
by Sam Juliano
“Nothing in the world can be compared to the human face. It is a land one can never tire of exploring. There is no greater experience in a studio than to witness the expression of a sensitive face under the mysterious power of inspiration. To see it animated from inside, and turning into poetry.”
- Carl Theodor Dreyer, “Thoughts on My Craft”
Carl Theodor Dreyer’s shattering expressionistic masterpiece, The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928) was voted the greatest silent film of all-time by 15 bloggers in the long-running Wonders in the Dark polling. Featuring Renee Falconetti as the celebrated martyr in a performance many consider to be the greatest of all-time by man or woman, Dreyer’s film is a cornerstone of any serious film class or of those wanting to observe the power of the cinematic close-up. Reached at his home, Voting Tabulator Extraordinaire, Angelo A. D’Arminio Jr. reported that three voters placed the film #1 on their ballots, while the film was named on nearly every submission. Joan of Arc garnered 280 points, while the #2 film, F.W. Murnau’s Sunrise finished close behind with 257. Rounding out the top ten were Nosferatu (245), Potemkin 235), Metropolis 233), Napoleon (205), The Gold Rush (196), The General (185), La Roue (172) and Greed (156).
Said Allan Fish in his countdown review of a few weeks ago, where he placed the film as his #5 choice:
“Joan of Arc has long been the subject of cinematic interpretation. One recalls de Mille’s visually arresting but dramatically stultifying epic Joan the Woman with Geraldine Farrar, the awful 1948 Hollywood borefest with Ingrid Bergman, the derided Saint Joan with Jean Seberg, the 1962 minimalist Bresson version with Florence Carrez and the more recent attempts with Leelee Sobieski and Milla Jovovich. Only Marco de Gastyne’s overlooked 1929 La Merveilleuses Vie de Jeanne d’Arc and Rivette’s 1994 epic two parter, Jeanne la Pucelle, come close to greatness, but even Rivette – in spite of the performance of Sandrine Bonnaire – fails to rival Dreyer’s seminal masterpiece. Put simply, Dreyer’s film is a true visionary work, a film of startling freshness and power.
The film is based strictly on the actual 1431 Rouen trial records preserved in the parliamentary library in Paris. As one of the titles says “we discover Joan as she was – not with a helmet and armour, but simply a human being, a young woman who dies for her country.” Whether Joan was indeed a blessed chaste saint or merely a misguided nationalist with insane visions is immaterial. At its heart, Dreyer’s film isn’t just about Joan, but about faith itself. It doesn’t matter whether we believe her, but that she believes herself. Either way it’s impossible, even for one of the nation to whom she proved such a bane, not to feel some sympathy for her plight. “It is you who have been sent by the devil to torment me” she proclaims at one point, and it would take a hard man not to sympathise. However, the overall feeling one gets as we watch the trial go on its remorseless, relentless way to its inevitable infernal conclusion, sometimes makes one forget just how revolutionary its approach was. No film before or since has used close-ups so menacingly or so effectively. No film has ever had such majestic period sets and then basically refused to show them. Dreyer’s camera is restless, rarely remaining still unless to dwell on the face of an accuser or the eponymous accused. The effect is shattering, its faces closing in as if accusing you the viewer. You feel every humiliation Joan receives and the final execution is surely one of the most realistic ever put on camera. We literally see Joan burning to virtually the last fibre of her being, long after we can recognise the cross she clutches to her chest. Religious figure or not, she is a martyr to her own beliefs, and for that alone we can only sit in awe. With no action or romance, only the sheer emotional pain of the ultimate cinematic experiment, is it any wonder it failed commercially?
Of course for such a film to work requires a truly exceptional performance, but what Falconetti gives us is nothing so common as exceptional, but rather a performance of unprecedented power and emotion. Considering it was her debut, it makes her work all the more remarkable and the degrees to which she went perhaps give us an inkling into her decision never to make another film. No disrespect to the great silent actresses from Lillian Gish (who ironically was first choice, but turned it down) and Louise Brooks to Ruan Lingyu and Asta Nielsen, she towers over everyone. In my humble opinion, it’s the greatest performance committed to celluloid. A performance captured down to the last look of terror and tear by Rudolph Mate’s magnificent photography, which also pushed the envelope to the nth degree. More than anything, however, this is Dreyer’s triumph, and one happily now available for home viewing in a gorgeous restoration from those masters at Criterion, adding a score which, though against Dreyer’s wishes (he wanted it silent), is still perfectly in keeping with the mood of this most reverential, spiritual piece.”
The Top 30 are as follows:
1. Passion of Joan of Arc 280






Fantastic! Joan rightfully takes he crown.
…woops, takes HER crown.
