Full movie can be found here.
Please choose one essay prompt and write at least 2-3 well-developed paragraphs.
Essay #1 From Roger Ebert's essay on The Passion of Joan of Arc:
"There is not one single establishing shot in all of 'The Passion of Joan of Arc,' which is filmed entirely in closeups and medium shots, creating fearful intimacy between Joan and her tormentors. Nor are there easily read visual links between shots. In his brilliant shot-by-shot analysis of the film, David Bordwell of the University of Wisconsin concludes: '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.'"
Many avant garde films also do not have matches on action or carryover shots. Compare The Passion of Joan of Arc to one of the avant garde films we watched in regards to editing and mise-en-scene. Use cinematic evidence to back up whatever you state.
Essay #2 From the Ib Monty article I gave you:
"When the film was released, the close-up technique was regarded as shocking. Dreyer defended his method by stating: 'The records give a shattering impression on the ways in which the trial was a conspiracy of the judges against the solitary Jeanne, bravely defending herself against men who displayed a devilish cunning to trap her in their net. This conspiracy could be conveyed on the screen only through the huge close-ups, that exposed, with merciless realism, the callous cynicism of the judges hidden behind hypocritical compassion--and on the other hand there had to be equally huge close-ups of Jeanne, whose pure features would reveal that she alone found strength in her faith in God.' As in all of Dreyer's major films the style grew out of the theme of the film. In La passion de Jeanne d'Arc Dreyer wanted 'to move the audience so that they would themselves feel the suffering that Jeanne endured.' It was by using close-ups that Dreyer could 'lead the audience all the way into the hearts and guts of Jeanne and the judges.'"
Agree or disagree with this quote. Use cinematic evidence to back up whatever you state.
Ib Monty’s opinion on close up shots is a very strong and well supported statement. In the film Joan of Arc by Dreyer he uses an excessive amount of close up shots which portray intense emotion. It is something that is exemplary of the time period because it was directly before the release of sound. Without sound there was a need to express emotions more dramatically to be sure the audience followed the storyline. Silent films are characterized by their immense amount of drama and this film’s story has a lot of intense emotion around it.
ReplyDeleteA close-up shot is used to get into a character’s intimate space to reveal characteristics that otherwise go unnoticed. It is used to keep a critical connection between the viewer and the character. The way Monty explains this technique as shattering is extremely accurate. During this period directors and cinematographers were pushing the limits to show emotion and plot, with the close-up you can see the details of her face that push it to a new undiscovered territory. In a no way discreet way Dreyer implicates the battle going on in Joan’s mind through facial expressions and what he places in the frame. An example of a shot that backs up Monty’s point of view is one of the first places a close up appears in the movie is after the head judge has asked if she knows god. She is looking up into the sky almost and the shot is pretty level. Being close to Joan shows us the light in her eyes, the clearness in her skin and her simplicity, her hair is cut and she isn’t wearing extreme clothing. We can see the bumps on her skin and it creates a connection because normally that's something you only notice when looking at somebody's face for extended periods of time. Which even today is seen as creepy if it isn’t somebody you are intimately involved with. They they the eyes are the windows to the soul which is extremely true.
Another example of the close-up being utilized in a different way is when it is used to show an emotional act. The first time that it really hits is the close-up of Joan’s hair being cut off. By this time there is already a connection with her. We have watched her cry more than once while trying to keep her commitment to god, and her life. The first introductory shot isn’t even a shot of Joan, it is a shot of her hair on the ground. We are already getting a feeling that this is a change in not only appearence, but who she is. We don’t see her face and I think that Dreyer leaves it out because the Joan that signed the paper wasn’t the same person who stood up and showed us all that emotion. The next shot is really the meat of this scene because of how the close up is composed. Joan’s entire face isn’t shown. Only her eyes up is shown and we see the top of her scalp as a man is cutting her hair. Because we are so close we can see the patchiness in the haircut and the pieces of hair that have fallen onto her face and gotten stuck in her tears. Another thing the close up shows in detail is her breathing and movement. Because she is tearing her breathing is faster and we can see that is how she moves in the screen. Also because we are so close up any slight movement of the face is extremely highlighted. All of this shows who she is on the inside not only the outside. Everything that Dreyer does is to impact the audience more than an average movie in his time. Monty explains it perfectly as him leading us into “the hearts and guts of Jeanne”.
