increasingly immersed in the world of a strange aristocrat and his secrets. But even receiving answers, they grow more doubt about the true state of affairs.
The film is completely absent dynamics, it is a slow measured film, where the main bet is made on dialogue. Of course, such a narrative allows you to feel the atmosphere of an aristocratic environment, but at times it brings boredom. The film plays with the viewer, allowing him to put an end to the whole story. This will appeal to some, but will cause rejection of others.
Jeremy Irons received an Academy Award for this role. He really fits perfectly into the image of an arrogant aristocrat, but this is far from his best work in cinema. There were more roles. At the same time, he managed to perfectly show the controversial figure of his character. He firmly insists on his innocence, but we subconsciously feel wrong. Glenn Close plays the role of his wife. It gets a bit of screen time, but in general it keeps its high level. Most of all, I remember Ron Silver, who perfectly acted as the lawyer of the main character. He managed to brilliantly show a professional in his field, but devoid of the cynicism of legal circles.
The underside of fate is an original picture in which several genre trends are interestingly intertwined. The film tries to shed light on real events, but does not provide definitive answers. Immersing in a mysterious atmosphere, and even seasoning it with a mystical shade, the director gives the viewer the opportunity to understand the events.
Looking through the list of Academy Award winners for Best Actor & #39, I came across Mr. Irons. And what you would expect, I was interested in the film and the role that supposedly deserved 2 prestigious awards.
To be honest, I have nothing against Jeremy, he is a brilliant actor, but the film itself completely failed (in my opinion) on all counts. We need to put the writer and the director on a stake and let them reconsider their creation. Where's the dynamic in the plot? Where are the unexpected pop-ups? The predictability of the film is simply off the scale, throughout it. And this is what you call a detective? Weak cast contributed, in particular curly lawyer, who appeared more often in the frame than the main character.
Irons has many good roles and films with his participation, but unfortunately, he received an Oscar for the role of the boring, dull husband of the deceased millionaire.
An investigative film that leaves the viewer to decide for himself where the truth is and where the lie is, based on the novel by New York writer Alan M. Dershowitz. The film was directed by Barbet Schroeder, who has French citizenship, was born in Tehran, his mother is from Germany, and his father is Swiss. He gained fame after the release of the drama “Drunk” with Mickey Rourke and Faye Dunaway in the lead roles.
In his new production of "The Otherside of Destiny," Schroeder summoned two great actors with such powerful talent that he had no right to screw up. Glenn Close, who in the film is more in a static position and has the function of a narrator behind the scenes, won the hearts of the audience with excellent performance in psychological thrillers (" Ragged Blade (1985) and Fatal Attraction (1987)) and a magnificent adaptation of Dangerous Liaisons (1988, receiving an Oscar nomination for Best Actress). At the time of the filming of “Fatherside of Destiny”, Glenn Close was at the height of fame and at the peak of form. The male role was given to Jeremy Irons, a non-one-time Golden Globe, BAFTA and Emmy nominee. These are the people who agreed to play for Barbet Schroeder.
The film tells about the prosecution of Klaus von Bülow (Irons), who is accused of deliberately driving his wife Sunny (Close) to death. A whirlpool of various situations that are thoroughly investigated by several lawyers assembled by the hero Ron Silver. They analyze the words Klaus said explaining a particular moment, one way or another, relating to the death of Sunny. They calculate options, sift through versions. For lovers of working legal dramas, watching such an action is a true pleasure. But it's not only that the film boasts, between the lawyer's investigation, that there are returns to the past, when Sunny was not bedridden yet. We are shown her relationship with her husband, with whom she appears to be on the verge of divorce. Her addiction to drugs. But at the same time, he learns that Klaus was on the full support of his wife and he does not need a divorce at all, because in this way he would lose everything. So who's responsible for Sunny's death? Are there any culprits at all, or is it because of a woman’s physiological problems? Take a look and make your own conclusions.
The film “Inside of Destiny” is shot in the neonoir style with a magnificent aesthetic with a perfectly selected entourage and costumes. The slow pace makes it possible to fully feel the atmosphere of the picture, feel the characters, approve or scold the characters. Barbet Schroeder meekly enters the darkest corners of the von Bühl family, reveals gradually silenced secrets, opens the doors of the cabinet in which the skeletons are stored. The film is largely conversational, standing on monologues, dialogues and voice-over, but does not lose its atmosphere stretched like a string. Time after time, the opening cards in the dark story of Sunny's death - it attracts and captivates. This is not a police detective, this is a film-research and investigation, a detective can feel any viewer.
