Much
controversy surrounds this version of the Joan of Arc story based on George
Bernard Shaw’s play; stemming from 1) comparisons to more sober and respected interpretations
by Dreyer and Bresson, 2) charges that Catholic screenwriter Graham Greene watered-down
Shaw’s anti-clerical theme, and 3) a widespread belief that Shaw could not and
should not be adapted to film at all.
While Preminger’s film is neither a masterpiece nor his best work, I
don’t find any of these complaints very valid.
If there is a problem with the film, more likely, it has to be
Preminger’s loyalty to Shaw. A fine
director, he nevertheless lacked a visionary’s willingness to prune and/or
amend source material as needed in order to shape it into something both
personal and cinematic, as Orson Welles did so ingeniously with his Macbeth (1948)
and Othello (1952), for example. American Jean
Seberg – (sporting her famous short haircut that would be so influential to
fashion in the 60s) – plays Joan surrounded by a mostly British cast that
includes heavyweights John Gielgud, Richard Todd, Finley Currie and Harry
Andrews. Seberg’s interpretation of Joan
effectively hovers between righteous innocence and borderline
schizophrenia. Seberg was so upset by the negative reviews of her performances here and in a subsequent film for Preminger, Bonjour Tristesse (1958), that she remained in France for years afterward; (making a splash in Godard's Breathless, among other things). But her genuine naivete is crucial to her role; both Seberg and Joan are dangerously out-of-their-depths. Surviving intact from
Shaw, more importantly, is a wry look at political power that puts off some
viewers because it does not come down clearly on the side of the good. In this world, cynics with a mordant sense of
humor are the survivors, mediating between the small-minded zealots in power, who rise and
fall, and the unbending idealists, who burn at the stake.
No comments:
Post a Comment