I believe that Dreyer was correct in assuming to correctly convey the emotions of the film he would need to use close ups almost exclusively. This choice of never showing the viewer anything from farther than a few feet away prevents them from removing themselves from the events seen on screen which makes viewing the movie somewhat shocking and uncomfortable. The audience feels as though they are a part of Jeanne’s whether or not they believe she is guilty, even if a viewer believes that she is guilty the amount of force the church puts towards Jeanne into admitting guilt leaves the viewer with a sickening sense of responsibility.
ReplyDeleteThe only moments that the viewer is relieved of this guilt is when the camera joins those who are rioting but at the same time this is when the camera is most removed from the action as it is positioned in low and slightly dutch angles positioned under bridges and off of walls. The viewer is not allowed to fully wipe their hands of Jeanne’s death. They were not a part of the riot attempting to save Jeanne but they were not a part of the guard trying to stop it. At this point they are just observers, left once again as an audience to events but left still with a guilt as though they have played a role and brought forth a result that should bring to them nothing but shame.
Roger Ebert discusses the use of jump cuts in the film The Passion of Joan of Arc directed by Carl Theodor Dreyer, which can be compared to similar use of jump cuts during the avant garde film period. Most of Dreyer’s intensely close shots are used to portray very similarly intense emotions, which is often compared to the avant garde films. In addition, Dreyer often doesn’t use establishing shots, which is another jarring cut for the viewer, contributing to the feel of being a more disestablishment film. The lack of easily readable transition between shots makes the viewer feel as if they have to pay attention to every shot to understand and read into the plot, a technique often utilized in avant garde films. This technique also forces the audience to make connections between the seemingly unconnected shots, and develop thoughts further. With Dreyer’s montage editing, scenes like the letter reading scene are slightly harder to follow, creating a more attentive audience, and having no unnecessary shots, only including shots that directly relate to the plot or convey emotion.
ReplyDeleteThe Passion of Joan of Arc relates to the film Un Chien Andalou, directed by Salvador Dalí and Luis Buñuel, because the more indistinct narratives, and the extremely distinguishable shot changes. Though the characters in The Passion of Joan of Arc don’t physically change from dead to alive before the audience's eyes, Joan does almost die, needing to be bled to keep from dying a natural death. The main female character in Un Chien Andalou is trapped by creepy figments, such as a man’s hand covered in ants, while Joan is being physically kept by the church of the French, showing the female struggle. The main character is being kept by physical bonds (the abusive man), she can eventually overcome these and meet with a man she loves on the beach. Joan does the same thing, originally being worried about the consequences of not signing the paper to submissiveness, she can also overcome these fears and wholeheartedly accept her beliefs in front of the public. Not only do these two films relate with plot and character development, they also relate with similarly positioned lack of establishing shots, such as in Un Chien Andalou with the sudden character death by the man hit by the train in the street, and Dreyer’s sudden introduction of a more helpful priest. Another similarity would be the lack of continuity from shot to shot, giving both films more of a Sergei Eisenstein feeling with montage editing.
The Passion of Joan of Arc is a 1929 French production directed by Carl Dreyer that is famous for its unique presentation of cinematic space. In this interrogation and execution of the main character, Joan, there are no establishing shots, and mostly all shots used in this film are close up shots composed only of a character’s face. With the trial and death of the main character presented in such intense shots the audience “discovers the real Joan”. In an Ib Monty article discussing the unique and innovational aspects of Dreyer's biographical film, and in this article there is a distinct interpretation of the overall implicit meaning behind the ubiquitous use of closeup shots in the film. This article goes in depth to explain how the repeated use of extreme close up shots aid to the implied conspiracy the priests had over the solidarity of Joan.
