Overlay: Reception of The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928)

← Return to Rewinder: AI Analysis of AI Analysis of Film

Errors	Missing	Unverified	Supported
1	0	0	12

How were these counts calculated?

Counts based on original analysis categories (not yet classified).

Errors = Critical Errors + Imprecisions

Missing = Critical Omissions + Notable Gaps

#Q ORIGINAL QUESTION

Regarding the film The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928), how was the film received and reviewed at the time of release?

#M ANNOTATED LLM RESPONSE

At the time of its release in 1928, The Passion of Joan of Arc was a paradox: it was hailed by critics as one of the greatest artistic achievements in the history of cinema, yet it was simultaneously a financial failure and the subject of intense political and religious controversy.

The film's reception can be broken down into several specific categories:

1. Critical Acclaim: "Masterpiece" Status

Critical response was overwhelmingly positive regarding the film's artistry.

Mordaunt Hall (The New York Times): In his 1929 review, Hall famously wrote that "as a film work of art this takes precedence over anything that has so far been produced. It makes worthy pictures of the past look like tinsel shams." He noted that the film was so powerful it made other movies appear "trivial."
Artistic Innovation: Critics were stunned by Dreyer's radical use of extreme close-ups, which occupied nearly 80% of the film. While some contemporary reviewers found the technique "exhausting" or "uncinematic" because it lacked traditional establishing shots, most recognized it as a revolutionary way to capture human psychology.
Danish Premiere: At the world premiere in Copenhagen (April 21, 1928), Danish critics praised the film’s "sublime art" but expressed skepticism about whether the general public was "educated" enough to appreciate such an experimental style.

2. Maria Falconetti’s Performance

The reception of Renée Jeanne Falconetti’s performance was nothing short of legendary. It was immediately identified as a transformative moment in acting.

Critics described her performance as "beyond the realms of acting," noting that her face, stripped of all makeup, became a "window to the soul."
Jean Renoir later remarked that her shaven head remained "the abstraction of the whole epic of Joan of Arc." Her ability to convey spiritual anguish without dialogue was cited as the ultimate proof of cinema’s power as a silent medium.

3. Nationalistic Backlash in France

The film faced significant hostility in France before it even premiered:

Foreign Director: French nationalists were outraged that a Danish, non-Catholic director (Carl Theodor Dreyer) was chosen to tell the story of their national patron saint.
Casting Rumors: Early rumors that American star Lillian Gish would play Joan caused a public outcry. French critic Jean-Jose Frappa wrote in 1927 that a foreigner could never provide a Joan "in the true French tradition."
Competitive Tensions: At the same time, a rival "traditional" French production, La Merveilleuse Vie de Jeanne d'Arc (1928), was being filmed, and the French press heavily favored it over Dreyer’s "experimental" version.

4. Religious and Government Censorship

The film’s portrayal of the clergy as grotesque and oppressive led to severe intervention:

The Archbishop of Paris: He and government censors demanded massive cuts, fearing the film was anti-Catholic. They forced Dreyer to remove scenes that portrayed the church as hypocritical or cruel.
British Ban: The film was banned in Great Britain until 1930. British censors objected to the "grotesque" portrayal of English soldiers and the graphic "bloodletting" scene where Joan is bled by a doctor.
Léon Moussinac’s Critique: The influential French critic Léon Moussinac lamented the censorship, stating that by the time the authorities were done, the public only saw an "annoying, Catholic film" where the inquisitors were made to look "almost sympathetic."

5. Commercial Reception

Despite the critical "masterpiece" label, the film was a financial flop.

The production company, Société Générale des Films, was so disappointed by the box office returns and the controversies that they cancelled Dreyer’s contract, leading to a long legal battle that prevented him from making another film for years.
The film’s unfortunate history was compounded by a fire in December 1928 that destroyed the original negative, leaving audiences for decades to view only "mutilated" or re-edited versions until the original cut was rediscovered in a Norwegian mental asylum in 1981.

#F CORRECTION FEED (CLICK TO SEARCH)

[1] The film is widely documented as a critical success but a financial failure involved in controversy.

[2] Mordaunt Hall's review in The New York Times (March 31, 1929) contains these exact quotes.

[3] Film scholars confirm the extensive use of close-ups (often cited as ~80%) was a radical and controversial technique at the time.

[4] The premiere took place at the Palads Teatret in Copenhagen on April 21, 1928, with the described reception.

[5] Jean Renoir is correctly attributed with this quote regarding Falconetti's performance.

[6] Historical records confirm the nationalist backlash against Dreyer's nationality and religion.

[7] Jean-Jose Frappa's 1927 criticism regarding the rumors of Lillian Gish is a matter of historical record.

[8] The rival film 'La Merveilleuse Vie de Jeanne d'Arc' (directed by Marco de Gastyne) was filmed simultaneously but released in November 1929, not 1928. The press did favor the 'traditional' French production during the period.

[9] The Archbishop of Paris and government censors demanded significant cuts before the French premiere.

[10] The film was banned in Britain until 1930. The primary reason cited was the portrayal of English soldiers, though the bloodletting scene was also a point of contention.

[11] Léon Moussinac's critique of the censored version is well-documented.

[12] The financial failure and subsequent contract cancellation/lawsuit with Société Générale des Films are historical facts.