David, we’ve been together on this one lock, stock and barrel!
Hi! Sam Juliano, Allan and to the Tabulator Extraordinaire Angelo A. D’ Arminio Jr.,
Congratulation! on another successful countdown and to all the Wonders in the Dark readers, who participated too! (and especially, if the films they voted placed in the “win,” “place,” or “show,” category.)
DeeDee
Touche on that one Dee Dee!!! You’re the best!
Oh! yes, how could I…forget Tony’s wonderful photographs from silent films on the sidebar.
Thank-you,
DeeDee
Dee Dee, they have been one of the site’s most magnificent visual aspects!
I didn’t vote Sam but I would also choose Joan. It is such a beautiful movie. Maybe Dreyer’s best film (which is saying a lot). The use of white in the cinematography is breathtaking. The fact that Falconetti never made another picture is fine. When you reach such perfection a followup performance is probably unnecessary.
Maurizio, thanks a much for your typically insightful contribution. Yes it IS really saying something to assert that JOAN is Dreyer’s best film, but I completely agree with you. And that’s exactly right about Falconetti achieving perfection, and not needing to be shot after that for even a second more. That use of white is indeed amazing.
For once, NO ONE will be disappointed…
Aye, JAFB, how true!
Hi! Sam Juliano, Allan and WitD readers,
Unfortunately, I have not watched…
Passion of Joan of Arc and Sunrise yet…(With “yet” being the operative word.) Therefore, I was unable to vote for these two films.
I must admit that it’s good to see that…
3. Nosferatu 245
5. Metropolis 233
7. The Gold Rush 196
12 Pandora’s Box 142
16 The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari 105
18 The Wind 101
21 The Lodger 89
Placed, but didn’t win and most definitely, not show.
Dee Dee, I’ll definitely help you to see THE PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC and SUNRISE, and the others that you applaud are richly deserving. Thanks as always for all your promotion of the poll, and of the many worthwhile silent links you provided.
I didn’t vote either simply because I didn’t feel like I could make a respectable Top 25. BUT, if I had made a list, Joan would have been #1 for sure. The only other silent-era film that I responded to as strongly as Joan – and which is a completely different type of film – is Keaton’s SHERLOCK JR., which I am glad to see checking in at #14 here.
I have so many films to get to have a decent appreciation of this era… but now it looks like I’m going into a 2000s binge for the upcoming countdown. Too many movies and too little time!
Aye Dave, so much to do and so little time, that’s for sure.
I’m very happy to hear of your definitive love for JOAN and for one of Keaton’s landmarks!
The BEST part of watching Schmulee type out this post naming the top films in the poll was watching him go through an online thesaurus to find a synonym for STAGGERING. “I CAN’T USE STAGGERING AGAIN, ALLAN’S GONNA KILL ME FOR USING OVER-THE-TOP HYPERBOLE! GOD, JUST GIMME ONE WORD I CAN USE! JESUS!”. LOLOLOL. I’m telling you, watching him at the PC made me realize you can’t make this shit up. As for the results of the poll: no kidding? The Dreyer Film? No? Like we didn’t see this one coming from a million miles away. Not bad though, we almost got it right. SUNRISE DID PLACE AT No. 2!
We didn’t almost get it right, Dennis, the poll got it wrong.
Remember the Devil’s Dictionary definition of BIGOT – One who is obstinately and zealously attached to an opinion that you do not entertain.
I actually have an idea for a film called BEING SAM MASTERPIECE, in which Sam enters his own head and sees everyone dressed like a slob in a restaurant and muttering MASTERPIECE, MASTERPIECE, MASTERPIECE…
ho ho ho!!!!!
SAM failed to mention that within the voting several directors within the top slots placed on the list with 2 films from there canons. In one case, a single director placed with THREE films. The winner of the number 2 position Friedrich Wilhelm Murnau saw his SUNRISE (no. 2), NOSFERATU (no. 3) and THE LAST LAUGH (no. 25). He may not have made the number 1 poisition but the readers here at WITD made it blatantly clear who they thought the greatest director of the period was. Hats off to F. W. Murnau!!!!!!!
Aye Dennis. Murnau was the winner with the three placements, and I’d say that’s dead-on, as he is unquestionably the most towering artist of the silent era.
FINALLY-and I know I’ll be accused of kissing ass here; A round of congratulation are in order, as well as words of appreciation to ALLAn for presenting this most educational and illuminating journey thriugh the landscape of pre-1929 film. I have amassed a huge list of film I have yet to and desperately want to see. Whenever I think I really know film I’ll look back at this amazing under-taking and use it as a hard kick in my complacencies. I couldn’t even begin to fathon the time, dedication and hard work that MR. FISH put into this amazing collection of written capsules. Again, thank you. Your ultimate goal was education and its paid off in spades.
