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.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteESSAY PROMPT 2
ReplyDeleteThe close-up technique vastly aids the identification of the viewer with the afflicted Joan of Arc of whom this film is based upon. The close up technique itself is used in order to convey the same feeling of being trapped that Joan went through at this point in time. Behind Joan, we scarcely see anything but a white wall, of such luminescence that her innocence and religious faith spew for symbolically from it. The close ups of her aggressors, which are fewer than those of Joan’s, are used to provide the same focus on the malice of these men that Joan herself must have had, although there-in exist stark differences between the close-ups used to portray Joan, and the close-ups used to portray those antagonizing her. Joan is always in the center of the close up, eyes wide, and short-spoken. Any close up of any of her aggressors plainly exhibits them off balance in the frame, not only separating them to be a separate group from Joan, but implicitly depicting how wrong they were in this malicious trial.
Some elements play off of the close-up technique as well. In the aforementioned, I stated that the close ups of her aggressors were used to direct immense attention to the bitterness of those prosecuting Joan. Sometimes, the director allows for many quick close ups of her aggressors to be shown in a fast paced sequence, which in turn, amplifies the intensity of an already unbearably chaotic and unjust occurrence. There is one particular instance in the film where a tracking shot can be scene of the close ups of these men both figuratively and literally spitting words at Joan, which made it all the more easy to comprehend the situation of the brave woman. The interrogative men are not always depicted in close up shots, however, in fact, there are several instances where we view several men in one shot. This is to further the stark contrast between Joan’s individual pleas, and the hammer operated by a group of men that are all conspiring against her.
The close ups of Joan were most commonly at eye level, but sometimes we viewed her in a slightly high angled shot. This was in order to give the audience the feel of looking down on her just as those interrogating her were. The costume design and the close perimeters of the frame allow for her innocence to glow in collaboration with these angles. On the flipside, it is absolutely apparent that the men are depicted most commonly with low angle shots, so we can feel their wrath just as Joan has. They are looking down on the audience in this way, and the viewers are able to more accurately identify with the film’s protagonist. The yelling and hissing of these men is therefore seen as more intimidating through the employment of such elements.
(agree)
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete(agree)
DeleteI agree with this quote simply because when I was watching the film, I shared the same opinion about the function of the close-ups and types of shots. The film, practically all composed of close up shots, had such an important impact on the viewers pathos and interpretation of the film as a whole. What otherwise would have been a film about what happened to Jeanne during her trial transformed into a film about a girls bravery and struggles in an analysis of the human thought process, faith and emotions. The utilization of close ups forced the audience to heavily rely on the characters facial expressions especially since not all dialogue was stated and one was left guessing on what was exactly implied or said based off of facial gestures. It also helped to keep the focus of the work on the individual characters actions instead of the location, what had happened previously, and the sociocultural context surrounding the time period. The close ups, as stated in the quote that I'm in agreement with, are needed to experience the level of intimacy between Jeanne and the judges that the director wants to highlight. Every movement and choice of words is noticeable and has some degree of importance. This causes the audience to hang on every word in the careful yet witty conversation between them. Although all the most of the shots were close ups, there were some distinct variations between them that connect with what I stated above. Occasionally there would be a low angle shot of a judge as he talks down to Jeanne. It could also be viewed that they are shown in this matter as a way of emphasizing the immense power they have over her. Another reason I found the close ups to be extremely important is it stressed her faith and devotion in God. Her wide, open, almost vulnerable face was usually tilted upwards, in the frame, toward the sky almost as a way of asking for divine guidance and help. I believe it influenced her character quite a lot. Overall the use of close ups sparked heavy empathy in the viewers hearts and provided direct entry into Jeanne and her prosecutors thoughts and guts, just as the quote said.
ReplyDeleteI somewhat disagree with this quote. To divide my argument into reasonable sections, I first specify Monty's interpretation of the judges' portrayal is justified, and though we know Dreyer's purpose behind the close-ups of Jeanne, the effect in my case was not the same at all. The religious oligarchs still came across to me as such, but Jeanne seemed to me far from the God-sent savior she was made out to be. The close-ups worked well to establish conflict between the two sides, but the severe difference in righteousness and cause I was not so well convinced of.
