Friday, June 20, 2003
The Passion Of Joan Of Arc
Directed by Carl Theodor Dreyer
Many things have been said in reviews and essays about Carl’s Dreyer’s The Passion of Joan Of Arc. Among them includes the close shots that were largely employed in the movie and how the set was built such that it reflects the German and French expressionism of that time. Pauline Kael said this of Renee Maria Falconetti who was Joan of Arc ”It may be the finest performance ever recorded on film''.
In fact, after reading so many reviews about the The Passion of Joan of Arc, which not only analyses the film, but even go as far as explaining the miscellaneous bits and pieces of what went through the filming process, I wonder if I could still write something new to contribute to understanding it.
For a start, I must acknowledge that the critics full of praise for The Passion of Joan of Arc got many things right. It is extremely unsettling and powerful to watch faces so upfront in almost every shot. In the Passion of Joan Of Arc, Falconetti, is Joan, androgynous (who could be mistaken as a lesbian in modern terms) with big startling eyes that looks right through you (albeit from an angle). When she weeps, her tears rolls down immediately and with a head cast to a side, it is as if she was Christ herself.
While most reviews focus on Falconetti’s credible acting; those of her oppressors which are portrayed as barbarous and evil; Dreyer’s demanding direction (such as keeping the monk’s hair cut as it is for 6 months; filming in an almost a chronological order; and doing so many takes until the actors become their characters) it is hardly mentioned that The Passion of Joan of Arc represents many metaphorical debates. For example, it throws up the argument between the existence and absolute power of the church versus a more spiritual belief of God as represented by Joan’s faith. The relationship between the church and the army is also another area that reflects some light on their pervasive influence. Joan of Arc also epitomises the riff between Anglo Saxon and their Francophile neighbour. Joan can also be seen as the purveyor of women rights as she battles against a
Critics fail to mention that Carl Dreyer’s film has its ambiguity. The priests who sentenced Joan to death are not all of the believe that she should die. For example, the priest that tricked Joan with a forged letter from King Charles is seen feeling sympathetic when Joan was sentenced to burning at the stake. Compare that to his earlier behaviour where Dreyer portrayed him as sly with his slit devious eyes. The mass who had gathered to watch Joan’s sentence in public congregates as if in a carnival. We see a joyous atmosphere and performances of contortionists and tricksters. Yet, when Joan was burned to death, the people began to watch with remorse and serious faces that soon culminates in a riot. Notice how the army already knew that this imminent which was why they started passing down weapons to the soldiers from the fort.
Even though The Passion of Joan of Arc basically tells the story with faces; Dreyer’s minimized but concise and crystallized screenplay is poetical and hidden with implicit references too. For example, when Joan was asked by the judges who taught her the Lord’s prayers, she starts to sob and tell them it was her mother. It would not be mentioned why this is heart-breaking for her though people who knows the story knows that she was upset because of her mother’s sorry fate. When Joan says that she was born to save France, one knows she has found her long term goals. When she says that she will dress as a lady when her mission is accomplished, it almost feels ominous.
The film is also full of religious inferences. When Joan looks at the cross formed by the silhouette of the window, she breaks into temporary lightness. When some soldiers came into her cell and made fun of her, making her wear the straw crown with her head slanted to a side, we are mistaken into believing that we have seen Christ. When asked if she is in a state of grace, her indefinite answer which angers her judges implies that she has left everything to God’s will.
The Passion of Joan of Arc is not the entire life of Joan and it need not be so to be a good film. It condenses the trial and shows us truth. Good acting, impressive artistic direction and cinematography makes it a must see
Directed by Carl Theodor Dreyer
Many things have been said in reviews and essays about Carl’s Dreyer’s The Passion of Joan Of Arc. Among them includes the close shots that were largely employed in the movie and how the set was built such that it reflects the German and French expressionism of that time. Pauline Kael said this of Renee Maria Falconetti who was Joan of Arc ”It may be the finest performance ever recorded on film''.
In fact, after reading so many reviews about the The Passion of Joan of Arc, which not only analyses the film, but even go as far as explaining the miscellaneous bits and pieces of what went through the filming process, I wonder if I could still write something new to contribute to understanding it.
For a start, I must acknowledge that the critics full of praise for The Passion of Joan of Arc got many things right. It is extremely unsettling and powerful to watch faces so upfront in almost every shot. In the Passion of Joan Of Arc, Falconetti, is Joan, androgynous (who could be mistaken as a lesbian in modern terms) with big startling eyes that looks right through you (albeit from an angle). When she weeps, her tears rolls down immediately and with a head cast to a side, it is as if she was Christ herself.
While most reviews focus on Falconetti’s credible acting; those of her oppressors which are portrayed as barbarous and evil; Dreyer’s demanding direction (such as keeping the monk’s hair cut as it is for 6 months; filming in an almost a chronological order; and doing so many takes until the actors become their characters) it is hardly mentioned that The Passion of Joan of Arc represents many metaphorical debates. For example, it throws up the argument between the existence and absolute power of the church versus a more spiritual belief of God as represented by Joan’s faith. The relationship between the church and the army is also another area that reflects some light on their pervasive influence. Joan of Arc also epitomises the riff between Anglo Saxon and their Francophile neighbour. Joan can also be seen as the purveyor of women rights as she battles against a
Critics fail to mention that Carl Dreyer’s film has its ambiguity. The priests who sentenced Joan to death are not all of the believe that she should die. For example, the priest that tricked Joan with a forged letter from King Charles is seen feeling sympathetic when Joan was sentenced to burning at the stake. Compare that to his earlier behaviour where Dreyer portrayed him as sly with his slit devious eyes. The mass who had gathered to watch Joan’s sentence in public congregates as if in a carnival. We see a joyous atmosphere and performances of contortionists and tricksters. Yet, when Joan was burned to death, the people began to watch with remorse and serious faces that soon culminates in a riot. Notice how the army already knew that this imminent which was why they started passing down weapons to the soldiers from the fort.
Even though The Passion of Joan of Arc basically tells the story with faces; Dreyer’s minimized but concise and crystallized screenplay is poetical and hidden with implicit references too. For example, when Joan was asked by the judges who taught her the Lord’s prayers, she starts to sob and tell them it was her mother. It would not be mentioned why this is heart-breaking for her though people who knows the story knows that she was upset because of her mother’s sorry fate. When Joan says that she was born to save France, one knows she has found her long term goals. When she says that she will dress as a lady when her mission is accomplished, it almost feels ominous.
The film is also full of religious inferences. When Joan looks at the cross formed by the silhouette of the window, she breaks into temporary lightness. When some soldiers came into her cell and made fun of her, making her wear the straw crown with her head slanted to a side, we are mistaken into believing that we have seen Christ. When asked if she is in a state of grace, her indefinite answer which angers her judges implies that she has left everything to God’s will.
The Passion of Joan of Arc is not the entire life of Joan and it need not be so to be a good film. It condenses the trial and shows us truth. Good acting, impressive artistic direction and cinematography makes it a must see
Wednesday, June 18, 2003
Alphaville
Directed by Jean Luc Goddard
Orwellian doom of 1984. Alphaville is a probability dytopia. An unfeeling projection. A land of no future or past, only present and its cold hand is Alpha 60, created by Professor Vonbraun (Howard Vernon) whose face is a portrait hung in every shops, offices and hotels. He hides beneath the shades and his overpowering presence is felt like leaders. Mao or Hitler.
Lemmy Caution (Eddie Constantine) who comes from the outland is here to attend a festival. His first unfriendly brush with Alphaville is to kill a man, a pimp for a seductress of the third class. Later, he was picked up by the daughter of Professor Vonbraun (Anna Karina) and she has her chauffeur drive him to places he intends to visit.
He contacts Henry in Red Star Hotel, with a run down hotel lobby. This is one of the many pop art scenes – unusual character in their settings - A man is reading. Another is eating snacks out from a bag as he caresses the legs of a woman. He talks to Henry and finds out more about Alphaville. Henry tells him that “dissuasion is their strong point “. He hides behind a cupboard and takes pictures of Henry petting with a seductress before Henry collapses and dies on the sofa in the hotel room.
Throughout Alphaville, Lemmy acts like a journalist and takes pictures wherever he goes. He gets a chance to talk to the people behind Alphaville and questions Alpha 6. He was interrogated by Alpha 5. He lies to the computer. He dresses like a secret agent with his hat, overcoat and looks unflinchingly staid. He only breaks out once into laughter when Anna relates an anecdote. It feels like a huge relief from an expanse of dry desert.
