The Passion of Joan of Arc
Introduction
Today, (historical) period dramas are one of the most popular genres in film and television. History becomes a tool of the expression of today's world. Producers and writers creates or re-creates events and characters from any periods (those are generally derived from the past but sometimes about the imagination of future). Technology constitutes opportunities to make periodic films pure and realist. In the early cinema, technical options were limited for this genre, there was a silent film period at the beginning of the 20th century. However, Carl Dreyer radically made "The Passion of Joan of Arc" in 1928 with his expressions on the event. In this article, first, I will analyze theoretical aspects of film and also compare the function of this film with more contemporary historical films: Barry Lyndon-from Stanley Kubric and Joan of Arc (1999) from Luc Besson.
Historical Film
When critics cannot associate that film traditional historical cinema, Abel suggests that The Passion of Joan of Arc as an 'anti-historical film'. He was right, when we consider the operating of film in Dreyer's way. However, the content of the film matches with the definition of that genre. Firstly, there is a needed explanation on the usage of historical film. There are many examples about that large genre in the cinema history. For example, in Turkey, historical film (must be) related to nationalistic perception of the viewer. On the other hand, after the W.W. II, film industry normally interested with holocaust. Ideologies or traumas can be root for making that kind of films. Moreover, heroes / heroins are the characters. Dreyer, tried to connect with hero and the audience to humanize the character (and tragedy) and he said; "my intention whilst filming Joan of Arc was, through the glory of legend, to reveal the human tragedy. I wanted to show that the heroes of History are also human beings". In the light of that, audience knows that Joan of arc is a symbolic national icon for France but according to Murray, Dreyer subverted that national icon (in the Besson's version of the story we could not see that kind of aim) and humanize the heroine with no make-up's, close up's on her defected face and unpretentious clothes of her (of course in her situation she could not wear beautiful clothes but a director can show poor clothes in pretentious ways too). For Antonin Artaud (he was in the cast), on the acting side, humanization of characters happened that way: "he emphasis on the physicality of his actors, suggesting that they should not simply act their characters, but become them, eliminating the distance between reality and its representation, and those writing about Artuad often identify his auratic presence in The Passion of Joan of Arc." If we think about physicality of Kubric's actors in Barry Lyndon (I selected that because it is perfect example of historical period dramas) the difference emerges automatically. Kubric creates an historical atmosphere perfectly, there are additional moles of most of the women characters, perfect lineaments in the face of Barry Lyndon, and their clothes natural for that period, but the audience can easily realizes they were unnatural for actors of the film. Therefore, as Artaud mentioned, hero and human cannot identify physically in one body.
Manipulation:
Sound and Camera movements
Moreover, Artaud was conservative about the silent cinema, so sound might breaks the authenticity of acting too. Because, the most significant feature of "The Passion of Joan of Arc" is close up and directly facial expressions. When sound and facial expressions come together, there may be a conflict in the concept of the aura. Any kinds of sound manipulates the affects of viewer but the aim of Dreyer is full concentration on the pure face of characters (especially Falconetti). Now, comparing two versions of Joan of Arc can work for understanding that concept. Recanting and burning scene of the latest version of Joan of Arc creates manipulative tension and affection on the audience. Sound is one of the manipulative tools in there. There is an epic music after the death of Joan of Arc with the start of rebellion. People with flags on their hands against the execution with the music. It creates nationalistic atmosphere for the audience (esp. French's). Also heroin recants an her oath to her Case (truer word than passion for this re-make film) with heroic and religious music to blessing her life and struggle. The other manipulative tools in that scene is camera movement and montage. There is a slow-motion on the face of heroine after the last speech of her and before audience sees her burning. After the slow motion scene, a cross figure appears. Another slow motion on the face of old woman when she looks at heroins painful face. Those exceptional choices of director try to triggers the affection of the audience. However, we never seen that kind of tricks in the first version of Joan of Arc. Dreyer in Joan of Arc, as Bordwell mentioned, "powerfully rejects the dominant relationships between narrative logic and cinematic space" (66). There are more than 1500 shots in the movie, so the average of the duration of a single shot is approximately two seconds. The film mostly remembered the face of Falconetti but it is not about the duration of take, it's seen too much on the screen. And, because of the composition of Dreyer, audience is unable to concentrate anything except the facial expression of heroine. The space generally maintains with white wall and empty sky in the background of the object. Also, lack of sound helps that direct concentration without manipulation. In the first example about the burning scene, there is nationalistic emotion comes from the rebellion of crowd. Dreyer avoids that but he also breaks the motivation with camera movements. At the end of the crowd scene, "two equally disorienting camera movements parallel the earlier pair. Now, as the people frantically flee through the gateaway, the camera views them from directly below and pans up, against their movement" (Bordwell, 77).