Well, it can be calculated, Dennis. Each review is written in 30-40 mins immediately after watching the film, so 100 lots of 35 mins as an average, then add up the running times, then a few hours posting on WordPress and a few hours trying to catch up with my escaping sanity to no avail.
I didn’t vote, as there are so many silent films I still have to see, but thoroughly enjoyed following this countdown and also want to thank Allan for presenting it and all those involved here at WitD – I’ll be looking back often at his reviews in the future as I manage to catch up with more of the films he highlighted.
Yes indeed Judy, Allan’s own painstaking reserch and at-home viewing for many years has guaranteed all of us for an exhaustive guideline not to found anywhere on the net. Your own involvement here has been a boon to all as well.
Having only seen a few silents that did end up on the list, I could not vote, although the couple I know well did end up here.
It was an enriching experience to learn about so many films I too have yet to see.
Thanks for all your hard work!
Cheers!
Ditto Michael. It was a ride we all won’t soon forget. Thanks as always for your beneficial attendance here!
As for the musical accompaniment, I don’t think there should be, though watching the burning sequence to Sid Vicious’ My Way is fun after a night at the pub…
Interesting. Thought Sunrise would win though obviously the winner here is hardly a huge surprise. Glad to see La Roue in the top 10. Again hardly any surprises in the overall poll. Now that this one is concluded any idea out there for future polls?
Kaleem, thanks as always for the astute observations and support. Actually, the 2000′s poll is underway, with several daily submissions already appearing here. Today’s countdown entry is SIN CITY.
thanks for the shout out.. I was under the impression that we’d already done this. Will submit my entries relatively soon.
I wanted SUNRISE to win and I don’t see greatness in THE PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC but it is wonderful to see two films at the top that are paeans to love and the glory of the human spirit. These are noble films.
Fair enough Stephen. That’s actually quite a wonderful observation/conviction you render!
BEING SAM MASTERPIECE! LOL!!!!!! That’s a film I’d definately pay fifteen dollars to see in 3D. Does Sam get spit out onto the side-bar of the New Jersey Turnpike after a few minutes? Actually, and I shouldn’t tell you this (but I will anyway)n but the funniest momenyt last night is him copying AMERICAN BEAUTY for me. I tell him to give me the original DVD the moment he finishes the copy so I can put it back in its proper place on the shelf in the library. Nano seconds after pulling it from the computer he can’t find it. Within a fraction of a second he throws his arms up in the air, shaking his head and breathing hard, exasperated. He looks at me and bellows: “Shit, Shit. That’s totally bizarre. Like va time portal opened up and took it! Oh well, there’s another one I have to re-buy!” THE DVD was on top of the computer, title showing, right in front of him the whole time. His reply: “Oh, there’s that bastard. This one almost got away.” Yea, right. And his kids are ALWAYS the major culprits. Uh-huh.
I have only recently seen Jacques Rivette’s JEANNE LA PUCELLE and Robert Bresson’s LE PROCES DE JEANNE D’ARC (which I’ve written about on my blog).
I think both are excellent and both are superior to Dreyer’s.
There is something cultish about the style of THE PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC. It turns her into an icon and a victim from the very first shot. There is an exaggerated sense of adoration and immolation. The judges are grotesque and Jeanne, at times, seems less human than alien. The parallels drawn with Jesus (the crown, the title of the film itself) detract. Jeanne was real. Her life was not an echo of Jesus’, nor was it a metaphor of Christ-like sacrifice.
Rivette’s and Bresson’s allow her to be human first. They give her room to breathe.
Has anybody else seen all three of these ‘versions’ of the Joan of Arc story?
I have seen all three, plus the de Gastyne version of 1929, which I’d say is far better than Bresson’s, which, after Four Days of a Dreamer, is probably his weakest film. I admire immensely Rivette’s film, but Dreyer’s remains the best.
Aha.
I haven’t seen the 1929 film.
I like the 10 minute 1899 Melies Silent. It’s hard to follow (if you don’t know her history) but it’s got the quality of a naive fable.
Dreyer’s is a film hard to escape from. It’s in your face. It either moves you and enraptures you or it turns you off. I thought it was, in many ways, overdone and overplayed.
What’s good about Rivette’s is that it takes us from the beginning of her ‘mission’ (and does it far better than the American versions) and, bit by bit, her companions leave her and she leaves them. By the end the feeling of fear is mixed with intense loneliness.
Rivette, too, gives Jeanne more colour.
[...] see that a group of film bloggers recently declared “The Passion of Joan of Arc” the best silent film ever. I’m not sure I’m ready to go that far, but it’s worth reading about the [...]