La Passion de Jeanne d'Arc (The Passion of Joan of Arc)
Carl Theodor Dreyer, 1928
Joan of Arc (Maria Falconetti) is interrogated, tortured, and burned at the stake.Ladies and gentlemen, what we have here may be the world’s first courtroom drama – and I don’t mean that in a good way. This film covers the very tail end of Joan’s life, from the time she is led into the courtroom to her death, and while it’s apparently fairly accurate (actual transcripts were consulted for the script), it’s pretty much a complete failure as a story, primarily for two (somewhat related) reasons. First, it’s extremely one-note from the perspective of tone: Basically, a bunch of powerful men beat up on Joan, first verbally, then physically. The horror of the powerful assaulting the weak is effectively conveyed at first, but as the same emotional beats are played out through the film, it loses all of its power due to lack of contrast. It doesn’t help that probably ¾ of the movie is shot in close-up, so there’s a tremendous visual sameness as well. The shot of Joan, her head tilted to the left, looking upward with a tear rolling down her face, is a strong image – the first three or four times. Once you hit number 37 (not an exaggeration), it’s meaningless. Second, Joan doesn’t really come across as a person because we only see one tiny aspect of her life repeated ad nauseum. She’s just an idea, an abstract figure, so it’s hard to get worked up when bad things happen to her, even if the details are rather horrific.
2/10
Sherlock, Jr.
Buster Keaton, 1924
A projectionist (Keaton) is accused of stealing his girlfriend’s father’s watch in order to buy her a box of chocolates. He tries and fails to catch the real thief, then dreams himself into a movie where he becomes the famous detective, Sherlock Jr.There’s not a tremendous amount to this film, from a narrative standpoint. In fact, the plot basically gets resolved without our hero’s involvement while he’s busy traipsing around in a completely different story. Nonetheless, it’s a terrific bit of entertainment because everything else about it is so very impressive – the “shadowing” sequence, the escape from the train, walking into the movie, the pool-shooting sequence, jumping into the old lady disguise, the list goes on and on. When the moments are this entertaining, sometimes you can forgive the big picture.
7.5/10
The Adventures of Robin Hood
Michael Curtiz and William Keighley, 1938
Robin Hood (Errol Flynn) steals from the rich to give to the poor, falls in love with Maid Marian (Olivia de Havilland), and generally makes himself a nuisance to Prince John (Claude Rains)My experience with Robin Hood prior to this movie was mostly limited to the Disney animated film. I haven’t even seen the more modern interpretations like the Costner one. Or the Brooks one, for that matter. I therefore am unable to accurately compare interpretations of the myth, but I very much doubt that any other version could top this. It’s exciting, it’s funny, it’s gorgeous, and it has a hell of a cast (take the three listed above and add Basil Rathbone). I would have preferred that less of the story be told through on-screen text summaries, but it never really reaches the point of being a problem.
8/10
Our Hospitality
Buster Keaton, 1923
Willie McKay (Keaton) travels back home to the south to claim his father’s estate. On the way, he meets and falls in love with Virginia Canfield (Natalie Talmadge) – which is a problem, because her father and brothers have sworn to kill every last member of the McKay family. Definitely the least of three Keaton films I’ve seen. As I’ve indicated before, Buster Keaton’s strengths lie in his stunts and setpieces, and that’s where Our Hospitality kind fails – we don’t get the good stuff until the last 20 minutes. There’s a lengthy bit of business involving an old-fashioned railroad early on that was probably meant to fill that void, but it pales in comparison to – well, everything I’ve seen from Keaton, honestly. Once we get to the chases and daring waterfall rescues and the like, they’re as good as the best moments from any of his other movies, but it’s too little, too late to make the film as a whole work.
4/10
Bande a Part (Band of Outsiders)
Jean-Luc Godard, 1964
Two would-be criminals (Sami Frey and Claude Brasseur) convince a naïve young girl (Anna Karina) to help them rob her aunt’s house.Band of Outsiders starts off slow, even a little boring – but picks up speed and interest throughout, so by the time our heroes reach the café where they have a minute of silence and dance the Madison, it’s pretty riveting. As with most Godard films, it’s the details that make the movie work – bits such as the boat that doesn’t go anywhere, the constantly shifting positions of the characters around the café table, and the fact that Arthur put his hat back on over his bandit mask. Some of the plot mechanics are woefully underdeveloped (what’s the deal with Arthur’s family?), and a Godard film without color is kind of handicapped from the get-go, but the character dynamics are fun and Anna Karina demonstrates very dramatically that women should wear sweaters with fedoras all the time.
7.5/10
Progress: 126 (Par +28)
No comments:
Post a Comment