ReplyDeleteFirst, to discuss what worked well and what depictions I agreed with. The regular close-ups of the judges was obviously intended to vilify them, especially when used in conjunction with reliable low angles. We also see predictable physical trends across the lot of them. They are composed entirely of old men, with wrinkly, almost grotesque faces, dark clothing, constant frowns, and in one case, hair resembling devil horns. Their expressions and age/ display of it serves to symbolize them as the ancient established religious society, unyielding and coldhearted. From a low angle, a judge could sometimes appear as a towering stone giant, bellowing scornful judgment to the world below. It may be an extreme claim, but I believe the presented image does quite well to capture the essence of the judges' portrayal.
Jeanne. The film's protagonist, figure of freedom and holiness in history. Depicting such a figure in the proper manner would prove an monumental task for any director. While some face may not have been lost, I claim that overall, Dreyer may have failed to convince the entirety of his audience of Jeanne's near-perfection. Many shots of her are close-ups showing her face, wide eyes staring to the sky, mouth slightly agape. While many would view this as her seeking guidance from above, to me her countenance often seemed crazed, wild even. Her face takes one of two paths when answering a question prodded at her by the judges. One: it moves hardly at all, not even her mouth, to mutter a one word answer, making Jeanne appear nonlucid and unfocused. Two: Her face warps and she dramatically shouts an answer, seeming frantic and desperate. The white background Jeanne is placed against furthers the connotation she is not sound of mind, calling to mind an insane asylum, and the lack of establishing shots does nothing to dispel this image.
Finally, a few notes on what close-ups hint about the relationship between characters. The fact that, overall, neither Jeanne nor the judges share a screen with the other side means neither is willing to consider the viewpoint or argument of the other. Expecting such to happen may not be realistic, but this cinematic technique furthered the separation extensively. Close-ups also suggest each side cannot remove themselves from the limited world they have each created, nor consider anything beyond it. The judges will never even think to consider Jeanne's argument, nor she theirs. But when we keep track of what we see, we realize something. There isn't much difference fundamentally between the two clashing parties. What evidence does either side have that Jeanne was sent by God or Satan? Do not both use dodgy wording to craft their arguments? Do not both display intense bursts of emotion and defensiveness? The judges line their questions with hidden traps, Jeanne adapts her story to fit the circumstances. Cinematically, if we look at why each side is only shown separately, we might conclude, metaphorically at least, they cannot be shown together because they are one and the same. Jeanne and the judges are collectively symbols for religion and how people see it, as a hypocritical despotism, or as a righteous path to salvation.
^prompt 2 by the way
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ib Monty’s quote because Dreyer's use of close-ups was the best way to show the conspiracy during the trial and draw up emotion from the viewers. The use of close-ups makes everything more personal and real for the audience and lets the director guide his viewer into the very essence of Joan. It is for these reasons that this film has remained timeless since the 1920’s
ReplyDeleteDreyer’s use of close-ups does a great job at going into the depth of Joan and her trial, especially compared to other films made during that time period, giving it depth and emotion. Most movies during this time had a comical feel, with the acting and non-diegetic music. These elements within the film were grand and excessive, as if meant for a play, and the music was usually fun and light, even during a serious moment in a film. The Passion of Joan of Arc was ahead of its time in many aspects, but especially in manipulating viewers emotions. The film involved depth and was for film, not plays. This is conveyed through the lack of screen action. Due to the camera’s capacity of shooting, everything looks slightly sped up and, in a way, that takes away some of the seriousness and emotion. The close-ups gave a very personal and vulnerable look at Joan, and a very ugly and atrocious look at the priests who tried her. The close-ups added to the very chaotic feel to the film as well, which represents all the thoughts rushing through Joan’s head, such as ‘Am I going to die?’ ‘Has God forsaken me?’ ‘If this was God’s will, why would this happen?’.
