Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Film classics: The Passion of Joan of Arc

Director Jean Cocteau once observed of Carl Dreyer’s great silent film La Passion de Jeanne d’Arc that it plays like “a historical document from an era in which cinema didn’t exist”. Certain films (including some I’ve blogged about before: The Seventh Seal, Aguirre, Eraserhead) give that impression – they are so self-contained that they seem to come to us as special messages from another world. It’s difficult to define the nature of this effect. It isn’t that these movies are “realistic” in a documentary-like sense – quite the contrary, many of them put cinematic tricks to great use. But they carry a conviction that makes it hard to think of them as existing outside the world they describe; when the lights go on it feels unreal to actually find a reel of film (or a DVD) with the movie’s title on it.

The Passion of Joan of Arc is leagues ahead of the others in this respect. Watching this 1928 masterpiece, the impression one gets is that Dreyer hopped into a time machine, flew back to 1431 France, recorded the Joan of Arc trial from many different an
gles simultaneously, returned to the present and then edited it for maximum cinematic effect. And he forgot to carry a sound recorder with him – which is just as well, for as Norma Desmond says in Sunset Boulevard, “We didn’t need dialogues [in silent films]. We had faces.”

The most widely discussed aspect of La Passion de Jeanne d’Arc (and, with full respect to
Dreyer and his great vision, the aspect most worth discussing) is the face and the performance of Maria Falconetti in the title role. Falconetti’s Joan is wide-eyed, tired beyond description, tears often running down her sunken cheeks. The haunted expression on her face could represent the unwavering conviction of a girl who has experienced divinity firsthand - but it could just as easily be the face of someone who has been driven to madness and is no longer sure of anything. This isn’t, after all, a film about the rabble-rousing heroine who led French troops to war on the strength of her visions, God firmly by her side every step of the way. It’s the story of a frightened, exhausted, lonely, even confused young girl being repeatedly questioned and cross-questioned by a group of tyrannical inquisitioners.

There are moments where Joan attempts to live up to her image as the fearless heroine, but falters. Threatened with torture if she refuses to admit that she received her instructions from the Devil, she initially declaims, “Even if you separate my soul from my body, I will say nothing.” But then, as she sees a machine of torture up close – a large revolving wheel with serrated blades along its circumference – terror crosses her face; she holds up a trembling finger and adds, “And even if I do confess, later I’ll say I was forced into it.”

When watching silent-screen performances we usually have to suspend our disbelief, keep in mind how different the theories of acting were back then: that cinema was still a young form, most of its early stars had cut their teeth on the theatre and were unprepared for this new medium. Falconetti’s Joan is the most notable of exceptions – it’s a performance that would have any modern audience in complete thrall.**

Dreyer’s use of close-ups for both Joan and her judges is rightly famous – it almost seems like we can see every pore, every little scar, on their faces, and this adds to the sense of claustrophobia. (Credit must be given to the mid-1980s restoration of the film, based on a well-preserved print that was serendipitously discovered in a broom closet in a mental institution!) But he also extracts a lot of power from the smaller moments, the ones that might otherwise be considered “breathers”. Like the shot where Joan gazes at a skull lying in a graveyard, worms slithering in and out of its nostrils. Dreyer seems to invite us to ask what she is thinking about at that moment. Is she merely contemplating the here and now – that she herself might be dead in a few moments – or is she considering that her visions might be delusions after all, the possibility that the afterlife is a vast unknown? (I don’t think it’s coincidental that much of the imagery of this scene – including a gravedigger shoveling mud – is evocative of Hamlet, of “the undiscovered country from whose bourn no traveler may return” and “your worm is your only emperor for diet”.)

My DVD of The Passion of Joan of Arc has two audio options – one silent, the other featuring the haunting “Voices of Light” choral soundtrack created especially for the film in the 1990s. Initially I tried to watch the film with the sound off, but the images were so stark and powerful that I needed an element of artifice, of manufactured drama. So I switched the soundtrack on after a few minutes – feeling slightly guilty until I remembered that when the film was originally screened in 1928 there would have been an accompanying score in the movie-hall anyway. I suggest anyone who gets hold of the DVD watches it with “Voices of Light” switched on. At least the first time.

** This is Falconetti’s only surviving film, which of course adds to the mystique surrounding her performance. Parallels can be drawn in this respect with the enigmatic German actor
Max Shreck, who played the rodent-like vampire in F W Murnau’s 1922 classic Nosferatu. So iconic is Shreck’s performance, and so little is known of him outside of that film, that it was possible 80 years later for a movie screenplay to suggest that he really was a vampire! The jury is still out on whether Falconetti was a saint in real life…


[Images from
Wikipedia]

12 comments:

  1. Thanks. I remember the emphasis on physiognomy, as if the soul can be read in the lines of the face. One might wonder, in a silent movie, what else is there? There are the words, unspoken; stinting gives more power to the words. I'm surprised you didn't mention the dialogue - Joan's responses to her inquisitors are philosophically resonant and yet true to her fiercely unlearned character. In this respect, there's a parallel with the trial scene in Kiarostami's "Close-Up"...