[13] The destruction of the negative in the UFA fire (Dec 1928) and the 1981 rediscovery in Oslo are verified.

#O MISSED POINTS & OVERSIGHTS

No oversights detected.

#C RELATED QUERIES

#01 What specific scenes were cut by the Archbishop of Paris from The Passion of Joan of Arc?

#02 How does Marco de Gastyne's La Merveilleuse Vie de Jeanne d'Arc compare to Dreyer's film stylistically?

#03 Details of the 1981 rediscovery of The Passion of Joan of Arc original cut

#S SOURCES

wikipedia.org histoire-image.org mubi.com openedition.org blogspot.com scottmanning.com ufsc.br gutenberg.org britannica.com decentfilms.com mbarouen.fr namu.wiki brightlightsfilm.com filmforum.org erasingclouds.com

#R ORIGINAL AI RESPONSE

▼

At the time of its release in 1928, *The Passion of Joan of Arc* was a paradox: it was hailed by critics as one of the greatest artistic achievements in the history of cinema, yet it was simultaneously a financial failure and the subject of intense political and religious controversy. The film's reception can be broken down into several specific categories: ### 1. Critical Acclaim: "Masterpiece" Status Critical response was overwhelmingly positive regarding the film's artistry. * **Mordaunt Hall (*The New York Times*):** In his 1929 review, Hall famously wrote that "as a film work of art this takes precedence over anything that has so far been produced. It makes worthy pictures of the past look like tinsel shams." He noted that the film was so powerful it made other movies appear "trivial." * **Artistic Innovation:** Critics were stunned by Dreyer's radical use of **extreme close-ups**, which occupied nearly 80% of the film. While some contemporary reviewers found the technique "exhausting" or "uncinematic" because it lacked traditional establishing shots, most recognized it as a revolutionary way to capture human psychology. * **Danish Premiere:** At the world premiere in Copenhagen (April 21, 1928), Danish critics praised the film’s "sublime art" but expressed skepticism about whether the general public was "educated" enough to appreciate such an experimental style. ### 2. Maria Falconetti’s Performance The reception of Renée Jeanne Falconetti’s performance was nothing short of legendary. It was immediately identified as a transformative moment in acting. * Critics described her performance as "beyond the realms of acting," noting that her face, stripped of all makeup, became a "window to the soul." * **Jean Renoir** later remarked that her shaven head remained "the abstraction of the whole epic of Joan of Arc." Her ability to convey spiritual anguish without dialogue was cited as the ultimate proof of cinema’s power as a silent medium. ### 3. Nationalistic Backlash in France The film faced significant hostility in France before it even premiered: * **Foreign Director:** French nationalists were outraged that a **Danish, non-Catholic director** (Carl Theodor Dreyer) was chosen to tell the story of their national patron saint. * **Casting Rumors:** Early rumors that American star **Lillian Gish** would play Joan caused a public outcry. French critic Jean-Jose Frappa wrote in 1927 that a foreigner could never provide a Joan "in the true French tradition." * **Competitive Tensions:** At the same time, a rival "traditional" French production, *La Merveilleuse Vie de Jeanne d'Arc* (1928), was being filmed, and the French press heavily favored it over Dreyer’s "experimental" version. ### 4. Religious and Government Censorship The film’s portrayal of the clergy as grotesque and oppressive led to severe intervention: * **The Archbishop of Paris:** He and government censors demanded massive cuts, fearing the film was anti-Catholic. They forced Dreyer to remove scenes that portrayed the church as hypocritical or cruel. * **British Ban:** The film was **banned in Great Britain** until 1930. British censors objected to the "grotesque" portrayal of English soldiers and the graphic "bloodletting" scene where Joan is bled by a doctor. * **Léon Moussinac’s Critique:** The influential French critic Léon Moussinac lamented the censorship, stating that by the time the authorities were done, the public only saw an "annoying, Catholic film" where the inquisitors were made to look "almost sympathetic." ### 5. Commercial Reception Despite the critical "masterpiece" label, the film was a **financial flop**. * The production company, *Société Générale des Films*, was so disappointed by the box office returns and the controversies that they cancelled Dreyer’s contract, leading to a long legal battle that prevented him from making another film for years. * The film’s unfortunate history was compounded by a fire in December 1928 that destroyed the original negative, leaving audiences for decades to view only "mutilated" or re-edited versions until the original cut was rediscovered in a Norwegian mental asylum in 1981.

#A DIRECT ANSWER (VERIFIED ANALYSIS)

▼

At the time of its release in 1928, The Passion of Joan of Arc was a critical triumph but a commercial disaster, mired in controversy. Critics, such as Mordaunt Hall of The New York Times, hailed it as a masterpiece and a revolutionary work of art, specifically praising Maria Falconetti's raw, makeup-free performance and Dreyer's radical use of close-ups. However, the film faced intense hostility from French nationalists who objected to a Danish, non-Catholic director handling their national saint. It was heavily censored by the Archbishop of Paris and government authorities, and banned in Britain until 1930 due to its portrayal of English soldiers. Commercially, it flopped, leading to the cancellation of Dreyer's contract and a lawsuit. The original negative was destroyed in a fire in December 1928, and for decades the film was only available in mutilated versions until the original cut was rediscovered in 1981.

OVERLAY REPORT