We are not sure if he loves Anna but he tells her about love and poetry, things Alpha could not fathom. Eddie as Lemmy is straight face and it complements Anna’s huge eyes and dark eyelashes that she stares right into the screen. The pivotal scene of Anna telling Lemmy things she is not allowed to say when she is in his room is a hidden message – that the incomprehensible human nature cannot be subjected to restriction. Alpha 6 can take away words and prevent them from asking “why” but thoughts can be re - ignited by love.
The music is at times loud and sinister, shocking or haunting. It is sometimes peaceful. Kraftwerk radio beeps interrupt every now and then. Neon lights – E = mc2, SUD, e.t.c. flash across in the dark. Alpha 6 monotonous and devoid of human texture voice speaks occasionally on what is Alphaville.
What is Alphaville (All things weird are normal in this city of whores – fuck logic – Ivan Johnson as Lemmy’s undercover words) ?
Answer: George Orwell’s 1984/ The bleak absurd future where cold war exists between lands and two opposing forces are called The Outlands and the other, Alphaville; separated by a galaxy, they are wary of each other’s presence and send spies to destroy each other/ an exploration of the conflict between technology and human nature + mathematical probabilities and context/ Thoughts and Words Vs Emotions.
*The essence of the so called capitalist word or the communist world is not an evil volition to subject their people by the power of doctrination or power of finance but simply the natural ambition of any organization to plan all its actions* - the retort of Alpha 6
Directed by Jean Luc Goddard
Orwellian doom of 1984. Alphaville is a probability dytopia. An unfeeling projection. A land of no future or past, only present and its cold hand is Alpha 60, created by Professor Vonbraun (Howard Vernon) whose face is a portrait hung in every shops, offices and hotels. He hides beneath the shades and his overpowering presence is felt like leaders. Mao or Hitler.
Lemmy Caution (Eddie Constantine) who comes from the outland is here to attend a festival. His first unfriendly brush with Alphaville is to kill a man, a pimp for a seductress of the third class. Later, he was picked up by the daughter of Professor Vonbraun (Anna Karina) and she has her chauffeur drive him to places he intends to visit.
He contacts Henry in Red Star Hotel, with a run down hotel lobby. This is one of the many pop art scenes – unusual character in their settings - A man is reading. Another is eating snacks out from a bag as he caresses the legs of a woman. He talks to Henry and finds out more about Alphaville. Henry tells him that “dissuasion is their strong point “. He hides behind a cupboard and takes pictures of Henry petting with a seductress before Henry collapses and dies on the sofa in the hotel room.
Throughout Alphaville, Lemmy acts like a journalist and takes pictures wherever he goes. He gets a chance to talk to the people behind Alphaville and questions Alpha 6. He was interrogated by Alpha 5. He lies to the computer. He dresses like a secret agent with his hat, overcoat and looks unflinchingly staid. He only breaks out once into laughter when Anna relates an anecdote. It feels like a huge relief from an expanse of dry desert.
We are not sure if he loves Anna but he tells her about love and poetry, things Alpha could not fathom. Eddie as Lemmy is straight face and it complements Anna’s huge eyes and dark eyelashes that she stares right into the screen. The pivotal scene of Anna telling Lemmy things she is not allowed to say when she is in his room is a hidden message – that the incomprehensible human nature cannot be subjected to restriction. Alpha 6 can take away words and prevent them from asking “why” but thoughts can be re - ignited by love.
The music is at times loud and sinister, shocking or haunting. It is sometimes peaceful. Kraftwerk radio beeps interrupt every now and then. Neon lights – E = mc2, SUD, e.t.c. flash across in the dark. Alpha 6 monotonous and devoid of human texture voice speaks occasionally on what is Alphaville.
What is Alphaville (All things weird are normal in this city of whores – fuck logic – Ivan Johnson as Lemmy’s undercover words) ?
Answer: George Orwell’s 1984/ The bleak absurd future where cold war exists between lands and two opposing forces are called The Outlands and the other, Alphaville; separated by a galaxy, they are wary of each other’s presence and send spies to destroy each other/ an exploration of the conflict between technology and human nature + mathematical probabilities and context/ Thoughts and Words Vs Emotions.
*The essence of the so called capitalist word or the communist world is not an evil volition to subject their people by the power of doctrination or power of finance but simply the natural ambition of any organization to plan all its actions* - the retort of Alpha 6
Monday, June 16, 2003
Scenes From A Marriage
Directed by Ingmar Bergman
It is a feat to direct, edit six original 50 minute television
miniseries into a 2 hour 48 minute movie which basically features
only two actors, Liv Ullmann and Erland Josephson, as a married
couple, grappling with their tumultuous relationship. And still
manage to hold the audience attention.
Johan (Josephson) and Marianne (Ullmann) are happily married with two
kids, which we see only in the first scene when they were interviewed
by a magazine journalist. This is the first time we see the couple
and they look the ideal couple; only when we Marianne try to say
something about herself and Johan, that we realise their happy
marriage wasn't what it seems.
When they invited their married couple friend over for dinner; and a
squabble between their friend ensues; we are jolted out of our seats
at how bitter and sarcastic people can become in long relationships.
When Marianne, a solicitor specialising in family law, talks to a
woman who is asking for divorce, the aged woman's dilemma confronts
us. When she says she would rather be lonely, than trapped in an
unhappy marriage, Marianne crunches up.
Though Scenes From A Marriage does not move beyond the couple's
convolutions (we hardly see anyone. Not Paula, the young girl whom
Johan divorced Marianne for or the new guy that Marianne met
afterwards), Scenes from a Marriage uses close facial shots and
lengthy conversations to engage us.
When Johan told Marianne about the news that he is leaving the family
for good, Marianne remained composed at first and tried to talk
things out. When they went to bed (ironically, in the same one),
Marianne kicks up a big fuss and Johan refusal to budge in uncovers
more latent problems.
Josephson and Marianne put in incredible performances. Josephson
integrated Johan's woes and confusion without simplifying them. He
is caught between Paula who believes he will go back to his wife and
a marriage he reckons is not working out. Marianne, as the more
perceptive and sensitive woman is highly emotional, especially the
scene where she tries to ward off her ex-husband's advances when he
visits her. When she tries to read something to him on what she has
written, we realise how much she wants to dig deeper and wants to be
understood and loved.
Vincent Canby has this to say, "It's a movie of such extraordinary
intimacy that it has the effect of breaking into mysterious
components many things we ordinarily accept without thought, familiar
and banal objects, faces, attitudes, and emotions, especially love."
The baffling thing about Scenes From A Marriage is that under normal
circumstances, tackling such a topic and directed by perhaps a more
mediocre director, it would have been lengthy, nihilistic and full of
psychological babble. Bergman's ingenuity is that we are made to
think and feel otherwise. Scenes From A Marriage is film fiction so
close to real life and magnified that it is hard to think what it is.
The Recruit
Directed by Roger Donaldson
Colin Farrell who had the shaggy looks of early Brad Pitt (Seven) as
James Clayton is headhunted by veteran actor Al Pacino, who is Walter
Burke, a mysterious streetwise CIA trainer.
James who is academically smart (he creates a program called
Spartacus which is able to control other programs) and physically
athletic (he plays boxing) has a father who went missing years ago.
To find out the truth of his father's disappearance, whom he believes
is an agent who was killed during a mission, he foregoes his job
interview with DELL to go into CIA.
As far as acting goes, Colin Farell's good looks cover up anything
that we might have tried to find fault with; but then again, The
Recruit didn't have much room for him in the first place. Al Pacino
passes of as much as we have seen of him in movies such as Devil's
Advocate and there is hardly any surprise for us.
The Recruit though has a large portion devoted to training anecdotes
that can be made into a documentary called, "What happens when you
join the CIA?" The recruits is inducted with an introductory sermon
by trainer, Walter Burke who will tell them that being in CIA is
about joining the right side and doing it for justice. There is no
fame, low pay and hardly any recognition given except becoming a star
if one dies during a mission. Then, the recruits go through training
to deceive, and learn to kill with bare hands. It even throws in the
lie detector, which is a neat piece of machine that can help
determine if a person is speaking the truth.
Mirroring real life, James Clayton and Layla (Bridget Moynahan) falls
in love but this is not good for both of them as we can see. James is
being cheated by Layla for his assignment while James gets back at
her with the lie detector. Lesson learned: Don't fall in love at boot
camp.
The real test came when James is given the assignment to find out
that the girl he loved, and that is Layla, is actually a mole – or
what we called a double spy, and Walter wants to know who she has
been giving the information to.
A tad predictable but The Recruit is pretty easy to follow and enjoy
if you don't try to be too critical. At least, ogle at the cute James
Farrell or babelicious Bridget Moynahan; who by the way, didn't have
much to act. Her supporting role merely brings out the conflict and
tries to confuse us with the twist towards the end.
