CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Foreign Films & Wishful Thinking › The Passion of Joan of Arc
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Passion of Joan of Arc

post #1 of 15
6/26/09 at 2:52am
Thread Starter 
Words can't describe the power of Renee Maria Falconetti's performance but I'll try anyway, the woman is a wonder of emotion. Dreyer's direction is an interesting mix of odd camera angles and bizarre composition that echo Joan's frame of mind but in the end it all comes down to Falconetti's performance, her eyes are the most beautiful eyes that have ever graced a cinematic screen, the entire performance is in those eyes, when she's not crying, of course.

Dreyer frames the church as the villains, blustering men in power who can't believe this frail girl would be getting messages from God so she must've been deceived by Satan. It's such a shame Falconetti never made another movie after this, I guess, it's a blessing though as I don't know if she could've matched it with subsequent roles, just watching her break down as the film progresses is really quite something, her hugging the cross before she goes to the mount is incredibly heartbreaking.
Reply
post #2 of 15
6/26/09 at 3:10am
Love this movie so much. It absolutely amazes me that it was made in the late 1920's. The camera angles and movement, it strikes me as very modern, somehow. It was one of the first silent films I had seen and it blew me away.
Falconetti's performance is indeed one of the best ever. I have no idea how she did it but her emotions seem so genuine and heartfelt.

I also have to mention that, alongside Regan in the hospital in The Exorcist, few things freak me out as much as the scene where blood is being drawn and just spurts out. Ugh, I get chills thinking about it.
Reply
post #3 of 15
6/26/09 at 8:12am
I've been meaning to see this one for some time. Need to get my hands on a copy soon.
Reply
post #4 of 15
6/26/09 at 8:56am
Renee Maria Falconetti's performance as is the direction of Carl Theodor Dreyer are the driving force of the movie however have you paid attention to the score? Dreyer wanted it to be a silent movie where the movie spoke for itself but Richard Einhorn added that extra dimension to the movie by putting that Voices of Light score under it. It's haunting, it's beautiful and it still gets under my skin every time i watch that movie.
Reply
post #5 of 15
6/26/09 at 9:40am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas View Post
Love this movie so much. It absolutely amazes me that it was made in the late 1920's. The camera angles and movement, it strikes me as very modern, somehow. It was one of the first silent films I had seen and it blew me away.
Falconetti's performance is indeed one of the best ever. I have no idea how she did it but her emotions seem so genuine and heartfelt.
The film really did feel quite progressive in a technical sense, the camera shots were so out of the norm than what you'd normally get at the time.

Also, I watched the french version, the score for that was mainly a piano and percussion.
Reply
post #6 of 15
6/26/09 at 10:08am
One of the most amazing things I've ever seen. I am a film fan, but probably not a true cinephile. I first saw this about two years and it was relevatory. It was so far ahead of the curve. A wonderful film, a real piece of art.

The direction and lead performance are rightfully legendary.

Incredible film.
Reply
post #7 of 15
6/26/09 at 11:50am
One of the best movies I've ever seen. Amazing that a movie made in the 1920's is more technically competent, artistic, and well acted than 99% of the movies that will be released this year
Reply
post #8 of 15
6/26/09 at 11:55am
It's a visually stunning movie in every way. It's amazing how much emotion they are able to capture on film.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas View Post
I also have to mention that, alongside Regan in the hospital in The Exorcist, few things freak me out as much as the scene where blood is being drawn and just spurts out. Ugh, I get chills thinking about it.
Agreed wholeheartedly; it really caught me offguard the first time that I saw it.
Reply
post #9 of 15
6/28/09 at 9:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon Ma View Post

Also, I watched the french version, the score for that was mainly a piano and percussion.
Interesting. I never heard the piano & percussion score before. Can you tell me who the composer was for that?
Reply
post #10 of 15
6/28/09 at 10:08am
Thread Starter 
It doesn't tell me anywhere on the DVD and I've looked to no avail, the closest I could say would be Ole Schmidt but I really don't know.
Reply
post #11 of 15
6/28/09 at 5:49pm
Powerful, powerful movie, but I made the mistake of watching it with the Philip Glass score the first time out. Now I can't watch it without it. I don't think Dreyer would have liked this very much.

I don't know if you guys noticed but I don't believe there's a single long shot or master in the whole film. It's all medium and close-ups.
Reply
post #12 of 15
6/29/09 at 9:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by woodsy View Post
Powerful, powerful movie, but I made the mistake of watching it with the Philip Glass score the first time out. Now I can't watch it without it. I don't think Dreyer would have liked this very much.

I don't know if you guys noticed but I don't believe there's a single long shot or master in the whole film. It's all medium and close-ups.
Hmm, can you point me to some sort of link so i can check if Philip Glass is the composer for the piano & percussion score that Dragon Ma was talking about? I like to hear it too but i think all in all i'm sticking with Voices of light score. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FU2qso0RaYg

And you're indeed right about that Dreyer using only medium and close-ups shots. It was a good choice i think concentrating on Falconetti and not be distracted by anything else.
Reply
post #13 of 15
6/30/09 at 12:39am
I think I'm an idiot and was talking out of my ass when I called it Glass' Score. I think I was thinking of the score he composed for Dracula. I know that's a really, really weird mix up, but it happened.
Reply
post #14 of 15
7/2/09 at 8:44pm
I had a long quest before finally seeing The Passion of Joan of Arc. I first became aware of it around 1994 when I heard the Voices of Light score on a plane trip. And was totally captivated by it and wanted to see that movie, badly. And it took a long, long time before I could finally track it down in a pre-Netflix world.

And, every hope I had for it was more than met.
Reply
post #15 of 15
4/12/10 at 12:45pm
TCM showed this several days ago, and WOW. I was completely blown away. The most famous stylistic choice is the use of medium and closeups, but there are some great tracking shots as well, such as when the judges are whispering to each other.

I found this David Bordwell note via Ebert:

Quote:
Of the film's over 1,500 cuts, fewer than 30 carry a figure or object over from one shot to another; and fewer than 15 constitute genuine matches on action.
It's amazing to me how this style allows the intensity to build.

Quote:
Dreyer wanted it to be a silent movie where the movie spoke for itself but Richard Einhorn added that extra dimension to the movie by putting that Voices of Light score under it.
This was the score the TCM showing used, and I thought it was perfect. Apparently, the set that they built was one of the largest, most elaborate sets of the time. You can't really see the scope of the set due to Dreyer's medium shot / close-up technique, but the editing and score convey the epic feel just the same.

It's currently available on Netflix Watch Instantly. A must-see.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Foreign Films & Wishful Thinking › The Passion of Joan of Arc