The use of close-ups does a good job at leading the audience all the way into the heart of Joan and judges because there is nothing else to see onscreen. There are very little distractions from the condescending looks of the judges, and the look of pure fear from Joan. With all of the medium shots and long shots, the viewer can accidentally let their minds wander. However, through the use of close-ups, the viewer has no choice but to look at this innocent girl be ridiculed by the harsh and grotesque judges. You see exactly what Dreyer wants you see, being the coldness of this trial, nothing more and nothing less. Also, through the close-ups the viewer will have no choice but to notice the complete contrast between the judges and Joan, adding more sympathy towards her, also making the viewers emotion and pity for her all the stronger, because the more intimate a person is with another, the more heart-breaking an injustice to that person is.
Cinematic techniques that make an avant-garde film are surrealism, editing, and its mise -en-scene.It also usually has no real storyline, but The Passion of the Joan of Arc can be seen as an adaptation of Avant garde even with its narrative..
ReplyDeleteThe Passion of The Joan or Arc is avant-garde because of its extreme use of closeups, tilted camera angles and how the characters are arranged in the frame. Extreme close ups is the main technique in this film and it makes it different from other films because of this its expressionistic. The extreme close ups also reveal the anguish of Joan of arc as we see her face continuously that makes us identify with her and her extreme pain, passion, and eventually her death. The reliance on this technique to emphasize the whole film is similar to avant garde because he actually relies on the juxtaposition of shots.
The differences between the avante garde film Le Ballet Mecanique and Joan of Arc is the fact that Le Ballet does not have an established narrative. Even though both films are great examples of experimentative filmmaking, they experiment in different ways. Joan of Arc is black and white but does not use the color of black and white to emphasize its aesthetic, it uses extreme close ups. The juxtaposition of shots with no narrative rely on the black and white tones to get its point across of man and machine. Le Ballet is also very fast paced with its cuts while Joan of Arc is slower because of the fact the director wants you to see the anguish of Joan through the extreme close up and makes sure that you see it.
Essay Prompt #2, here we go:
ReplyDeleteI think that quote is absolutely spot on. The film’s close-ups create an intimacy that in a sense almost borders on voyeurism. Here we see this woman – Joan of Arc – and from the way the film is presented entirely in close-ups and medium shots, we are forced to see her plainly how she is – there is no other option, and it is the same way with the judges. In fact, when I was watching the film, I almost felt as if I were part of this “conspiracy” that Dreyer talks about – that, I, just by watching, had joined in on the judges dismantling of Joan. The close-ups of the film not only help us identify, from a purely emotional standpoint, the trials and despair that Joan is going through and the callousness and general cruelty of the judges, but they also strip away everything else, in the best possible way. The close-ups force us to see all the true emotions, the “truth” of Joan and the “lie” of the judges, in a sense. In some sense, it felt like watching the trial under a microscope – every detail, every emotion, is laid bare in front of us through the actor’s facial expressions (and I must say that Renee Falconetti delivers perhaps the best cinematic performance in the history of film, and she does almost all of it simply through the looks on her face). Everything in within the film is amplified by the sheer closeness of it, both cinematically and emotionally. Dreyer forces us to confront the movie head on – there is no other way, as there is nothing else to focus on screen than the actors. Even the minimalist set makes sure that nothing – nothing – distracts from the pain Joan feels, her strength, and the Judges callous cruelness. So yes, I believe the quote is absolutely right – if the movie was shot in any other way, it would not have nearly the emotional, even physical (the film, while not loud or violent, is never the less among the most visceral I’ve ever seen) impact that is possesses.
Zach
Essay Prompt #2
ReplyDeleteI think that the quote was spot on with what it was saying about how the close-up affects how the audience feels about Joan of Arc and the judges.