Close-up and Facial Expressions
"There is perhaps no other film in which the material quality of the photography has more importance." (Bazin)
In the historical periodic dramas, stories comprise historical background of characters and details about the atmosphere. In, Barry Lyndon, audience witnesses all the events without any gap. The rise of hero is formed step by step. Each step has to be a threshold for the development of character and the story. Each side characters work for the building of Lyndon with love, conflicts etc. In "The Passion of Joan of Arc", as Micheal Kollar indicates that, there are no details about Joan is or what she has done, where she has came, nor are they any details of her interrogators or their political alignment. Audience starts to witness with the trial of Joan. There is no linear rising of heroine in the story, she finds herself to protect her belief against the pressure of the church. The side characters are independent from the heroine, they do not help to built the main character. That possible question comes out; How is the audience joins the trial?
The actual question is, how a film express itself? In cinema, ways of expressions invented and mixed from directors. It becomes a huge industry. However, in the early 20th century, it was hard to find a unique expression style. Carl Dreyer believes 'the soul of the face'. He gives the importance of gesture and facial expression in silent film, Murray cites that, mimetic form of expression that communicates more directly than speech. "The mimetic acts directly upon us and evokes our emotions without the need for thoughts to intervene, and that the mimetic gesture brings the soul to the face" (Dreyer, 1983). The purest expression must avoids make-up, perfection turns to imperfection. Eyes get bigger or smaller. While heroin suffers and cries, a judge can spits on to her face (with close up). Also there is an exaggeration on the face of Joan, but it is not only interested with mimics or gesture. Dreyer blows out the details in the background, so there is only the face in the surface.
Close ups are crucial for Dreyer and Gilles Deleuze describes his technique "He prefers to isolate each face in a close-up which is only partly filled, so that the position to the right or to the left directly induces a virtual conjunction which no longer needs to pass through the real connection between people” In close up sequences, there are microscopic nuances on the face of Joan, but usually it is not happens during the single shot. It happens among two consecutive takes on face of her. Bela Balazs described that "a drama of spirit". For Bordwell, "the spatial uncertainty from shot to shot is accompanied by one of the most naked narrative conflict ever filmed." In the classical narrative format, there is an orientation between shot of looker and shot of thing seen (180 degree rule). In this film, that system is also broken. There is no problem about shot of x (face of Joan) looking, and seeing (object that Joan seen) but the returning scene the face of Joan seen from different angle. (Bordwell, 82). Also there is an agreement about his depthless frames on film critics, because even close up's can involve deepness in the background but his medium or long shots works without space as Bordwell mentioned. Deleuze, realized that and he understands medium and long shots are transformed into close-ups in the concept of close-ups flow (145). There is an uninterrupted movement;
Expression of the Passion
Thera are different films about Joan of Arc from another great directors; Bresson and Rosselini. All of them tried to tell their words with different concept on same event. For example, trail is the most attractive issue for Bresson. The last version of film gathers all the things about Joan and the people from 14th century and tries to reach the most heroic emotions about the concerns of film (like Case, passion, nationalism etc). That is the common type of historical period dramas. In that concept, "The passion of Joan of Arc" can characterized as an anti-historical film because only passion handled by Carl Dreyer (again no detail, no linear process). Except Falconetti, nothing is important. Falconetti represents the passion with most realistic way for his daughter. According to Kollar, she stated that "her mother hadn’t made other films was because she believed the arduous physical conditions she had to endure in the making of La Passion de Jeanne d’Arc were typical of filmmaking". That statement related the thoughts of Artaud about acting. Throughout the article, facial expression was a material to analyzing but at the end: What was the face expressed? Mainly sorrow, sometimes death of fear (stake) but her truth is her passion, and it becomes everything for the film. Murray, mentioned that idea of Bazin "seem to suggest that the individual identities of the actors are important, yet on the other, they imply that the body’s individuality is exceeded: Falconetti becomes Dreyer, Eugène Silvain (bishop in the film), Jean d’Yd and Maurice Schutz (judge) are identified through small facial features or qualities that form part of a collective affect." (10).
Conclusion
Extinguishment of perspective is a key for understanding the difference between Kubric and Dreyer. Kubric known as a obsessed with perspective of the object in the frame.There is no possibility to see top of the face of Barry Lyndon with (unnecessary) 80% of gap in the screen. Necessity is a tool for Kubric to create a mis-en-scene, which is significant for rhyme and tune of the film. Sound is a crucial part of that unity. Considering the thought of Bordwell, Joan of Arc has not that kind of unity because of the technical breaking of Dreyer. However, Deleuze cannot argue anything agains Bordwell, but he shoves the orientation of film (close ups flow) with understandable aspects. But all of the critics accepts that the film transcends the limitations of early cinema, and it opens inspirational aestheticism to experience of audience.
References:
Bordwell, David. The Films of Carl-Theodor Dreyer. University of California Press. 1981.
Deleuze, Gilles. Cinema 1, Movement-Image
Dreyer, Carl Theodor "Réflexions sur mon métier", Paris: Cahiers du cinéma.
Koller, Micheal. "La Passion de Jeanne d’Arc". From: Senses of Cinema. (2000)
McKeown, Siobhan. "Techniques Of Terror: Carl Dreyer's Danish Gothic Dissected" from http://thequietus.com/
2012
Murray, Ron. ‘The Epidermis of Reality’: Artaud, the Material Body and Dreyer’s The Passion of Joan of Arc" Film-Philosophy 17.1 (2013).
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder