February | 2025 | Tanya's Astro Blog

1928 – The Passion of Joan of Arc

Produced by Société Générale des Films, directed by Carl Theodor Dreyer, is a 1928. It stars Renée Jeanne Falconetti as Joan. It is a French film based on the trial record fro Joan of Arc. I watched it on JustWatch here kindly remastered and made public by the Open Archive.

Because of David Lynch’s recent passing, I saw Mulholland Drive for the first time a few weeks ago. I had always been scared to watch it, that I would probably not understand it. So glad I did, because I absolutely loved it, especially the performance by Naomi Watts. However, I don’t know, if I liked it so much, because I understood a lot of callbacks, e.g. the “Kim Novak, Vertigo” dress that Betty wears at some point in the movie. I kept asking myself, if I would’ve understood it as much 24 years ago, when it came out, me not being mature enough or would the chills that I had throughout the movie been enough? I think the same applies for this movie, The Passion of Joan of Arc. I’ve always archived it to “probably need to see this at some point in my life, but I am still too scared that I won’t get it”. I have been disappointed before – unimpressed by Citizen Kane, bored by Lawrence of Arabia, confused by The Last Picture Show, so it’s not a given that my fears will be for nothing.

Well, I am glad to say that “I got it” for this movie. The main theme being the feeling of dread, discomfort and desperation from the oppressing close-ups in this movie. It is quite experimental, but simple at the same time. The mantra in movies usually is “show, don’t tell” – that’s what the moving pictures are for! But then you get something that turns it on its head – think 12 Angry Men, which plays out only in the juror’s room – it’s such a fine line, because a lot of the showing is only in the desperation of the faces, while the telling is often the classic expository dialogue. And the same happens in this movie – it basically has no plot, it’s the final days of Joan of Arc and her trial before her burning at the stake. It’s all the oppression she felt, but her quiet defiance in the face of torture and death.

Just like Joan of Arc itself, I also liked the quiet defiance it took to get this film made. She had just been canonized as a saint 8 years before, so fervors in France were strong to honor one of their heroes. It was quite controversial that (a) the plot was just about her final 10 days, not the amazing battles that inspired France’s last push in the 100 years war against the English (b) the movie was directed by a Dane and not a Frenchman and (c) they tried to make it as original as possible, largely reproducing word for word the original transcripts from the 15th century – condensing them into one trial, which did not sit well with the Archishop of Paris at the time and we final restoration only coming to us in 2015 after the final cut was found in a mental institution in 1981.

And then of course, there is the feminism, quite remarkable also for 1928. How the subtleties in the faces doing the horror belong to men and the faces distorting in horror at what its happening, belong to the women (with a few unhelpful exceptions such as the priest sprinkled in). Quiet, defiant competence gets women so far and Joan of Arc, but also here Maria Falconetti’s performance underscored that! Very strange to juxtapose it to the so-called feminism depicted in Lessons in Chemistry that I just finished a few days ago (blergh!). The brilliance in so many women role models for me was how they could inspire anybody to fight, work, protest, vote with them, not simply preach! This movie, while simple, also does that!

1927 – Wings

Produced by Paramount (Famous Lasky Corporation), directed by W. Wellman. It stars Clara Bow, Charles “Buddy” Rogers and Richard Arlen. It’s a story about the piloting and aerial dog fights in World War I. I watched it on YouTube here. It is the restored version that was finalized in 2012 for its 85th anniversary.

Some movies have an amazing effect on people. I was 5, almost 6 years old, when my dad took me to see War Games at the theater – anybody in their right mind would tell you that’s not a movie for a 5-year old. And yet, that movie sparked an everlasting love for computers in me, how he reversed engineered (hacked) his way into what he thought was a gaming company, the first time I heard about a modem, heard about a branch of mathematics called game theory… I begged and begged my dad for a computer and when he owed me a favor for a trip he flaked out on, I got it and have been hooked ever since. The first thing that Apple IIc taught me was perfect strategy in blackjack, heh!

Why do I tell that story? Well, it was only 2-3 years later that Top Gun came out. All the boys in my class started drawing jet fighters instead of houses, families, etc. when it was “drawing time” at school. Aviator glasses and jackets were suddenly cool. Apparently, enrolment in the air force went through the roof. It’s just like that, a movie can entice you, give you your calling… Well, judging by the technical aspects of the 1927 movie Wings, I am sure it would’ve been a siren call to many to become pilots or at least be fascinated by the aerial prowess possible with airplanes then. Last year, I read The Great Circle by Maggie Shipstead and was fascinated by the teenager girl bootlegging liquor from Canada during prohibition – she too, must have been fascinated by Wings. It was something different in the 1920s, aviators were like astronauts, something special, that barely anybody could do! I totally get the fascination with flying!

The plot of the movie is quite simple – it’s an epic of two pilots (Jack and Dave) during World War I, they pine over the same girl Sylvia at home. But just as Challengers this year, it’s also about the “friendship” these guys have with each other (and it’s still unclear whether this movie features the first gay kiss on screen or not); how they have each other’s back during the dog fights with the germans (Heinis). Sort of added, because Clara Bow’s complete star persona, was the character of Mary, who pines for Jack and joins the army as an ambulance driver.

Why did I choose the movie? For one, hey, it’s the first ever Best Picture Winner from the Academy Award. For the other, I love Buddy Rogers and Clara Bow and seeing them together should be good. I also must confess that I mixed it up with Hell’s Angels, the Howard Hughes produced movie, which fascinated me back when I saw The Aviator. Alas, it’s not that different, the filming is all original, done on the airplanes themselves, which made the movie crazy expensive (2 million dollars back then). Richard Arlen already could fly airplanes, Buddy Rogers learned for this movie.

Unfortunately, I have to say the movie is just fine. And it’s a shame, because

(a) the technical aspects are so amazing. The dogfights are a delight to see, the scenes in the air bristle with excitement and artistry. You really get the sense of airplanes being crucial to many roles in the war. As said above, I am certain, just like me with War Games and computers, this must have been an inspiration to many young people to get into aviation.

(b) Clara Bow is widely underused. She has such a magnetic personality, I would’ve much more been interested in how she came to be a uniformed mechanic and ambulance driver during WW1, than her infatuation with pretty boy Jack. Apparently even Clara Bow, didn’t see the point of her limited role in the movie, as she thought this movie was focussed on the two pilots.

As for the rest of the movie? Look, I can take the melodrama. The scene where Jack comes home from the war and meets with Dave’s parents or the “choice” Sylvia makes for Dave. But I can’t take the “aw shucks” approach this movie has to war. You tell me in a title card “The Horrors of War” and the next few scenes show them getting drunk in Paris and having a jolly good time – the bubbles gag just goes on and on and on. Or you show me the patriotism of Schwimpf with a wobbling tattoo of the Stars and Strips, jeez. And it can’t be a movie of it’s time or American sentiment during the silent film era, not when just 3 years later the masterpiece “All Quiet on the Western Front” produced in America will be released. So sure, watch this movie, because it is important for the history of movies, but sadly not because it’s a well told story.