The Passion of Joan of Arc

[Gold Trumpet]

Absolute essential film. Easily the film that lifted the movies into the world of serious art and maybe the greatest of all silent films. The pure art that this movie acquired is much more noticeable when all the other films on Joan of Arc are seen and identified by their cliches of movies. How could anyone think that they could go beyond this movie?

Also, one must speak of the groundbreaking performance by the one time film actress, Renee Maria Falconetti, who had her head shaved and wore no make up to prolly create one of the most complex and sad faces ever seen in any movie. Some nice quotes for the performance:

"You cannot know the history of silent film unless you know the face of Renee Maria Falconetti."
-Roger Ebert

"It may be the finest film ever recorded on film"
-Pauline Kael

I believe 2001: A Space Odyssey pushed the limits of movies more than any other, but for the silents, that honor is given to this movie.

~rougerum

[Jeremy Blackman]

"It may be the finest film ever recorded on film"
-Pauline Kael

She is so redundant. And I bet she says that about every movie.

[Gold Trumpet]

I don't care for her that much either, but she may be right there.

~rougerum

[MacGuffin]

Beautiful movie; wonderful cinematography. Like GT said, Falconetti's sad face engrosses you.

[Duck Sauce]

Criterion always has the best fucking covers. I dont know a thing about this movie but I will see it.

[Gold Trumpet]

Detailings on the Criterion dvd by Criterion President, Peter Becker:

Take, for example, Dreyer's The Passion of Joan of Arc, a film that by all rights shouldn't even physically be around any longer. The original negative was lost in a fire in 1928. It was recut from alternate takes by Dreyer the following year, I believe, and that version was lost in yet another fire-an unbelievable history for a film! A print of the original film was discovered in 1981 in the janitor's closet of an insane asylum in Norway. The director of the hospital was an amateur French historian who acquired one of the original release prints, we don't know exactly why. It had been projected once or twice but it was in quite beautiful condition, still wrapped in papers dated and sealed by the Danish censorship office, proving their authenticity. That version has never been released here.

We know that Dreyer had not approved of any of the scores that over time had been written for the film. At its premiere in Paris, it was accompanied by a score that Dreyer hated. In 1952 a fellow name Lo Duca made a sound version that included a voice-over-which was certainly not welcomed by Dreyer--as well as a great deal of music. He even took the liberty of cutting in some shots of stained glass to give Joan something to look at when she looked up. It was clearly a version of the film that didn't understand what Dreyer was doing and it was the subject of a furious letter from Dreyer. One of the reasons that The Passion of Joan of Arc was never presented on video was that no distributor was willing to show it silent, although that was really the way Dreyer wanted it to be seen.

On the Criterion DVD, the first option on the menu is to play the film silent, and there is an explanation that if you want to see the film as Dreyer intended it, this is the way you should watch it. On the other hand, we went to enormous lengths to make it possible to include another extraordinary art work, Richard Einhorn's oratorio, "Voices of Light," which was not written as a score for The Passion of Joan but as music inspired by the film. Richard saw the film and over the next ten years became obsessed with its images. He began working through medieval texts, particularly those about women mystics of the era, and wrote this stunning piece that has been performed a number of times with the film, including at Lincoln Center. For this video release, Richard worked with a sound engineer to remix it for five-channel surround sound, so this may be the most overproduced silent film DVD anybody's ever come up with. The supplemental material includes an interview with Falconetti's daughter, a restoration demonstration, and images of Hermann Warm's set, which was enormously expensive and very complex, with moveable pieces to allow camera movements. The DVD also includes a comparison of the first and second versions of the film, so you can see what the alternate takes look like.

I'm very proud that we're able to do this kind of work on classic films. These are opportunities we never had in laser because the marketplace was too small to support it, but in DVD we're now able to do work on international classics that we used to have to reserve for major studio films like The Silence of the Lambs.

~rougerum

[Ravi]

I don't know about this film, I saw it as more of a technical exercise in telling a story exclusively through close-ups.  I don't believe God talked to Joan, but I don't believe she should have been burned at the stake, so I don't really know what to think of that part of the film.  It's as if I sympathized with her and I didn't at the same time.  I liked the end sequence the best, particularly the disturbing shot of Joan as the flames engulfed her.

I watched it with the score, as I watched it at night and probably would have dozed off if it was completely silent.  The story of the various versions of the film and the discovery of an intact version in a Norwegian mental asylum was fascinating.  Those interested in film should see it, but it's not one of the best silents I've seen.  Does anyone know why Falconetti did not act in any films after this one?

[MacGuffin]

Does anyone know why Falconetti did not act in any films after this one?

It is believed that the rigorous demands of the film and by Dreyer himself were too much for her to even want to do another film.

[Gold Trumpet]

Ravi,
I understand what you are saying that is in fault with the film, but I must beg the question of how you can deny the complete greatness of it when a filmmaker like Ingmar Bergman could have been said to make his entire career off the approach that this film had, in its various meanings and emotions that can be identified through the human face. I did a research paper on the role of women in silent film for my women's literature class in college and said that this movie represented the greatest break and highest honor of any female role to ever grace the film with how unbeautifying and honest the face was. Also I mentioned how this is the film that is generally noted as being the first film to bring film into the threshold of being considered a serious art form because lots of people saw all the other silents the way Virginia Woolf did, in saying they acted as "one syllable words" in novels. That was the result of telling the movie with a situation, conflict and resolution only. The Passion of Joan of Arc went beyond anything ever seen and made a piece of work that was completely open to interpretation like associated with the greatest works of art in history for any form. My personal feelings for why the film exceeds outside its history? Because it a film that catches the ambiguilty of conflict in all the people who served that trial, saw their society condemn these actions as heresy but saw not a tyrant or big man being charged, but a single girl only. The face of Renee Maria Falconetti provides that sadness, that strength of emotion for being a single soul to stand up. I was completely fascinated with how varied the faces were in the courtroom, and the never ending sadness that looking at the face of Jon of Arc brought. People can study the trial all they want in history and determine who did what or not and all that, but this movie provides the key to understanding the possibilities of what was felt at that trial. Nothing, in terms of art, is more important that.

~rougerum

[Ravi]

You make some good points about the acting and the emotions, etc., and I do recognize the contributions it made in those departments, but I still feel that it is more of an exercise in acting and technical aspects than an engrossing story.  YMMV definitely applies here.  While I am aware of the advancements of cinema contained in this film, it belongs in a different league of greatness than films like Modern Times, The Gold Rush, Sunrise, etc., IMO.

[(kelvin)]

If God were a filmmaker, he would have made something like "La passion de Jeanne d'Arc"...it's like the Holy Grail of the Seventh Art.

[Gold Trumpet]

Ravi,
I know what you mean in its technical exercise, something that today may be speaking of contrivance. And you're right, it does share a different greatness than the films you mentioned because it is not directly influenced by the Griffith storytelling that was brought to stapling in Birth of a Nation. Instead of it being for contrivance though only, it shares another world in expressing the emotional anguish that Joan of Arc during her trial, and from all the movies on Joan of Arc I've seen, none have done so through as much power, force and identity like this movie. Like I said before, the structure brought it acclaim but not just that because the structure was the case to bring the emotional force of the movie. One of the best movies of last year, "Songs from the Second Floor", also shared a completely different structure on how to tell a story but was brilliant because it was for the material. The Passion of Joan of Arc does act for the material. If it wasn't your cup of tea in liking more personally than not, then that's fine. But a discussion of this movie is a good thing anyways.

~rougerum