    Trivia buffs may be interested to know that Antonin Artaud, of "Theatre of Cruelty" fame appears as one of the inquisitors.

    Dreyer is a significant influence on Lars von Trier, an influence that goes far beyond the fact of their common Danish Catholic background. They are both drawn to intense explorations of faith and suffering (typically of a woman who is pure of heart ), though of course von Trier's films are much more heavily ironized, in acknowledgment of the times. Perhaps Bjork is the modern Falconetti?

    ReplyDelete
  2. You really are outstanding in your film reviews. In your other posts, I imagine an undercurrent of impatience, as if you wanted to finish it quick and get back to another film.

    J.A.P.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You should also catch Dreyer's "Days of Wrath" and "Ordet", both available from criterion (the palika guy might have it). "Days of Wrath" is similar to Joan of Arc in some ways - a deeply repressive and tyrannical setting, a woman as the protagonist, a medieval age etc (though there are also differences). Ordet has one of the most amazing endings in the history of cinema - its probably completely unique. A must see.
    Incidentally, Dreyer was from a Danish Lutheran background, not catholic. But its also true,that Dreyer was not himself very religious (see Jonathan Rosenbaum's criterion collection essay here : http://www.criterionco.com/asp/release.asp?id=125&eid=135§ion=essay). In this he seems similar to Robert Bresson: both made films which are intensely about religion (Bresson's Diary of a country priest) but even Bresson was an agnostic and not especially religious.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous: Have seen Ordet but haven't ben able to get my hands on Day of Wrath yet.
    Interesting to hear that Dreyer wasn't very religious - sort of adds to my idea that Passion... doesn't necessarily think of Joan as a saint but simply as a young woman of great conviction.

    Perhaps Bjork is the modern Falconetti

    Cheshire Cat: now there's a nice, bizarre thought! In the context of "intense explorations of faith and suffering", there's also of course the Emily Watson character in Breaking the Waves.

    JAP: thanks. Actually, I often start to get impatient when a post starts going beyond 800-900 words. Want to wrap it up quickly then.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous, thanks for the correction. Makes sense, given that Joan is the sympathetic character. But really, as you say, religion may not be a very useful lens through which to read Dreyer. I remember "Vampyr" (which is the only other movie of his I've seen) as eccentric and brilliant, but not religious in any conventional sense.

    I do disagree about Bresson. With "Mouchette" and especially with "Au Hasard Balthasar", the Jansenist belief in predestination is too powerfully relevant.

    Jabberwock, I mentioned Bjork because the role demanded so much from her, and it seemed doubtful she would ever act again after that experience. Unfortunately, she might be back, thanks to that insufferable husband of hers...

    ReplyDelete
  6. great post and very learned comments too...!

    it is very interesting indeed to compare von trier with dreyer and see how the ideas of faith and suffering get a postmodern twist, specially in breaking the waves.

    I sometimes long for those innocent pre-ironical age when someone could make films like these and still mean everything that they wanted to say.

    btw, who is bjork's husband?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Alok, that would be Matthew Barney, art world superstar. He made a sequence of films called "The Cremaster Cycle" which showcased his monumental self-importance and complete lack of craft. I read a report a few weeks back that he's making a new film with Bjork, in which they participate in a Japanese tea ceremony and are then turned into dolphins...

    Or something.

    ReplyDelete
  8. FYI: there was this book that paul schrader wrote many years ago (the guy who wrote the script for taxidriver among others) which compared the styles of ozu, bresson and dreyer. he called it the 'transcendental' style in film. i havent read the book myself but i would think its well worth reading...

    ReplyDelete
  9. this is a bit OT but here's an interesting interview with Donald Ritchie about Japanese cinema. A large part of it is about Ozu (which is why i was reminded of Schraders book).

    http://www.midnighteye.com/interviews/donald_richie.shtml

    Incidentally the site midnight eye is entirely devoted to japanese movies. well worth a look if you havent already done so.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The Passion of Joan of Arc is a wonderful old film and thanks to the internet at MaidofHeavne.com it can be seen for free:

    http://www.maidofheaven.com/joanofarc_videos_movies.asp

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thanks for this nice review of one of cinema's masterpieces; I saw the film recently and was struck of course by Falconetti's amazing intensity - but also by the faces of all the other characters around her, which seemed to me to come out directly of Leonardo da Vinci's caricatures, or some other medieval artist: certainly Dreyer has plunged his film into this brutally ambivalent world of good and evil that his B&W cinematography underlines so well.

    ReplyDelete