The close-up technique used in the film vastly aids in how the audience views Joan of Arc in this film. In all of the shots that Joan is in, she is either trapped by the camera frames or by the priests/judges themselves on screen. The audience experiences this as well because of the close-up, we feel as if we are trapped along with her. While Joan is in the frame, her head is cut off by the borders of the camera, while the rest of the characters’ heads are not cut off, and are given a bigger camera frame to move around in. Joan almost always had a stark white background right behind her, and there were almost no shadows cast on her face, compared to the judges who almost always had a shadow cast on their body(face) to some degree. This creates a physical embodiment of irony because the judges are supposed to be “church-like” priests and Joan is supposed to be a “heretic” and yet there are almost no shadows cast on her throughout the entirety of the film. This implicit showing of how the judges are the actual ones in the wrong is also shown by the fact that whenever the judges and Joan share the screen, they are almost, if not always surrounding her like a pack of wolves would a wounded animal.
The first time that she gets a bigger frame to move around in is when she is being lead to the stake and she exits the prison, although she is trapped by guards armed with weapons on both sides of her. It’s an implicit way to say that Joan is almost free from the pain of being imprisoned and is moving on to a better life, the afterlife with “God”. However it goes back to a very small frame, trapping Joan as she’s burned at the stake, watching the birds fly away, another implicit way to give Joan, and the audience a kind of hope for whatever comes next for Joan. The last image any saw of Joan is her shadow behind all of the smoke from the fire that killed her, as her burned corpse falls to the ground.
PROMPT#1
ReplyDeleteThe Passion of Joan of Arc is similar to Le Ballet Mecanique in their styles of editing and mise en scene. The use of lighting between the two films is used in similar ways. In Le Ballet Mecanique high key lighting is used to highlight the main actress’s face and expose her emotion throughout the film. The makes her emotions bold much like the lighting in The Passion of Joan of Arc where high key lighting is also used. The lighting used on Joan of Arc expresses her emotion to the fullest just like in the avant-garde feature. The range of emotions shown by both women in the two films is wide; both express themselves in many ways and both do it with great sense of the human condition. The lack of establishing shots in both films is a crucial part of the editing. Le Ballet Mecanique lacks an establishing shot like many other avant-garde films. This dazes the viewers and catches them off guard to really throw them into the seemingly random events that shape the film. The lack of an establishing shot in The Passion of Joan of Arc shows its influence from the avant-garde films before it. The filmmakers behind Joan of Arc wanted the viewer to be thrown into the story as it actually happened. The lack of an establishing shot makes the viewer feel like they are right with Joan of Arc in the trial. Much like an avant-garde film Joan of Arc does not let the viewer catch up with what is going on in the story. The style of editing just keeps the plot moving non-stop forcing the viewers to keep up scene by scene without maybe knowing where they are or what will happen next.
Both of the films are filled with close-up shots of female faces. In Le Ballet Mecanique the woman is in the shot several times and fills up the whole screen. This makes the film personal and has the viewer feel the emotion the actress displays on screen. A similar technique is used in Joan of Arc with close-up shots of Joan’s face and emotions. In a way Joan of Arc’s emotions can be seen as more powerful because the viewers know the person they are identifying emotions with and therefore get closer as a viewer to that person. With these close-ups Joan of Arc takes the viewer on an emotional journey with just the expressions on Maria Falconetti’s face.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the quote that “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.” The Passion of Joan of Arc has an iconic style, utilizing intense close-ups and establishing shots completely.
ReplyDeleteThis brings the viewer to feel the overwhelming amount of uneasiness as we connect with Joan and her physical and emotional state. Instead of using establishing shots to depict the setting of the trial, or where Joan was within the room, the viewer is subjected to close-ups of the judges' and Joan's faces. You are visibly able to see features you may not have seen before, like Joan’s tears for instance. It lets you feel the way she feels, being so close to her through these shots. It would not have the same effect if it was a medium or long shot because you wouldn’t be able to see all of her distinct facial features. This causes the film to feel more personal, and more painful - where long shots would make Joan look small and pathetic, the close-ups force the viewer to see the purity of Joan's expressions.
