The Passion of Renee Maria Falconetti

by Todd Ollis

On the verge of the silent/talkie era, movies were excited to jump onto the latest commodity and let their actors be heard. Sound revolutionized film probably more than any other single event since Governor of California Leland Stanford commissioned Eadweard Muybridge to set up a series of twelve cameras along a horse race track and take a picture of the horse going by to see if there was any point in which all four of the horse's legs were off the ground; thus setting off series photography and eventually cinematography. In 1928 a Danish born director named Carl Dreyer made a film called The Passion of Joan of Arc. This French film is a rarity among films, silent or not. With strange tones, unusual back stories, and strenuous obstacles the actors had to endure in the making of the film, the story is not nearly as interesting as the film, but it is a good one nonetheless.

Carl Dreyer had a big budget, big for its time, and basically had complete artistic freedom on this film. He soon abandoned the script that was given to him and decided to take his story from the transcripts of the trial of Joan of Arc. After Joan dressed as a boy and led the French army in the defeat of the British forces, she was captured by French loyal to the British and brought to appear before the church court. Here she was questioned on everything from why she dressed as a boy to her belief that she was sent to help the French army by God. This is the section of Joan's life that the film looks at. Dreyer found his Joan on stage in a comedy. He said there was something in her face, knowing then how he was going to shoot the movie. He put this wonderful actress, Renee Maria Falconetti, through much strenuous activities such as making her kneel on stones in order to get pain in her face, making her do take after take trying to remove all of the emotion from her face, and forcing her to shave her own head in the final sequences of the movie. She gives a performance that is unbelievable and maybe the best performance by an actress ever. Her eyes are like two giant oceans in which the audience is forced to delve into and take a swim. The expressions her face gives off say so much more than this movie ever could if there were dialogue. In addition, it would have been a travesty if Dreyer would have used the new found technology of sound in this film; it wouldn't have worked nearly as well.

An interesting side note to this film is what the actual footage has gone through over the years. After the premiere in 1928 a warehouse fire destroyed the original negative and other prints. Dreyer reconstructed the film from another version of outtake footage. Only lightning struck twice and the second version was also destroyed by fire. Dreyer gave up on it at this point and went on making other films. For years it remained a movie that was buried according to Dreyer at least, who disowned the bootleg copies that were circulating because they were fragmented versions from the remaining parts of whatever had survived. Dreyer died in 1968 thinking that his masterpiece would never be seen and appreciated in its original version. Then a strange and miraculous thing happened. In 1981 in Oslo, Norway someone was cleaning out a janitor's closet of a mental institution when they stumbled upon a complete print of Dreyer's first cut. The print was in near perfect condition and is the sole reason we are able to see his version of the film today.

To speak on the movie, it is shot in either medium range shots or close-ups. There are no far away establishing shots to let you get a feel of the atmosphere. The feel of the movie generated from these types of shots is one of uncomfortable tightness, a person being trapped. And Joan is certainly this person. She is being bullied and questioned by these priests whom she has no choice but to answer in the way that God wishes her to, which is not necessarily what the priests want to hear ironically. These shots are intense enough but when added with the music, sounds of monks chanting, adds a whole other level to intensity. This is truly one of those films that you can't take your eyes off of. The close ups of Falconetti are the most striking by far because once again her face says everything and nothing at the same time. Watching this movie I saw facial expressions I didn't think were possible and also saw horrible sadness that no human should feel. Faces are, obviously, important in this movie; therefore, Dreyer does something else unconventional. He doesn't put any make-up on any of the actors, including Falconetti. Watching this film looked like watching the actual trial of Joan of Arc, because the actors look authentic to the era and the sadness portrayed by Falconetti is extremely authentic.

All this proved to be too much for Renee Falconetti. She never made another movie again because of Dreyer's demands. This is a good and a bad thing of sorts. Good because if she did make another movie there would be the comparison factor that us movie people love to bring out. However the bad end of it is she did a wonderful part in this movie and who's to say that she didn't have other great roles in her. However it is a poetic career to say the least. She has this one performance for us to enjoy and that is the sole one. It was as if she showed up, did her thing, and dropped off the face of the earth; or in this case moved to Buenos Aries. Therefore if you are in the mood to see a captivating film and get the chance to see one of, if not, the greatest performances of all time by an actress, or by an actor for that matter, go and find—difficult as it may be—The Passion of Joan of Arc.