Given the many award nominations and critical acclaim Anatomy of a Fall has received since its release last year, its many enthusiasts might argue that the suspenseful drama’s 150-minute run time is perfect. But writer-director Justine Triet might have other ideas, whether her editor Laurent Sénéchal’s agrees or not.

“I think I would adore to do a version [that is] three hours and 10 minutes, maybe something like this. But Laurent has not the same feeling,” Triet says with a laugh, with Sénéchal playfully objecting beside her. “He’s totally traumatized by me in this room because [post-production] was very long.”

Sénéchal, who has known and worked with Triet for roughly 15 years, jokes that he would prefer to avoid that scenario. “Please don’t let her come back in the editing room!” he protests.

Triet and Sénéchal’s film, which centers around a woman (Sandra Hüller) who comes under suspicion for her husband’s mysterious death, made its auspicious debut at Cannes all the way back in May, where it took home the festival’s coveted Palme d’Or. The momentum and support behind it has continued to build, resulting in five Oscar nominations, seven BAFTA noms, and 11 César Award nominations.

Here, the Oscar nominees—who are used to speaking French with each other, but switched to English for our sake—talk about the joy of their decade-plus collaboration thus far, how they pulled off the courtroom drama’s crucial and compelling ambiguity, alternate endings, and their reactions to new awards season star Messi the dog. 

Vanity Fair: When did you first meet and what were your impressions?

Laurent Sénéchal: I think it was around 2010, because we edited your documentary.

Justine Triet: Yeah, Shadows in the House [Des ombres dans la maison]. I did a movie in Sao Paulo in Brazil, and Laurent edited it in my house because we had no money.

Sénéchal: I knew [Triet’s partner] Arthur Harari first. I edited short films for him, we were friends from the university and then this is the way I met Justine, and it was already around editing. But since the very beginning it was really interesting because Justine was already breaking all the rules of what we were supposed to do in a documentary. It was like another school for me to work with her and it's still the case.

A guide to Hollywood’s biggest races

On that first project, was there instant chemistry or a sense of fruitful collaboration?

Triet: We worked [well together] really, really quickly. I think there is a famous sentence by Joanne Woodward about acting that I read just a few days ago. “It's like sex. You don't have to you talk about but just do it.” And I think it's the same for editing. You can speak and be the best friend of the world if you don't put your hand in the crap you don't know. I think you can know. I really discovered Laurent in the process of editing the work.

When did you tell Laurent about Anatomy of a Fall?

Triet: On this film, I asked him to read the script very early. It was the first time in our collaboration that I asked for his advice before the shoot, and he gave us a lot of advice. And we worked differently from before, because we asked him to not start working until I finished the shoot.

Sénéchal: I didn't make any assembly or rough cut, because it was not working very well for us previously. Justine [is skilled with directing] acting and editing, and before editing she needs to be choosing really precisely all the takes, the good takes. And it was really hard for her not to have [selected] all the takes yet.

Triet: It could make me nervous sometimes, when I'm not in the mood to choose a take with him. And sometimes I could be very, very desperate in the editing room, but it's also really interesting. It's the only place that you cannot cheat. You have to be humble. You might [think or hope], "Oh, my movie will be so incredible. It'll be massive…" but not in the editing room. In this place, it's the truth moment. We are in front of what we’ve done and it's not a fantasy.

Laurent, when you first read the script, were there scenes that you knew going in were going to be a big challenge? Or anything that changed or evolved from the script to when you started to edit them?

Sénéchal: In fact, what I knew when I read the script was that it was a long movie. And it is a challenge when you have a long story. I also identified that the fight, the argument, because it was a flashback, it was also a very long scene and a very strange scene. At the beginning, I was wondering if it was going to work because it's nobody's point of view at all. Then I saw the material and when we started, it was obvious that it has to be like that. That’s the power of cinema. It can seem weird when you read it, but when you are in front of the actors, the characters, it's so vivid. It was hard to do, but it’s at the heart of the story. This and some details around the boy, how we had to manage the arc of the boy during all the story. That was also my identified challenge before starting the editing.

Was there ever any discussion about having some of those flashback elements earlier, or was that fight always in the same place?

Triet: It was written like this in the writing process. We were obsessed with teasing this scene and [keeping] the moment very precise where it appears and it didn’t change. It was really precise.

Sénéchal: Yes. And it's not a movie where we edited a lot. We redesigned many details of course, because that's what we really like to do. But the main aspects of the movie were really well-scripted. The movie I think is good because it's quite frank, harsh, and with massive long scenes. I think this is where it is a powerful movie. It's not hesitating a lot. We [made deliberate choices like] the fact that we didn't use any score music. I think it was a good choice because if we had divided the argument in pieces, in sections, it would've been another movie. Very nightmare images coming in the head of the boy. We didn't want to do that.