The close-ups make it clear: the film is about Joan's passion throughout the trial. A more conventional style would render the film more subjective. The use of close-ups forces the viewer to understand Joan's suffering, and more readily know the anguish she was subjected to. However, there are times in there isn’t such of a close up of her. In these instances, she is surrounded by guards, or in the scene where she is at the stake. Having the same effect as the close ups, these shots give Joan a closed feeling, in a closed frame. She is weak in comparison to the guards she is up against. This is also done through low angle shots of the guards, and high angle shots of Joan, contrasting their rank of power over each other.
Overall, the close ups truly were the best way to convey a sense of nervousness, suspense, and get the same emotional response from the audience, as from Joan herself. Her expressions seen in the close ups highlight the Avant Garde film as a whole, and said shots shape Joan to be passionate, until her death.
I am selecting prompt number 2.
ReplyDeleteI 100% agree with the quote. The film's use of cinematic technique compels the viewer to feel as if they are right there with Joan the whole time, feeling the uneasiness she feels and the over-observing looks given from the judges. The close-ups create a certain connection between the viewers and Joan that is simply unparalleled by anything else we have seen in IB Film. At certain times we feel as one with Joan, like a single unit. We feel just as much trapped in the dicey situation as Joan does. Something peculiar which I noticed is that Joan was always, for the most part, in the center of her frames while the judges were usually never centered but off kilter to the side, exhibiting characteristics resembling maliciousness.
The close ups and medium shots not only display uneasiness and blatant connection from viewer to film subjects but it also blocks out everything in the frame so that all we see are facial expressions. The shots are very palpable so all the facial expressions shown are easily articulated into emotion due to the prevalence of these expressions as shown in the use of close up and medium shots. Due to the constant use of these types of shots, it became impossible for any of the subjects in the frame to hide what they were thinking/their innermost feelings toward the trial. In addition, the constant existence of the white wall behind Joan symbolized the angelic hue which engulfs Joan almost acting like a halo. The use of low angle and high angle shots were also used such as when we would see Joan at her weakest, we often saw her at a high angle shot and when the judges were acting most tyrannical (verbally) then we would often see them in a low angle shot.
Personally I got the sense that the director leaves very little to interpretation due to the use of his close up shots. Physically and perhaps even mentally, the viewer will generally get the same implicit meaning from the film, give or take some variation. And I think that this is exactly what the director was going for. They made the shots continuously close ups and medium shots so that we would not see it any other way. In conclusion, this type of cinematic approach leaves us closer to Joan and the judges as a whole.
I am selecting prompt number 2.
ReplyDeleteI 100% agree with the quote. The film's use of cinematic technique compels the viewer to feel as if they are right there with Joan the whole time, feeling the uneasiness she feels and the over-observing looks given from the judges. The close-ups create a certain connection between the viewers and Joan that is simply unparalleled by anything else we have seen in IB Film. At certain times we feel as one with Joan, like a single unit. We feel just as much trapped in the dicey situation as Joan does. Something peculiar which I noticed is that Joan was always, for the most part, in the center of her frames while the judges were usually never centered but off kilter to the side, exhibiting characteristics resembling maliciousness.
The close ups and medium shots not only display uneasiness and blatant connection from viewer to film subjects but it also blocks out everything in the frame so that all we see are facial expressions. The shots are very palpable so all the facial expressions shown are easily articulated into emotion due to the prevalence of these expressions as shown in the use of close up and medium shots. Due to the constant use of these types of shots, it became impossible for any of the subjects in the frame to hide what they were thinking/their innermost feelings toward the trial. In addition, the constant existence of the white wall behind Joan symbolized the angelic hue which engulfs Joan almost acting like a halo. The use of low angle and high angle shots were also used such as when we would see Joan at her weakest, we often saw her at a high angle shot and when the judges were acting most tyrannical (verbally) then we would often see them in a low angle shot.
Personally I got the sense that the director leaves very little to interpretation due to the use of his close up shots. Physically and perhaps even mentally, the viewer will generally get the same implicit meaning from the film, give or take some variation. And I think that this is exactly what the director was going for. They made the shots continuously close ups and medium shots so that we would not see it any other way. In conclusion, this type of cinematic approach leaves us closer to Joan and the judges as a whole.