ReplyDeleteThe essential focus of this article is that by using close-up shots the director could 'lead the audience all the way into the hearts and guts of Jeanne and the judges.'. I agree with this statement completely, because of the harshly close shots the viewer is forced to succumb to the intense emotions of Joan and entirely feel for her throughout this trial. In this film Dreyer leaves no room for unneeded information and drastically reveals exactly what the audience's eye should be brought to- the viewer sees Joan under a telescope and is able to formulate their own opinions as well as starkly see the overarching opinion of the priests. An example of this is during the first interrogation scene where Joan is seen at a much closer viewpoint than the priests and jury which shows the audience is dissecting her as close as the priests are. The priests are always shot from very low unappealing angles that make them unattractive to the viewers as well as appear of higher power, which alludes to one explicit meaning that they will abuse that large amount of power they hold. The close up shots of Joan’s face in the torture chamber and in her stall also show us the lack of freedom she holds by not allowing the audience to see what building she is in or who is really around her, these strict close ups force the audience into Joan’s imprisoned shoes. Another aspect of this film I felt embodied the central idea of the IB Monty article (the audience is meant to feel the conspiracy of the priests towards Joan's innocence) was that the brutal actions taken towards Joan, draining of her blood and cutting her hair, are shown in close up shots of the action itself. The audience is forced to look at the brutal cutting and draining of Joan's blood unable to focus on anything else because the action is the only thing in frame, and after this shot is a shot of Joan's hurt expression. Because of the shot of Joan follows the action the audience has no other choice but to feel the utter pain and confusion that Joan is facing both physically and mentally.
Essay #2:
ReplyDeleteThe Passion of Joan of Arc, through its use of close up and extreme close up shots, achieves a uniquely emotional form of storytelling comparable to films of the avant-garde movement. By shooting the film almost entirely in these close-up shots and refusing to carry action between shots, each shot becomes an isolated frame of emotion. We no longer view the film in context of continuous action or the rhythm of the editing, but in the context of Joanne's visceral desperation. Many a time do we see Joanne, huge, centered in the frame, staring up past the camera, wearing a glassy, glazed expression, like a deer in the headlights, her eyes shining with the light from the interrogation room windows and her face shining with terrified sweat. The background contains nothing but a gray wall, so the audience has literally nothing to focus on but Joanne's face. Due to this, and the lack of an editing style that carries action and context from previous shots, the only thing in the world is Joanne's terrified face. The only thing we have to think about cinematically is her emotion and her plight. The lack of many significant events, along with the substance of the film being composed mainly of questioning, creates a sort of narrative minimalism that makes way for this emotional storytelling that has been established.
In addition to creating a visceral context through which to view our heroine, the close-up style makes the leering judges even more imposing. They are framed very similarly to Joanne, centered in a close-up shot with a blank background, excepting the angle of the shot. They are often viewed from a low angle, displaying their earthly power over Joanne. As they are, once again, the only thing the audience has to think about, seeing the same old faces over and over, they become as brutal and grotesque as they seem to Joanne herself, their smiles twisted and their scowls hideous. And although the difference in angles between the judges and Joanne establishes a legal and institutional power imbalance, the fact that they take up the same amount of space within their respective frames implies Joanne's religious and political influence. Although this shooting style thwarted cinematic convention, it proved effective for this alternative narrative style that the film provides.
Essay #2, Ib Monty
ReplyDeleteI must agree that the entire use of extreme closeups was essential for demonstrating the facial expressions of the trial in order to highlight the cynicisms of the judges and the isolation of Joanne against the odds of her judges. In the Passion of Joanne of Arc, We see the judges's heads to upper torso. Their medium close up signals more bodily presence in the scene and therefore more power and menace as a low angle shot would provide. On many occasions, several judges would appear in the same frame. This establishes that the judges are conspiring against Joanne since they never cease to criticize her faith all while embodying this physical representation of such overwhelming power. On the other hand, Joanne is typically shown in a full closeup, no more than her shoulders to head are ever seen when she is being judged. This closeness allows us to see reflections of light in her eye, which creates a passionate connection between her and the audience, which also reflect her tears in detail, thus allowing us to "feel the suffering that Jeanne endured.
We encounter high/low angle shots in Jeanne's cell. In the archway, the judge and guard are seen from a low angle shot with Jeanne at eye level and high angle, her tears visible on screen. Although we experience a physical dynamic, this is one of Jeanne's revelations that her God is on her side and outsmarts the guard with her rhetoric and claim that France has the God given authority to conquer the Church. This is a great victory for her, but the Church reestablishes their authority by only permitting her churchgoing under rule that she removes her men's clothing. This is an interesting gender dynamic, as it clearly is an attempt for the judges to reassert their authority by stripping her of a masculine cloak, as if it enables her will to be authoritarian. She sticks to her principles and refuses, but the Church reestablishes their authority by denying her grace. This high/low angle dynamic remains in the entire scene. The closeness of the shots demonstrate her passion and misery as the trial continues. I have to agree with this Monty essay, and that the emotions on screen are dynamically affected by the use of extreme closeups throughout the film.