Directed by Ingmar Bergman
It is a feat to direct, edit six original 50 minute television
miniseries into a 2 hour 48 minute movie which basically features
only two actors, Liv Ullmann and Erland Josephson, as a married
couple, grappling with their tumultuous relationship. And still
manage to hold the audience attention.
Johan (Josephson) and Marianne (Ullmann) are happily married with two
kids, which we see only in the first scene when they were interviewed
by a magazine journalist. This is the first time we see the couple
and they look the ideal couple; only when we Marianne try to say
something about herself and Johan, that we realise their happy
marriage wasn't what it seems.
When they invited their married couple friend over for dinner; and a
squabble between their friend ensues; we are jolted out of our seats
at how bitter and sarcastic people can become in long relationships.
When Marianne, a solicitor specialising in family law, talks to a
woman who is asking for divorce, the aged woman's dilemma confronts
us. When she says she would rather be lonely, than trapped in an
unhappy marriage, Marianne crunches up.
Though Scenes From A Marriage does not move beyond the couple's
convolutions (we hardly see anyone. Not Paula, the young girl whom
Johan divorced Marianne for or the new guy that Marianne met
afterwards), Scenes from a Marriage uses close facial shots and
lengthy conversations to engage us.
When Johan told Marianne about the news that he is leaving the family
for good, Marianne remained composed at first and tried to talk
things out. When they went to bed (ironically, in the same one),
Marianne kicks up a big fuss and Johan refusal to budge in uncovers
more latent problems.
Josephson and Marianne put in incredible performances. Josephson
integrated Johan's woes and confusion without simplifying them. He
is caught between Paula who believes he will go back to his wife and
a marriage he reckons is not working out. Marianne, as the more
perceptive and sensitive woman is highly emotional, especially the
scene where she tries to ward off her ex-husband's advances when he
visits her. When she tries to read something to him on what she has
written, we realise how much she wants to dig deeper and wants to be
understood and loved.
Vincent Canby has this to say, "It's a movie of such extraordinary
intimacy that it has the effect of breaking into mysterious
components many things we ordinarily accept without thought, familiar
and banal objects, faces, attitudes, and emotions, especially love."
The baffling thing about Scenes From A Marriage is that under normal
circumstances, tackling such a topic and directed by perhaps a more
mediocre director, it would have been lengthy, nihilistic and full of
psychological babble. Bergman's ingenuity is that we are made to
think and feel otherwise. Scenes From A Marriage is film fiction so
close to real life and magnified that it is hard to think what it is.
The Recruit
Directed by Roger Donaldson
Colin Farrell who had the shaggy looks of early Brad Pitt (Seven) as
James Clayton is headhunted by veteran actor Al Pacino, who is Walter
Burke, a mysterious streetwise CIA trainer.
James who is academically smart (he creates a program called
Spartacus which is able to control other programs) and physically
athletic (he plays boxing) has a father who went missing years ago.
To find out the truth of his father's disappearance, whom he believes
is an agent who was killed during a mission, he foregoes his job
interview with DELL to go into CIA.
As far as acting goes, Colin Farell's good looks cover up anything
that we might have tried to find fault with; but then again, The
Recruit didn't have much room for him in the first place. Al Pacino
passes of as much as we have seen of him in movies such as Devil's
Advocate and there is hardly any surprise for us.
The Recruit though has a large portion devoted to training anecdotes
that can be made into a documentary called, "What happens when you
join the CIA?" The recruits is inducted with an introductory sermon
by trainer, Walter Burke who will tell them that being in CIA is
about joining the right side and doing it for justice. There is no
fame, low pay and hardly any recognition given except becoming a star
if one dies during a mission. Then, the recruits go through training
to deceive, and learn to kill with bare hands. It even throws in the
lie detector, which is a neat piece of machine that can help
determine if a person is speaking the truth.
Mirroring real life, James Clayton and Layla (Bridget Moynahan) falls
in love but this is not good for both of them as we can see. James is
being cheated by Layla for his assignment while James gets back at
her with the lie detector. Lesson learned: Don't fall in love at boot
camp.
The real test came when James is given the assignment to find out
that the girl he loved, and that is Layla, is actually a mole – or
what we called a double spy, and Walter wants to know who she has
been giving the information to.
A tad predictable but The Recruit is pretty easy to follow and enjoy
if you don't try to be too critical. At least, ogle at the cute James
Farrell or babelicious Bridget Moynahan; who by the way, didn't have
much to act. Her supporting role merely brings out the conflict and
tries to confuse us with the twist towards the end.
