logo
An Ordinary Case review – Daniel Auteuil directs and stars in tense Ruth Rendell-ish crime procedural

An Ordinary Case review – Daniel Auteuil directs and stars in tense Ruth Rendell-ish crime procedural

The Guardian8 hours ago

Here is a fictionalised true crime drama, but one that is more stately and sedate than the garish procedural brutality of regular true crime. There is one gruesome crime-scene photo, but otherwise this could really have been based on something by Ruth Rendell. It is co-written and directed by its star Daniel Auteuil and the original French title is Le Fil (The Thread), after an incriminating thread of material found on the corpse – or perhaps it means the thread of logic behind a legal argument, the loose thread which, if pulled sufficiently, might cause the whole thing to collapse.
The action is based on a case recounted by Jean-Yves Moyart, a criminal defence lawyer, who blogged under the name 'Maître Mô' and who died in 2021. Grégory Gadebois plays Nicolas Milik ('Ahmed' in Moyart's blog), a devoted, careworn husband to his alcoholic wife Cécile and caring dad to five children. When Milik is accused of murdering his wife, with a local bar owner apparently an accomplice, principled lawyer Maître Monier (Auteuil) takes the case; passionately convinced of his client's innocence but finding himself in an increasingly tense situation.
An Ordinary Case is, mostly, a rather low-key movie whose incidental details of obsession and crime are oddly underplayed; the same goes for Auteuil's rather detached performance, gliding through scenes in court and at home with his partner and fellow lawyer Maître Annie Debret (Sidse Babett Knudsen). Yet the film snaps into shape after the verdict in the final act and a tense conversation between Monier and Milik has a force that lends a retrospective charge to what has gone before; their final conversation raises the stakes yet further.
This is not exactly a drama of ambiguity, like Justine Triet's Anatomy of a Fall: it is more old-fashioned than that. Perhaps Auteuil needed to give it more energy on both sides of the camera, yet there is a charge in its deferred revelation.
An Ordinary Case is on digital platforms from 7 July.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

British law firm coached universities on how to obtain sweeping protest bans
British law firm coached universities on how to obtain sweeping protest bans

The Guardian

time32 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

British law firm coached universities on how to obtain sweeping protest bans

A law firm that helped a UK university obtain a year-long ban on unauthorised protests, which could lead to students being jailed for up to two years, has quietly coached several others on how to take similar legal action, the Guardian can reveal. Shakespeare Martineau LLP, which represented Cardiff University during proceedings that led to it being granted a sweeping anti-protest injunction this month, promoted the controversial type of court order to universities at a webinar last October, according to documents obtained by the Guardian and Liberty Investigates under the Freedom of Information Act. Cardiff staff and students could now face prison and unlimited fines for holding protests on large stretches of their campus without permission, which must be sought three weeks in advance. It follows conflict between the university and students over a pro-Palestine encampment on campus. Lawyers who argued against the injunction said it was so broad that it potentially covered all unauthorised protest-related activity ranging from industrial action to bake sales – though Cardiff disputes this – while a UN watchdog for protests rights called the move a 'flagrant violation of international human rights law'. When approached for comment, a Shakespeare Martineau spokesperson said this interpretation was 'inaccurate', insisting the injunction related only to 'unlawful encampments'. They reiterated that the order did not not prohibit 'lawful' protest, where the university had given its permission. But two independent legal experts who examined the order's wording agreed that it could apply to other protest activities besides encampments. Other universities that registered for the webinar include Reading, Exeter, Northumbria, Hertfordshire, Birkbeck, Bath Spa and Liverpool John Moores. Spokespeople for these universities variously said their staff commonly attended webinars and attendance did not mean they had adopted or agreed with the measures discussed, while Exeter and Northumbria said their staff had not attended but received slides. Falmouth and Warwick, whose staff were also recorded as having attended, did not respond to requests for comment. Slides from the webinar show Shakespeare Martineau suggested the 'newcomer injunctions' – so called because they can be used 'against persons unknown' and those not involved in protests at the time it was made – like that taken out by Cardiff could represent 'the future' for universities. One attender asked whether the use of injunctions could 'be seen as attempting to curtail [freedom of speech] unlawfully', according to notes provided by a university. The presenter said: 'No I don't see any difficulty in principle with that […] You would of course need to show to the court that the restrictions imposed by an injunction do not interfere with freedom of speech and that you can demonstrate this is a proportionate response.' But the European Legal Support Centre, which has intervened in four university injunction cases, including Cardiff, said the tactic represented a 'chilling precedent for academic institutions', calling the injunctions 'legally complex and financially impractical for affected students to challenge in court'. Gina Romero, the UN special rapporteur for freedom of assembly, said 'profiting from the […] curtailing of human rights is despicable', in comments critical of the law firms' promotion of the tactic to universities. Last week England's Office for Students published guidance due to take effect in August, advising universities against making 'sweeping' protest restrictions. While the move has been welcomed by free speech lawyers, they have cautioned that it will not stop universities applying for injunctions and will need to be tested in court. Twelve-month temporary injunctions were this week month granted to two Cambridge colleges, as well as a temporary injunction at a third. Smita Jamdar, the head of education at Shakespeare Martineau, said it was working with universities to facilitate peaceful protests while dealing with unlawful encampments and trespass. She said: 'Universities are dealing with complex situations on campus every single day. Understandably, many institutions are seeking guidance on how to manage a whole host of situations effectively and safely, while upholding the law and balancing the rights and freedoms of the whole campus community.' A spokesperson for Cardiff University said it remained 'absolutely committed to free speech and to the right to peaceful protest' but had seen 'an escalation in practices that put protesters and the community at risk'. Cardiff's injunction is due to be reviewed in July 2026.

