I always thought that the reason why this thread was so short until recently was precisely because everything had been said about the film and its greatness already. At least about the technical side of it, and for me, the greatness of "Jeanne" is indeed very much in its technical and formal aspects, in all the things you mentioned: the blank sets and the close-ups being the most impressive among them. What makes the film so important is not so much that the film employs these devices, but at what time it did that. The film was made 30 or 35 years before Bergman dared to try something remotely like it again. Dreyer seems to me to have invented a whole new language of cinema more or less out of nothing, and it's probably this daring that makes it impossible for me NOT to think of the camerawork. The Einhorn score, as you say, underlines what we see, and probably makes the mise en scène side even more dominant (at least more, I'd assume, than some piano track). So, in fact, I like it a lot. But I never tried to watch the film without it.

I perhaps admire the film more than I love it as much as Schreck or Sloper seem to do. In fact, the kind of emotional involvement described is much more generated by "Vampyr" or "Ordet" (where I never think about the technical details, it seems) in my case. It's not that "Jeanne" leaves me cold, far from it. But it still allows me a certain 'objectivity' which I can't (and don't want to) uphold with these other two films.

Thomas J has no point, he simply has Bitch-Colored Glasses that he peers thru to view every post: he simply cannot post without beefing to feed his sense of himself. He's a troller, plain and simple, and my guess is his isp address is going to get pegged like his Cranial forerunners if he keeps it up.

My posts above (the recent ones) weren't a SUm Assessment of the picture. They're the continuation of a very specific conversation that was started on the avant garde thread, and since the subject (the caricaturing of your characters-- or your animals, in the case of Joseph Cornell-- via stylization, for the sake of expressive comment) fit better on the JOAN thread, we had it here. It was a random discussion entirely of the moment that Colin & I had, not a Wikipedia entry on the film, which apparently started Thomas J into foaming embolism.

I could go on for pages about why this film noodles back & forth with a couple of Murnaus & Epsteins (and Kirsanoff) as my favorite film of all time... and I been a broken record about my love for this film over the years I've been on this forum (Singore J hasn't been around over the years and wants us to start all over again to satisfy his categorical nitziness).

From Leaves to Once Upon a Time to Parsons Widow to Master of the House & Mikael, on thru Vampyr and the other three viewable features (not to mention the industrial & topical shorts he did to fill the gaps in the sound era), Dreyer's canon is a great trove of genius and originality... yet to me Joan is not only his but the whole mediums highest religious (I mean that in an aesthetic way) epiphany.

And imho there's no question that the film is most effective without the score. Despite all the astonishingly innovative and "lawbreaking" mise en scene, it absolutely has the chilling effect of "peering into the past thru the keyhole" he sought. I always thought the Einhorn score was there to help "dabbling" audiences on the circuit (Joan was not so long ago the best performing film on the theatrical circuit) along with their appreciation of a silent film. Certainly medieval chants arent neccessary "for effect". These are some of the most haunted, chilling (and traumatizing) images ever lensed.

I am NOT a fan of the film (let's not go into this) -- but I quickly turned off the music when I watched this DVD. As with Ozu's early films, the film made far more sense really silent.

On the other hand, I just saw Kozintsev's and Trauberg's New Babylon and Alone -- and think the scores were clearly intended to be an integral part of both these films.

Is this accurate--did Dreyer actually intend that this film be seen with no accompaniment, in complete (or theatre) silence? Would this have been a reasonable expectation on his part? I know next to nothing about the silent era; I guess I always thought most cinemas had an organist or pianist whose job was to accompany the pictures, and probably would have been as unwilling to sit silently by as the benshi were in Japan.

I'll have to give Joan another spin with the sound off and see how my reactions differ. Thanks for the idea.

Speaking only for Me I'd actually love to hear a dissenting view on the film. All you hear is "Best Film Ever Made" yadda yadda yadda, I'd like to hear from someone who it didnt work for.

> I'd like to hear from someone who it didnt work for.

Someday -- when I have plenty of time. (Very short version -- I really, really don't like ultra close-ups -- and I disliked (on historical and theological grounds) the way Joan's story was treated.

P.S. My wife hated it -- much more vehement than I was (She thought it was a virtual "snuff video") ;~}

Details some other time....

I would agree that you have a point here, I love the film for the way it gets into the fight for control of the Joan's mind, but it does so in an interesting way stripped of historical context. It becomes much more of an intimate (and thus more disturbing) battle, people arguing their position but with much more at stake on Joan's side and far little interest in listening to what she has to say for more than a pretext on which to inevitably destroy her on the other.

I think the wider historical story is one that seems to cause problems for filmmakers in that the enormous battles give way to an intense individual fight and a downbeat climax. I find it interesting that films seem to either get the 'battle' Joan or the 'saintly' Joan but can't seem to combine her together into one actress - though I would like to see the Rivette Jeanne la Pucelle with Sandrine Bonnaire.



But isn't that implied by 'passion' in the title? Suffering as a means of transcending your worldly concerns and the inevitability of death focusing the mind more intently?

