La passion de Jeanne d'Arc/The Passion of Joan of Arc

Country: France

Released: April 21st, 1928

Genre: Historical Fiction, Drama

Directed by: Carl Theodor Dreyer

Produced by: Carl Theodor Dreyer

Written by: Joseph Delteil & Carl Theodor Dreyer

La passion de Jeane d'Arc is a historical retelling of the final days of the fifteenth century French military leader, Joan of Arc. For the uninitiated Joan of Arc, a.k.a The Maid of Orleans, was the daughter of minor village officials in the Dutchy of Bar who, after claiming to be ordained by God to drive the English from France, became a military leader and war hero during the Hundred Years War. She was eventually captured by the English and burned at the stake as a heretic. After being canonized by the catholic church she passed into the annals of legend and remains a hero in France to this day. 

Jean d'Arc, much like Napoleon, had a rough restoration process with thirty minutes of the original footage still lost. Also like Napoleon the film is less about exploring a real, historical person than about aggrandizing a legend, to the point that it makes me wonder whether historical nationalism became a large trend in French cinema during the late 1920s or if these movies were the only examples of their kind. In any case, Jean d'Arch chronicles Joan's final trial and eventual execution, leaving the rest of her exploits off screen. In that sense the movie bears a striking resemblance to The Passion of the Christ. Now I have yet to see The Passion so this is pure conjecture on my part but from what I know of Mel Gibson's piece it would not surprise me if he based his original concept to some extent on Jeane d'Arc.

As for the film itself it's a movie that rests entirely on it's lead. Renée Jeanne Falconetti is running an acting marathon here as Joan. I don't think it's much of an exaggeration to say that almost thirty percent of the film consists of closeups of her reactions. She is at once forced to be divine, tragic, and unyielding all at once, and whether she pulls it off is really up to debate. For myself while I was initially a little turned off by some of her choices (specifically her habit of widening her eyes in this near constant thousand yard stare) I found that as the film progressed I became more and more appreciative of her skill. Falconetti puts her all into it, offering one of the most vulnerable and frankly emotionally open performances I've seen. It's difficult to measure an actor's success but I find that a good criteria would be if they made me forget I was watching a performance, and under those terms I would say that Falconetti succeeds. Watching her struggle immersed me into the world of Joan of Arc and allowed me to connect with the figure on a tangible level. One of my favourite moments was when a clergymen trying her asks if god had long hair. She can't help but smile in utter amusement at the silliness of the question.

I mentioned a prevalence of closeups and I was not kidding. If closeups of Joan make up thirty percent of the movie than closeups of other characters make up the other seventy. The camera is constantly jumping from one face to the next in an effort to tell the story entirely through reaction shots. Normally this would feel claustrophobic and, if done really poorly, obnoxious. Instead however each shot feels like a Northern renaissance painting come to life, and I must commend Dreyer on the boldness of the choice.

This style perfectly reinforces the central theme of the movie, namely that of Joan of Arc as a allegory for Jesus. In retrospect I guess the allusions to The Passion of the Christ were actually quite appropriate. Except whereas The Passion was an anti-Semetic vehicle for Mel Gibson expose his creepy devotion to biblical torture porn through (I'm told), Jean d'Arc is a tragic tale of a young girl trying to reconcile her faith while being manipulated and lied to by said faith's very authority. The final scene in the movie, where Jean is sentenced to death and the clergymen who gave the order suddenly realize the horror they've committed is subtle and moving. 

All this being said the film suffers from the same issue The Docks of New York does, namely that it's an extremely slow burn for a plot that is, frankly, rather straightforward. What I'm saying is that Dreyer could of told the story in half the time and I don't think I would have lost anything. One can make the argument that the journey itself is entertaining enough, but without any dialogue or even any music (the original score was lost and there haven't been replacements) I started to feel it's length. Still, I was invested through most of it, and Falconetti's performance itself is worth seeing.