Campaign group Palestine Action to challenge proscription under anti-terror law
Campaign group Palestine Action to challenge proscription under anti-terror law

BreakingNews.ie

time34 minutes ago

  • BreakingNews.ie

Campaign group Palestine Action to challenge proscription under anti-terror law

Campaign group Palestine Action is seeking a legal challenge against the UK government's bid to proscribe the group under anti-terror laws. An urgent hearing was held in the UK High Court on Monday related to an application for judicial review on behalf of one of the founders of the direct action group, Huda Ammori. Advertisement A further hearing will be held on Friday to decide whether the UK government can temporarily be blocked from banning the group, pending a hearing to decide whether Palestine Action can bring the legal challenge. A decision on whether the group will be given the green light to bring the legal challenge will be given at a further hearing expected to be held in the week of July 21st. Supporting statements have also been submitted by Amnesty International, Liberty and European Legal Support Centre over concerns of unlawful misuse of anti-terror measures to criminalise dissent, a spokesperson said. It comes as a draft order was laid before Parliament on Monday to amend the Terrorism Act 2000 to include Palestine Action as a proscribed organisation, making membership and support for the direct action group illegal. Advertisement If approved, it would become a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. UK home secretary Yvette Cooper unveiled the intention to ban the group on June 23 (James Manning/PA) Commenting on the hearing, Ms Ammori said: 'I have been left with no choice but to request this urgent hearing and to seek either an injunction or other form of interim relief because of the Home Secretary's decision to try to steamroll this through Parliament immediately, without proper opportunity for MPs and Peers to debate and scrutinise the proposal, or for legal and human rights experts and civil society organisations to make representations, or for those of us who would be denied fundamental rights as a result and criminalised as 'terrorists' overnight, including the many thousands of people who support Palestine Action.' The UK government's move comes after two planes were vandalised at RAF Brize Norton on June 20th in an action claimed by Palestine Action. Five people have since been arrested on suspicion of a terror offence in relation to the incident. Advertisement Unveiling the intention to ban the group following the incident on June 23rd, UK home secretary Yvette Cooper said it was the latest in a 'long history of unacceptable criminal damage committed by Palestine Action'. The group has staged a series of demonstrations in recent months, including spraying the London offices of Allianz Insurance with red paint over its alleged links to Israeli defence company Elbit, and vandalising US president Donald Trump's Turnberry golf course in South Ayrshire. Its website states the group uses disruptive tactics to target 'corporate enablers of the Israeli military-industrial complex' and seeks to make it 'impossible for these companies to profit from the oppression of Palestinians'. Ms Ammori added that causing disruption 'is not terrorism', while Ms Cooper has said proscribing the group is a 'legitimate response to the threat posed' by Palestine Action. Advertisement The home secretary has the power to proscribe an organisation under the Terrorism Act of 2000 if she believes it is 'concerned in terrorism'. Some 81 organisations have been proscribed under the 2000 Act, including Islamist terrorist groups such as Hamas and al-Qaida, far-right groups such as National Action, and Russian private military company the Wagner Group.

Love Island spoilers: The heart rate challenge is back - and Helena leaves the boys reeling with VERY raunchy trick
Love Island spoilers: The heart rate challenge is back - and Helena leaves the boys reeling with VERY raunchy trick

Daily Mail​

time38 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Love Island spoilers: The heart rate challenge is back - and Helena leaves the boys reeling with VERY raunchy trick

The iconic heart rate challenge is set to return to Love Island and Helena leaves the boys reeling with a very raunchy trick. In scenes due to air on Monday's episode of the ITV reality show, Shakira receives a text message announcing a new challenge for the villa. She read: 'Islanders, it's time to get each others' pulses racing in tonight's Boys vs Girls challenge. #HeartthrobMode #BootyandBeats'. The girls go first, with Toni leading the way, and attempt to raise the boys' heart rates with saucy performances. Alima's heart-racing entrance stuns the men while Emily dresses like an angel and Shakira throws rose petals. But it's Helena's trick that really sets things off as she whispers something in Harry's ear. He later asks Tommy to pass the cheeky message on and Dejon looks shocked when he hears what Helena said. The boys take their turn to raise pulses too - Tommy's go-to is a whopping bouquet of red roses, while Conor tries his best with a Rugby ball. Harrison dons pleather as he tries to impress the girls while Giorgio dresses like a waiter and pours chocolate on his torso. As for Harry, he wears gold angel wings and chooses to whisper back in Helena's ear. Dejon's trick involves him lying Meg down on the floor. At the end of the challenge, the Islanders are told who raised their heart rates the highest and the results cause shock waves amongst the group. The evening before, Shakira confronts Harry about his kiss with Helena during the game of Snog, Marry, Pie. She asks him, 'Why did you do it?' Harry replies, 'Because I had no reason to kiss anyone else.' But Shakira isn't pleased with his reasoning and fumes, 'You knew that would p**s me off. 'You could've kissed anybody, then to get down on one knee like, I was going to be buzzing after I watched you snog her…' Harry attempts to make amends and says, 'I don't want to hurt you, I haven't tried to hurt you Shakira.' She replies, 'But you have. Everything in me is telling me to burn it.' Later on in the evening, the Islanders are called to recouple and the boys are given the power to choose first. Each share their feelings and reasoning behind their decisions, with some gushing over growing connections. Harry comments on 'choppy waters' and Harrison reveals his coupling choice explaining they 'naturally gravitate towards each other'. Love Island continues tonight at 9pm on ITV2 and ITVX.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store