My wife felt the film seemed to savor Joan's suffering in an almost lascivious fashion. Nothing transcendent about this at all.

(She is very touchy about certain things. She got very upset about the chicken killing in Olvidados -- so I watch Las hurdes when she wasn't around).

;~}

I much prefer the Rivette version -- and the (theatrical) Shaw one.

Has she had a similar reaction to Mouchette, Vagabond or Von Trier's Breaking The Waves or Dancer In The Dark? Similar arguments about taking pleasure in degredation vs dignity in the face of abuse could apply here also.

Oh, Dancer in the Dark. I had the same reaction and to this day, I still can't bring myself to sit through it again. It's ironic that Falconetti and Bjork never acted again.

That's the 'human' Joan. Not much of a warrior or a saint in her, just an amazing 20 year old who acts out of both her compassion and her clarity of mind. Most amazing and touching, and I think I prefer it even to Dreyer (though these films are not really comparable). I wonder why this isn't available on disc even in France (and don't buy the shortened version released in the US!!). Okay, to answer that rhetorical question:it was a huge box office flop, but it's surely one of Rivette's greatest masterpieces.

I know better than to try Von Trier. I think she mostly ignored Mouchette when I watched it -- she didn't care much for Balthazar.

We will see Vagabond when the new Varda set comes out (and we can afford to biy it).


I bought a copy of the French video of Rivette's Joan from FNAC (or was it Alapage) -- but something went wrong. The image was so thin and washed out (all the way through) it is almost impossible to watch (almost like severely underdeveloped slide film). I made it through once -- and could tell that it had a lot more sensible and compelling structure than the truncated American version. Even in butchered form, Bonnaire's performance is outstanding (and the film has some great music).

I'd be happy with an unsubbed French DVD release of this (though subs would be nicer still).

That sounds really bad. Let me assure you that the film looks as gorgeous as anything by Rivette in both its 5 1/2 hour theatrical version and in the shortened 'international' version I once saw on TV. And yes, the pacing is totally off in the shortened version. I wonder why they (whoever they were) did it. It's still almost four hours and thus equally uncommercial, but all the magic is gone. Can't remember the music, but wasn't it some original medieval music played by some such ensemble?

Given the fact that Rivette seems to be somewhat popular in Germany (you can see more Rivette on TV here than Kurosawa, for instance), I still have hopes that some German company might release it. It would have been a great chance to include it in the forthcoming Arthaus set, but no, they opted for "Celine" and "Va savoir" instead... Where is CC when one needs them?

Anyone else think this DVD would be a good re-release? I mean, the old one is fine, but it's been eight years since, and I'm sure technological advances could improve the image quality on the DVD quite a bit. And wouldn't it be something to throw in the sonorized Lo Duca version? I've always wanted to see it, just to get a sense of what the recut was like, considering Dreyer had to use second takes after the original neg was lost. That'd be a package I'd be more than willing to double dip!

Well the current DVD does have a comparison between Dreyer's cut and the other versions he had to piece together.

It might be too soon to say that about Björk - she has just acted in and composed the music for Matthew Barney's Drawing Restraint 9.

I suppose being in a relationship with the director was a big factor in her decision to do the film (I keep thinking though that it might be a good jest to have Barney and Björk after turning into whales be chased by a Von Trier lookalike manning a harpoon gun! )

Also, she has been speaking with Michel Gondry about potential film projects.

That's a relief to know that Bjork's considering to give acting another chance. She probably needed that long break after playing Selma for Lars.

Falconetti never acted again?! She was a theatre star before and after the film. There's a whole universe outside of the cinema, you know.

Oh god, such a fuss! Falconetti never acted for cinema after working with Dreyer. Better now?

Thought I'd pass along some new info. I just received my regular email from the ITN Corporation (the official website for In the Nursery) and was informed that they have apparently completed a new score for this film as part of their Optical Music Series--which includes scores to the likes of Hindle Wakes, A Page of Madness and Asphalt. This new score will be premiered as live accompaniment to a screening of The Passion on April 16th at the Sensoria Festival in Sheffield. Complete info here. Anyway, if anyone can make it (God knows I can't) I'm sure we'd all like to hear a response.

I'm more interested in knowing when and how the Page of Madness score is going to be used.

Restoration please, and dvd.

Excellent news! I hope someone in the UK (BFI??) will release this on dvd. ITN's soundtracks are all great, but some of them only work with the images. The cd of "Electric Edwardians" without the images is a complete bore, whereas with the films it has an entrancing quality. And yes, get out "Page of Madness" soon, restored or not.

Well, if you want unrestored cineklump, there's always superhappyfun.

Apart from the fact that it's an NTSC VHS which I can't play anyway, have you seen this? The image looks like one of those bootleg dvds that show up time and again on ebay and reportedly are close to unwatchable...
When I said 'restored or not' I rather had in mind that I couldn't care if there were the usual wear and tear, but of course I want a professional transfer of this. But Kino would do...