by Allan Fish
(France 1928 83m) DVD1
Aka. The Passion of Joan of Arc
Cinematic sainthood
p/d Carl T.Dreyer w Carl T.Dreyer, Joseph Delteil, Pierre Champion ph Rudolph Maté ed Carl T.Dreyer art Hermann Warm, Jean Hugo cos Valentine Hugo
Renée Falconetti (Joan), Eugène Silvain (Bishop Cauchon), Maurice Schutz (Nicholas Loyseleur), Michel Simon (Jean Lemaitre), Antonin Artaud (Massieu), Louis Ravet (Jean Beaupère), André Berley (Jean d’Estivet), Jean d’Yid (Judge),
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.
Click on names for archives
Writers/Founders
“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.”
Brilliantly stated observation that of course I agree with completely, but the use of the close-up has never been as compelling and all-consuming as it is in this masterpiece of silent cinema, a film I have ceaselessly promoted, and the one I placed at the very top of my own silent list. Allan and I also happen to be on the same page with Rene Falconetti’s performance as the greatest by either man or woman in the history of the cinema, an astinishing accomplishment for a woman who was previously known as a comedian. But the expressionistic design, and the medieval canvas is spectacularly realized, and the film is surely the most emotional in all of silent cinema. It’s subject is treated more than reverentially, and one feels a sense of catharsis in the final staggering scenes. This is what is meant by art in the cinema.
I was skeptical that there would be 10 better films then ‘Pandora’s Box’, then that there would be 9 better then ‘Battleship Potemkin’, then that there would be 8 better then ‘The General’.
Tonight I am skeptical there are 4 better films then this.
Great review of a film I find something new to love every time I watch. Maybe the first film in the history of cinema that gave acomophiliacs (someone attracted to a bald/shaved head) an icon.
LOL Jamie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Your comments are ceaselessly brilliant and creative!!!!
Brillinat piece, Allan. Now I have to catch up with the other versions!
ALL TOO EASY NOW… I was expecting this one at number 1 or 2 a while back, but its now blatantly evident how this count will end. Frankly, I’m a little shocked by the 5th place score of THIS film as its often cited as one of the two greatest silent masterworks. That’s a moot point and, as always, I respect Allan’s choices. Myself, I have it at No. 2 and I’m floored by this film every time I see it. Aside from the ingenious pacing of the narrative, Dreyer’s stark visual style and countless other technical strokes, I am NEVER at a loss to praise Rene Falconetti’s performance in the title role. Honestly, it is, in my mind, the greatest screen performance by anyone in THE HISTORY OF FILM. To see it is to be moved to tears.
TBH, Dennis, you hardly need to be Nostradamus to foresee the top 4, but when it comes to the final poll, all I can say is GOOD LUCK!
Always interesting, to read the reviews here, which make wanting to see these films at some point a must.
Thanks & Cheers!
I HEAR YA ALLAN. The 2000 to 2009 poll will be exceedingly difficult to predict, but that’s the fun. I’d rather be shocked, surprized and amazed than predictive. I feel we have a tendency to learn more, review films we’ve already seen and dismissed to take a another show with, perhaps a different point of view. Many times here you or Sam or Tony or Bob or Joel point out something I may never have taken into a considertion or highlighted a film I knew nothing about. So its all good. I can’t to see THERE WULL BE BLOOD at No. 1!!!!!!! LOLOLOL!!!!!
Dreyer made exactly the right use of those sets, making them look like a lived-in world by refusing to treat them as a spectacle in their own right. Doing that would have undercut the emotional intensity he was right to forefront. This was one of my sure things for Alan’s top ten(two remain to be seen)and is likely to turn up in my own.
Knowing how these lists usually pan out…I suppose I’m not surprised this is ONLY at number 5. Sometimes I think it might be the greatest film ever made.
While the film is just as powerful totally “silent” (as Dreyer intended) I’m a huge fan of the “Voices of Light” accompaniment. Having that on full blast in surround sound at home makes for a great experience.
The special features on the Criterion edition are also fantastic, showing how Dreyer built such elaborate sets and how he cast Falconetti in the role and then the history of what happened to the film after its release up until now.
This film is essential viewing not just for any film buff, but for any human being. It should be shown in every school throughout the world in art, psychology, religion, film, ethics, and history classes.
Though not nearly as erudite as Alan’s glorious piece here, I did my own write-up awhile back at the ‘Spin.
http://davethenovelist.wordpress.com/2008/06/15/a-review-of-carl-dreyers-the-passion-of-joan-of-arc/
DAVID SCHLIECHER-I don’t own the CRITERION version of this film (matter of fact I don’t think I own it at all-its a sin), so, QUESTION: is the VOICES OF LIGHT accompaniment offered on the CRITERION edition? I like the way you describe the experience you’ve had with this film.I’d like to try it as well.
Dennis – yes, on the Criterion edition it allows you to watch the film with or without The Voices of Light score. It’s truly one of the best Criterion has ever offered in terms of quality of the transfer, viewing options, and special features.
Yes, shame they treat silent films like they’re leprous overall. Over 500 film collection, only proper Criterion editions of Pandora’s Box, Haxan, Jeanne d’Arc, King of Kings and Nanook, along with a Micheaux on a Robeson set. That’s it, a less than 1% return rate for silent film releases. Eclipse have given us the silent Ozus and there’s talk of Von Sternberg, but I’ll believe it when I see it.
I know, CRITERION has been a savior for certain films and floundering in the silents department. It kills me that a film like the Brownlow Restoration of NAPOLEON is unavailable but films like THE ROCK and ARMAGEDDON get the full treatment. ALLAN-Silent VON STERNBERG would be GLORIOUS!!!!!!! DAVID SCHLIECHER-Thank you so much for coming to my rescue with this information so quickly. With the recession money is tight and I like to go in armed to the teeth before I make a purchase. Thanks Again Guys!!!!!
The lack of Napoleon is purely down to the nepotism of Francis Ford Coppola. Criterion would probably love to release it, but Coppola will only allow the shortened version with his daddy’s music to be seen on DVD.
That’s right. I forgot it was CARMINE COPPOLA who rescored the shortened version! Good point, ALLAN. And Francis Coppola calls himself a slave to films history. HA!
ALLAN-Im almost afraid to ask… But, did you by any chance send Sam a DVD copy of the Brownlow version of NAPOLEON. I’d ask Sam, but 1. He currently attending a wake for a friends father. 2. Even if you did, he more than likely forgot you did and will swear you never sent one. If its easier for you to reply by phone my number is 201 658 4565. Thanks, Dennis
Yes, I did, and he saw it, and I even sent it him in a cover art of my own. Drop me an email sometime over the weekend to tell me when you’re in and I’ll gladly give you a call.
I first watched it this month, and even though I don’t care for Joan’s character, it is indeed brilliant. I still don’t get the extreme praise Falconetti gets though.
Great review, too. BTW, would you recommend watching it silent or with the score from the Criterion version?
Watched it on TCM. A true masterpiece of its time.