The complete ranked list formed from Scout Tafoya's cinematography poll on Fandor. Rankings are first by number of mentions and…
The Passion of Joan of Arc
Joan of Arc, a young woman inspired by God to lead an army against the English, is put on trial by priests who try to force her to confess that her visions were false.
I watched this twice, back to back. Once with sound, once without. Both times I was gobsmacked by what was laid out before me on screen. Watching this film feels like having the weight of our history looking over your shoulder with you. It is teeming with historical framing and importance, regarding both its shape and content.
Completely ignoring historical context Dreyer’s film opts to relate Joan of Arc’s story by focussing on her trial and execution and the suffering that went along with it. No sweeping shots of her military victories, no familiar backdrop, it assumes that its audience knows who we’re dealing with here and chooses to focus on her last days and how she suffered through them.…
Robert De Niro sure hasn't aged much since 1928.
I never believed the hype. A film made in the 20s, a silent film made in the 20s, being declared by some to be the best film ever made? Sounds like something only a film historian could say. Sounds like homework, like you have to know about film in the 20s to see how this one sets itself apart. Yawn. At least it is only 82 minutes.
I believe the hype now, and I ain't no film historian.
Dreyer didn't want to tell the story of Joan of Arc, he wanted to tell the story of The Passion of Joan of Arc. If Joan is God's daughter, she met the same fate as her brother. Both had trials. Both were…
I am not a religious man. Growing up, my mother took me to church because she felt she should, an obligation rather than any actual deep connection to a deity or the scripture that was referenced each week. My father would spend each Sunday morning out in nature, taking walks or just sitting and reflecting on the beauty of the world around him, thus he would rarely if ever join us at church. As I hated going and found the one hour to be painfully boring, absorbing nothing from the teachings of Jesus Christ, I finally spoke up and asked my old man why it was fair that I had to go and he didn't.
He explained that he did…
After a recent watch of Mexican director Carlos Reygadas’ wonderful Silent Light, and subsequent urging from LB friends to seek out Dreyer’s Ordet, it became apparent that it was time to tackle Dreyer’s The Passion of Joan of Arc from our list of shame as a warm up.
As a reference point, we watched the Criterion DVD with the Voices of Light musical accompaniment track. As another point of reference, my historical knowledge of Joan of Arc was woefully lacking, as is my knowledge of silent film.
I’ll just begin by saying that it’s visually arresting. The ability to see this startling beauty is due to the discovery of a near pristine original print in 1981 and subsequent Criterion restoration,…
In a review posted in 1997, Roger Ebert wrote "You cannot know the history of silent film unless you know the face of Renee Maria Falconetti." What makes this statement fascinating is that anyone even remotely familiar with that era of film would think first of the stars of the time like Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton and perhaps Harold Lloyd, yet he invokes the name Falconetti as a necessary piece of cinematic knowledge. Was she a star at the time, a familiar face recognized from multiple silent classics? She was not. In fact, her lead role in The Passion of Joan of Arc was her one and only appearance on film during her life. It didn't require her to speak…
With The Passion of Joan of Arc, Carl Theodor Dreyer might have very well made the pinnacle of silent film dramas, creating one of the most unsettling, terrifying biopics ever to this day. It's insane to think this film is almost 90 years old, mostly because it always feels like it doesn't belong in one time or place. Jean Cocteau once said of the film that it's like "an historical document from an era in which the cinema didn't exist.” The Passion of Joan of Arc feels like it could've been filmed during the actual trial, yet still seems insanely ahead of its time with what Dreyer is trying to do.
Dreyer brings an incredible intensity and fear…
This somehow exceeded my already high expectations. Falconetti's performance is one of the best I've ever seen; utterly haunting. Dryer's minimal style pre-empts that of Bergman/Nykvist. For anyone who doesn't think they would enjoy a silent film, just watch this and be prepared to be proved wrong.
Seriously this is one of the best films I've ever seen and it's almost 90 years old.
me: maria falconetti is truly enchanting in 'la passion de jeanne d'arc’, a landmark of classic film that showed cinema™ what it could become
also me: why does a silent movie based on legal documents from the 1400s have me chained like this... is that ambassador spock ?
Renée Maria Falconetti gave one of the greatest performances by an actress (or actor for that matter) I have ever seen in my life hands down.
The Passion of Joan of Arc, my first Dreyer film, has been on my watchlist for some time now. Until recently, no film has affected me as a cinephile and as a person as much as this one did.
We all know the story of Joan of Arc (right?). She claimed to have been sent on a mission by God, and since various priests refused to believe her, she was burned at the stake.
The film is completely silent. I feel Dreyer wanted to pull the full effect out is the characters, and he pulled away any sound that could come near the film. Again, a beautifully artistic way of approaching this story.
Carl Theodor Dreyer also wanted the sets…
The ultra rapid editing style is used so perfectly and also provides so much food for thought when compared to the comparatively languid shots in Ordet.
I was most struck by the men in this film, who function as a terrible and unstoppable hydra. The oppressive barrages of the close ups of their ever sneering, grotesque, and indistinct faces was overwhelming and effectively hard to watch.
Dreyer's distinct ability to portray emotion at least offers the solace that Joan's dedication to her faith led her to the peace she had desperately yearned for.
My first viewing since I was 18 in 2012, words cannot express or even begin to describe to the amount in which i love this film, its something more than love, its a complete passion and devotion almost to point of religion. This film is the reason to watch movies, and explore every inch of cinema culture in every inch of every corner of the world. its a perfect example of essential cinema, something so perfect, it deserves to become the actual definition of cinema. in the dictionary, under cinema, it should just have this film. nothing you say, hasn't already been said about this masterpiece of art. it destroyed me
Don't listen to Robert Bresson, this film is amazing and falconetti is incredible
The best film of all time, according to the Toronto International Film Festival. They're wrong. I mean, it's not bad and for its time it's good, but even in 1928 it wasn't the best movie that had ever been made because The General, Nosferatu, Battleship Potemkin, and Dr. Caligari all preceded it.
I was impressed by the acting. Without a single sound making it into the film, the actors did a great job conveying their characters' feelings, especially the actress who played Joan.
I've now seen everything that has been on a Sight & Sound Top 10 since 1962.
All the films from all the editions, including those subsequently removed, presently totalling 1177. An easy way of seeing how…
The first 1012 films are from The 1,000 Greatest Films list, and maintain the original order. The films that follow…