A genuine 2016 court case inspired this critically acclaimed drama from Alice Diop. It concerns a Senegalese woman, Laurence Coly (Guslagie Malanga), on trial in a French court for killing her 15-month-old daughter. She claims she wasn’t in her right mind due to sorcery, and that she’d been cursed by relatives. Literary professor and writer Rama (Kayije Kagame) witnesses the trial, as she intends to frame the events as a modern version of Euripedes’s Medea. But she finds herself deeply affected in the process, due to unnerving similarities between herself and the defendant, concerning her nationality, class, education, romantic life, relationship with her mother, and her own impending motherhood.
Director Alice Diop, usually a documentarian, found herself unable to film the trial of Fabienne Kabou, who was charged with an infant killing crime in 2013, citing the same defence. Instead, Diop fictionalised the story, but her documentary background is evident, often to good effect. Given the limited locations (most of the drama takes place in the courtroom) Diop attempts to diffuse staginess with cinematic verve, perhaps channelling films like 12 Angry Men in the way her angles go from wide, to mid, to close as Laurence’s testimony progresses. The results are often compellingly claustrophobic, but the length of these scenes is perhaps a tough ask for general audiences, whose attention and intellectual rigour are demanded throughout.
So perhaps not one to watch if you’re in the mood for a Gerard Butler film, but there is much to praise in the performances, particularly from Kagame. As her character Rama grapples with her research and watches Pier Paolo Pasolini’s 1969 Medea adaptation, her conflicted hang-ups around motherhood and the trial’s defendant are depicted with subtlety and nuance. Malanga is also excellent, especially in her interactions with defence barrister (Aurélia Petit). There’s also a fine performance from Valérie Dréville as the court president, who interrogates the sorcery defence with composed but crystalline dexterity.
Those expecting clear-cut conclusions will be disappointed. This film essentially asks the audience to act as jury (as is made clear by the defence barrister’s final summing up, delivered directly to camera), so the deliberate ambiguity will frustrate some. Still, it’s certainly a thought-provoking piece, especially concerning how a western court can maintain objectivity when dealing with profound cultural differences about which they are bound to have inherent biases. Cynicism around accusations of sorcery is inevitable, but some of the testimony against Laurence is underpinned with unconscious racism (by her former university professor, for instance). How much the brazen sorcery claim can be dismissed out of hand with secular incredulity, versus how much it can be reframed as a compassionate mental illness defence more palatable to western sensibilities, is a central question with which the narrative grapples.
UK Certificate: 12A
US Certificate: PG-13