A film shrouded in mystery, with an average pace is not boring at all. Filmed in a rather lively atmosphere of the neonoir, gives the action a kind of angle to the general plan of the development of the plot, where there are quite unexpected facts that differ little from common sense, but something is wrong in the death of Sunny von Bülow - you feel it subcutaneously.
8 out of 10
P.S.: Three years later, Glenn Close and Jeremy Irons meet in the new film “House of Spirits”, where they play a brother and sister. After him, it can be argued that the duet Close-Irons was one of the strongest in terms of intensity and drama in the early 90s.
What is the perfect crime? This is not only a crime that cannot be solved due to lack of evidence. But it is also a crime that has several versions, each of which has the right to exist, that is, even the victim may be the perpetrator of the crime. One of these mysterious cases is the case of Klaus von Bülow, whose history was shown in the film “The Inside of Fate”.
English aristocrat Klaus von Bülow is accused of attempting to murder his wife Sunny, as a result of which she falls into a deep coma. Klaus faces a huge sentence and hires law professor Dershowitz to avoid prison. Dershowitz and his students will not only have to justify von Bülow, but also find out what really happened on that ill-fated day.
Game of actors In fact, it was very difficult to evaluate the game in this film. “Fatherside of fate” is a detective thriller, i.e. characters rarely embody special images that can become an example to follow. Of course, there were exceptions. One such exception was Jeremy Irons, who played the mysterious Klaus von Bülow, who, although trying to prove his innocence, at the same time seems to be hiding something. Another exception is Glenn Close, who played the role of Sunny, the wife of Klaus, a strange woman and an avid drug addict, whose attitude towards others could cause the incident.
Directorship Director Barbet Schroeder shot “The Inside of Fate” in the style of a mystical detective thriller-drama. And indeed, the plot of the picture is told by Sunny herself, who is in a coma. Throughout the film, even in scenes where the heroine was not present, there was a feeling that she was somewhere near and watching the characters. However, the picture is a phased investigation and study of several versions, each of which is presented in a realistic way. In general, the director keeps the viewer in suspense throughout the film.
Scenario As I’ve said before, the plot of the film is told from the perspective of Sunny, who tries to explain to the audience what caused her to fall into a coma. We learn this story, this case, from the testimony of witnesses and participants in the events, and Sunny only commented on their testimony, not trying to confirm or deny it. Unfortunately, a huge number of versions leave you guessing what really happened, but the complexity of the case, its unusualness and mysticism keeps you on the screen.
The bottom line "The underside of fate" is a very unusual, but very exciting and, above all, beautiful film. Since the film takes place in an aristocratic environment, you can observe the problems, their way of life, all that is hidden from the eyes of the ordinary person. And mysticism attached special importance to the overall atmosphere of the picture.
10 out of 10
A difficult film about a crime and trial, but in fact it is still a family drama.
He is an absolutely left-wing aristocrat with cockroaches in her head, she is a miserable woman sitting on pills, once desirable, and now unnecessary. He married her for money, she married him for love and a desire to take revenge on her ex-husband.
Jeremy Irons and Glen Glose showed good mines in poor play. A huge beautiful house as decorations to decompose what could be called a family. Ron Silver’s great performance as a lawyer was similar to Pacino’s in 90s movies. Silver is an actor of great talent, it is a pity that he left the world so early.
I can say that Schroeder is a very specific director, an amateur. Sometimes he gives something very digestible like "Before and After," and sometimes just crazy "Drunk."
This picture deserves attention, if only because of the play of some of the best actors of modern cinema.
In general,
7 out of 10
for the brilliant performance of the Irons-Glose tandem.
The film is very mediocre. Formally, it is a semi-judicial drama with the lawyer trying to figure out whether the client is actually guilty. There are many such films, but this is characterized by a lack of drama, mixing the image of the central lawyer, accentuating the details of forensic casuistry. In fact, it is not even very interesting whether the client is guilty - the story is painfully uninteresting in itself.
There is a saying that in mediocre cinema there can be no clear acting work. This film definitely refutes the thesis, as Jeremy Irons played brilliantly. The direction and role of this actor are generally known. In this film, he played an aristocrat with honed manners, a restrained neurosthenic with black humor. Plastic, small gestures, the manner of moving, holding a cigarette – technically it is perfect and fans of scripted acting technique should look at it. Irons was impressed - for which the film gets a whole point. Glen Close played mediocrely, the rest of the actors roles are so emotionless and retouched that they objectively had nowhere to turn around.