1-The Passion of Joan of Arc-Director:Carl Theodor Dreyer - Cast:Maria Renée Falconetti.



"Those who have the opportunity of seeing Carl Dreyer's masterpiece The Passion of Joan of Arc are actually seeing a print made from the original negatives. They were thought to have been destroyed but were miraculously discovered among the out takes of sound film at Gaumont Studios. There is perhaps no other film in which the actual quality of the photography is more important.


The Passion of Joan of Arc was filmed in France in 1928 by the Danish director Carl Dreyer, using French writers and a French crew. Based on a script by Joseph Delteil, the film is in fact inspired by the actual minutes of the trial. But the action here is condensed into one day, conforming to a dramatic requirement that is in no way a distortion.



Dreyer's Joan of Arc will remain memorable in film annals for its bold photography. With the exception of a few shots, the film is almost entirely composed of close-ups, principally of faces. This technique satisfies two apparently contradictory purposes: mysticism and realism. The story of Joan, as Dreyer presents it, is stripped of any anecdotal references. It becomes a pure combat of souls. But this exclusively spiritual tragedy, in which all action comes from within, is fully expressed by the face, a privileged area of communication.



I must explain this further. The actor normally uses his face to express his feelings. Dreyer, however, demanded something more of his actors—more than acting. Seen from very close up, the actor's mask cracks. As the Hungarian critic Béla Balasz wrote, "The camera penetrates every layer of the physiognomy. In addition to the expression one wears, the camera reveals one's true face. Seen from so close up, the human face becomes the document." Herein lies the rich paradox and inexhaustible lesson of this film: that the extreme spiritual purification is freed through the scrupulous realism of the camera as microscope. Dreyer forbade all makeup. The monks' heads are literally shaved. With the film crew in tears, the executioner actually cut Falconetti's hair before leading her to the stake. But this was not an example of real tyranny. We are indebted to Dreyer for his irrefutable translation direct from the soul. Silvain's wart (Cauchon), Jean d'Yd's freckles, and Maurice Schutz's wrinkles are of the same substance as their souls. These things signify more than their acting does. Some twenty years later Bresson resubstantiated this in Diary of a Country Priest (1950).



But there is still so much more to say about this film, one of the truest masterpieces of the cinema. I would like to enumerate two more points. First, Dreyer is perhaps, along with Eisenstein, the only filmmaker whose works equal the dignity, nobility, and powerful elegance found in masterpieces of painting. This is not only because he was inspired by them but essentially because he rediscovered the secret of comparable aesthetic depths. There is no reason to harbor false modesty with respect to films. A Dreyer is the equal of the great painters of the Italian Renaissance or Flemish school. My second observation is that all this film lacks is words. The only thing that has aged is the intrusion of subtitles. Dreyer so regretted not being able to use the still frail sound available in 1928. For those who still think that the cinema lowered itself when it began to have sound, we need only counter with this masterpiece of silent film that is already virtually speaking.
-Andre Bazin-
-------------




""The virgin of Orleans and those matters that surrounded her death began to interest me when the shepherd girl’s canonization in 1920* once again drew the attention of the public-at-large to the events and actions involving her—and not only in France. In addition to Bernard Shaw’s ironical play, Anatole France’s learned thesis aroused great interest, too. The more familiar I became with the historical material, the more anxious I became to attempt to re-create the most important periods of the virgin’s life in the form of a film.



Even beforehand, I was aware that this project made specific demands. Handling the theme on the level of a costume film would probably have permitted a portrayal of the cultural epoch of the fifteenth century, but would have merely resulted in a comparison with other epochs. What counted was getting the spectator absorbed in the past; the means were multifarious and new.



A thorough study of the documents from the rehabilitation process was necessary; I did not study the clothes of the time, and things like that. The year of the event seemed as inessential to me as its distance from the present. I wanted to interpret a hymn to the triumph of the soul over life. What streams out to the possibly moved spectator in strange close-ups is not accidentally chosen. All these pictures express the character of the person they show and the spirit of that time. In order to give the truth, I dispensed with “beautification.” My actors were not allowed to touch makeup and powder puffs. I also broke with the traditions of constructing a set. Right from the beginning of shooting, I let the scene architects build all the sets and make all the other preparations, and from the first to the last scene everything was shot in the right order. Rudolf Maté, who manned the camera, understood the demands of psychological drama in the close-ups and he gave me what I wanted, my feeling and my thought: realized mysticism.


But in Falconetti, who plays Joan, I found what I might, with very bold expression, allow myself to call “the martyr’s reincarnation.” "
-Carl Theodor Dreyer-
----- ---------------------------------------



2- 8 1/2 . Director:Federico Fellini - Cast:Marcello Mastroianni, Claudia Cardinale, Anouk Aimée and Sandra Milo.



"I wish that every young person with an interest in film could've had the same experience that I had back in those days...To be young,open to everything,and to walk into the theater and have your expectations not just met...But surpassed time and time again. We all had one film that was a turning point,a personal touchstone...and I suppose that Fellini's 8 1/2 was mine. There was no turning back for Fellini after La Dolce Vita,but it turned out that La Dolce Vita was only the calm before the storm. With 8 1/2 he took a giant step forward. He reinvented himself,and in so doing...He reinvented what we all knew as Cinema. Now,you make a movie like La Dolce Vita that takes the world by storm and then what?Everybody's is waiting to see what you're going to do next,hanging on your every word,wondering what will be the next step in your artistic evolution. And everybody feels like they know you...like they understand you,like they own you...because you "thouched" them. In a word--Pressure. Pressure from your public and fans. Pressure from your critics and your enemies. Pressure from your producer because the clock is ticking and that means money...And more than anything else ,pressure from yourself. So Fellini did something unprecedent in movies...He made a film about his own artistic dilemma."
-Martin Scorsese-My Voyage to Italy ~

------

"Fellini—I met him recently in Rome—that is to say I said "How do you do." He pulled me by the nose and kissed me on the cheek. He asked why I looked at him all the time. I replied that I had to see what the man who made the film, which I love almost most of all, looks like. I can't explain what it is that makes 8½ so wonderful or how he was able to make such a film. All that I can say is that I weep in my heart when I see it. Think of the ending when everything starts to move, everyone dances around the manège. Then I feel as if I would like to jump into the screen and take part and I think "Oh God, what a wonderful profession we actors have!"

-Harriet Andersson-