I agree with this quote. I feel that the same connection between the audience and the characters in the movie could not have been achieved if there were shots further away from them. The intimacy awarded by the closeups gives the audience no doubt about the intentions and feelings of the characters in the film.
ReplyDeleteThe shot of Joan crying with a fly on her face would not convey the emotion as well if it were placed in a longer shot. If we couldn't clearly see the little fly or the tears streaming down her cheek we wouldn't be as connected to her and her feelings. In the same way, we wouldn't be able to as clearly feel the judges' conspiracy against her. In the shots showing the judges collaborating against her, a longer shot would not show the callousness and lack of sympathy in their faces.
Since the movie is about the people and the effects the trial had on them, it needs no establishing shots and longer shots would distract from this. The exclusive use of medium shots and closeups leaves mone of the emotions to the imagination of the audience - it gave the director total control over how the audience perceived the judges amd sympathized with Joan.
Essay 2:
ReplyDeleteI agree with the quote in this essay. The way that I interpreted the extreme closeups was that she was a Jesus figure - she is sacrificing herself for what she believes is a greater cause. In almost every single closeup, she is looking up and to the side, mimicking the universal "Jesus on the cross" face. It makes her seem extremely vulnerable, especially because the shots are high angle and she has extremely wide eyes. Because of the angling of these shots she seems very feminine, despite her short hair and male clothing. That draws an interesting juxtaposition between her and the judges, given that the entire time they are trying to get her out of the male clothing. However, they shave her head nearing the end of the film, symbolizing that they've given up trying to persuade her to change her path.
She obviously is showing the most emotion out of the entire film, especially when compared to the judges who seem extremely dispassionate. Overall, it makes the viewer take pity on Joan while also disliking the judges, which is the effect that the director was going for. She seems extremely vulnerable, but not weak, especially nearing the end of the film when the high angle shots began switching to low angle ones.
I will be discussing the Ib Monty quote because I agree with it strongly and also because I do not trust Roger Ebert. When analyzing Dreyer’s “La passion de Jeanne d'Arc”, it is important to put the film into context in two main ways (that are connected). First is the fact that the film was released in 1928, right at the end of the silent era. The goal of filmmakers working was (and hopefully still is) to express the human form and emotion in their work. Second, the tale of Joan of Arc is not one without emotion, the deep sadness, the glimmers of hope, the furious anger: all of these must have been in the front of Dreyer’s mind when filming these scenes taken directly from the transcript of the trial. The way he presents the interactions perfectly represents the direction of silent cinema prior to the introduction of sound, and perhaps where the direction of cinema could have gone. Normally in the silent film era, actors would wear heavy face makeup and be shot at from a medium shot or a medium long shot, rarely with extended closeups. Instead of a typical shot structure and editing style, Dreyer truly exhibits control of both the lens and the frame with his work on “La passion de Jeanne d'Arc”. His decision to keep all the actors without makeup and cut quickly between extreme closeups make the emotions in this movie so strong, and truly relate to the meaning of the Ib Monty quote. It is the only way this story could be told. If Dreyer had shot the film in a normal fashion instead of changing the way cinema could be done with this production, the end product probably would’ve looked a little more like “My Cousin Vinny”.
ReplyDeleteNow, the entire film could be used as an example of the techniques utilized by Dreyer in order to portray Joan’s emotions. I’ll use one part in particular however because that is the assignment. At a little before the 30 minute mark, Joan and the monks are already far into their discussions and questioning. The scene here, well sequence we’ll call it because it is hard to seperate scenes in a film like this, cuts between a closeup of Joan’s head, turned sideways about 30 degrees, to shots of monks, always one or two within the frame during this sequence. The beauty of this film and where Ib Monty gets at with his statements of Dreyer’s intentions, is in these closeups. The closeup of Joan gives a feeling like no other, a longing for her freedom and a sympathy with her. As she stares blankly at the monks, the word of God ringing in her ears, the closeup gives the sight of the tears forming in Joan’s eyes, the light reflecting off of her irises. On her face, the bright lights reflect in the closeup view to form what look like the wings of an angel on Joan’s cheeks. There is no doubt that Dreyer’s method was not only highly effective in acheiving his goal for the film, but also extremely moving and groundbreaking to boot.