How did you feel about your deadline in finishing the film? Do you feel like you both had the time to finish it exactly how you want it?

Triet: For the first time in my life, I think we had the [right amount of] time. I finished the shoot around April or May, and we had almost one year before Cannes. So it was very comfortable in a way. But the movie was really complicated, because I did a lot of takes and I was a control freak as usual. I had to make some concessions, to drop some things [which] is always very, very tough for directors of course. And Laurent helped me to go through all these crises. This movie was very interesting because I think I've never discussed all as we did on Anatomy about the place of this woman. If she's too tough, if she's too much, or if the husband is sympathetic or not. We had to find a way to love everyone even if they have some flaws, we needed to love them. I remember when we were editing the argument scene, we had many good takes of Sandra and in some of them she is really yelling [almost screaming] and that [was too much], it was a question of balance.

Sénéchal: And what was really interesting were the reactions of the audiences that we invited to see or to think with us about this scene. The reactions tell a lot about who people are. It was really funny to see how this scene was in fact showing your anatomy as a viewer.

Triet: I think I have to give you a secret. When we were in the writing process, I was sure that when the spectator would be confronted with the argument scene, they would [turn against] Sandra. But [when we screen the film] the young generation is always with her. They were like, "Okay, she's right, I'm with her." I travel a lot with this movie and a lot of older men sometimes say, "Oh, she's so difficult. I don't understand why she's so rude with the man." I think it's a question of place and generation.

How did you create and maintain the element of ambiguity?

Triet: I think it's like [having the] touch of a painter. Laurent told me it's like Tetris. If you move this, you have to move that, because it's really a delicate balance.

Sénéchal: Yes. When we changed some slight details in the beginning, you could really see another movie [emerge]. Sometimes we had some derailment of the ambiguity around Sandra. The movie was no longer very interesting when she was becoming too innocent or too guilty, or too manipulative. The main challenge for the editing was this arc of ambiguity for her, how to stay with her, how to be endeared by her with this ambiguity still around her. It was really hard to do.

Triet: Yes, but I have to admit something. At the beginning, we decided with Laurent to put aside all the sophisticated takes and keep all the very documentary takes, when Sandra was… I don’t know how to say in English.

Sénéchal: You're right to say it's hard to describe. My word is that we wanted her to be a bit candid, because the movie could be a thriller around a very tricky woman and we didn't want the takes that could bring the audience to one place or another.

If you were to do a director’s cut, what would be your dream run time?

Triet: I think I would adore to do a version of three hours and ten minutes, maybe something like this. But Laurent has not the same feeling. He's totally traumatized by me in this room because it was very long [post-production].

When we prepared the French DVD, the bonus [features], we met with Laurent and we watched again the final scene in the Chinese restaurant. And I was like, "Okay, I didn't take the best [take] and I would love to change the end of the movie a little for a director's cut." But I'm totally crazy with the editing. If I could spend my life in the editing room, if I could build [an editing room] in my house…

Sénéchal: Please don't let her come back in the editing room! [laughs]

Triet: I think he should [stop working with me] because I'm not very good for his marriage and his tranquility. [laughs]

Can you hint at what you mean with a change to the final scene of the movie? Would it just be a change in tone?

Triet: It's complicated. Sometimes when I'm on set, I ask to do exactly the mood of the scene, but without words. "Okay, do the scene, but without words. The same mood, the same everything, but just with gaze." And we did this in the restaurant and I have to admit that because Sandra is a genius and Swann [Arlaud] was over moved by the end of the shoot, there is a mood, something indescribable in a way. And I knew at this moment that it was something very magical. And for the editor it's a nightmare because I can say, "Okay, we can take this, but maybe take that." And it's a problem, the problem of choice.

Sénéchal: You have here an example of how she works. But not only for the end of this movie, every day. With Justine, we are really trying to create things around good materials, even if it's several takes of the same moment. We are really trying to use what is good before trying to be really efficient with the story itself. The acting is really important. And of course with Sandra, the garbage bin is golden garbage because she can do crazy things, but sometimes those things were creating a manipulative character. We had really good material and Justine is like a mother with all those takes, it's hard to make choices. But it's also very exciting and fascinating to work with her. I have learned a lot about acting and choosing it, paying attention to details, smiles, looks, and gathering things to create something else.

Messi has also become quite the star, how do you feel about all the attention he’s received?

Triet: He’s a new Rin Tin Tin. It's crazy and beautiful because we've chosen this dog as a real character and not just an accessory of humans. So I think it's so beautiful because he has a real gaze in the film.

Sénéchal: He's also a great actor, Messi. I say that as an editor, it was really great to work with him.