Juana de Arco

This is great stuff. Like everyone else, I loved Leelee as Joan. She is a very good young actor. The story is well done, much better than most big budget movies (that usually end up as just dreck aimed at idiots). The acting is good, the script is great, etc, etc--what I really loved about it was the period detail. Awesome. These guys have full plate armor that makes the guys in 'Excalibur' seem underdressed! Gotta love that. If only for the battle of Orleans, this movie is worth a look. Such intensity in a battle is so rarely matched, and they did it without overexcessive gore and blood, so I can let my kids watch it without flinching (too much). This is good, because a story like this, tragic as it is, is important for everyone to hear. Not only that, the story is TRUE. I'm sure some liberties were taken in this version, but it doesn't matter, the heart of the story is about idealism in the face of bitter cynicism. Joan brings hope and victory with her vision, and for her effort is betrayed and murdered in a gruesome fashion. But she never backed down, never withdrew her convictions, and never succumbed to doubt or self pity. We should all think about that--especially in today's world of sarcasm and scorn. I'm not very religious, but this story inspires me nonetheless. And...I love midieval battle scenes with plate armor and huge swords :)

In a stroke of good fortune for those of us who like a good historical religious story, this film and "Messenger" both came out in 1999. They are both excellent, both relate the same story, but in quite different ways. Here, Joan is depicted in the more traditional manner, a young girl who is both humble and headstrong in her wanting to follow God's will, and help set France free of the English. As I did for "Messenger", I rate this one a strong "8" of 10.

I own the DVD, and it is a very nice one. No extras, but the picture and sound, in ProLogic, are both excellent. The movie was originally broadcast as a "mini-series", as I recall, but the DVD is one continuous presentation 3 hours and 5 minutes long. However, there are no wasted scenes here, and the entire story is captivating.

To add a great touch of realism, much of the filming was obviously done in unheated churches and castles. As a result you can see the breath of the characters in the cold as they speak. It probably was really like that during the 1400s. Also, the colors chosen for the costuming remind me of the colors in old masters' paintings. The deep rose, muted royal blue, the earth tones, all added to the realism.

Leelee Sobieski really became Joan for this role. Plus, all the other veteran actors were in top form. There isn't any flaw in the film version of the story of Joan of Arc.

Joan is perhaps the most female difficult role to cast. The actress must be attractive but not conventionally alluring; magnetic but not intellectual; a towering figure but physically slight. You must understand why people would die for her. Above all, the performer must convey an authentic sense of religious piety, a virtual impossibility for young actors today. Sandrine Bonnaire--a wonderful star in every other respect--tried her hand in the recent French version but was too sexy for the part.

As Joan, Sobieski juggles the disparate requirements astonishingly well. This is emphatically not the kind of movie in which the actress can merely show up and look decorative; you have to work at it, but as Sobieski revealed in Uprising, she has the capacity for challenging period roles. And that also means that in contrast to her female peers in the business, she has a long professional future.

Watch out for O'Toole in an astonishing performance as a Cardinal who gradually realizes that Joan is the real thing.

The culminating scene--no details provided, you must see it yourself--is curiously uplifting and properly theological rather than merely unpleasant.

I had to write a comment after reading the previous one. I found this to be a very refreshingly straightforward rendition of the Joan of Arc story that taught me, as one who only knows the story from movies, a great deal about the political and social realities at the time, including the hunger for real leadership and real spiritual authority. Not too different from our own times now.

Apparently a great deal of research was done, including a thorough reading of the transcripts of Joan's actual trial in the original French, to get both the setting and Joan's personality right. And I think it shows. It certainly held my interest, and nothing about its budget distracted me.

Plus they did not make her a complete victim - she knew enough to go willingly to the stake. And that's a courageous move on the part of the film's creators which adds that final necessary element of spiritual integrity. Enough so I willingly cried many times through it without feeling manipulated... these matters of soul and spirit felt real to me, and for a skeptical Scorpio like me that's high praise for work well done.

Yes. It wouldn't happen today, that's for sure, but it really did happen once upon a time in France, some 580 years ago. A nation managed to unite against an occupying power, inspired and led by a girl who responded to the request of her mysterious "voices" to do something about it when she was about seventeen years of age. Growing up in Domremy in what was then Lorraine, this girl clearly ended up quite the tomboy, typically dressed in jerkin, doublet and hose, her hair cropped short, ready upon instruction from her voices to don armour and wield the sword if necessary to raise France like a phoenix from the ashes. The film doesn't show this, but in Domremy she was called "Jeanette," when she arrived in France she was called "Joan," and in the actual transcripts of her trial she states, "as for my surname, I know of none," unlike the title of this film which borrows the popular English version of the name by which she is known today.

The story of Joan makes for a daring plot, and were it not for the fact that the transcripts of Joan's trial still indeed exist today -- making her one of the best known persons in history -- and attest to the events described as being most certain in fact, we might otherwise think such a story line to be quite incredible, if not simply ridiculous.

So let's make no mistake about it: Leelee Sobieski had the nerve to play one of the most riveting characters in history, a risky role that many a great actor has already played with determined success. Yet, like the powerful personage she portrays, Ms. Sobieski achieves a major victory in the final scheme of things. Not that Peter O'Toole didn't turn in his usual stunning performance, or that Ms. Sobieski wasn't also well-supported by Neil Patrick Harris, Maury Chaykin, Maximilian Schell, Shirley MacLaine, Chad Willet, and all under the fine direction of Christian Duguay, but let's face it -- it really boils down to being pretty much a one-kid show.

For a change, Hollywood really did this one right. Joan was a teenager, Joan should obviously be played by a teenager, and Leelee Sobieski was clearly the right kid for the job. Ms. Sobieski captured Joan's many contradictions brilliantly. With Joan, pious spirituality took its place along with a frisky charm, a sense of things serious and urgent often relaxed to humor and a sharp wit, the relentless pain of arrows that pierced her body was surely dulled by her thriving desire to live and her unfailing commitment to lead France to its place in a free world that she herself would sadly never see. Leelee Sobieski wove all of these into the highly textured character of Joan, not leaving a single aspect untouched, even though Joan's personality could occasionally disturb those of us who are far less saintly. Ms. Sobieski captured the spirit of a teenaged girl who actually led France to war in the 15th Century, and managed to create a crystalline character that convincingly showed us how that just might happen.

This film borrows freely from history but, to its credit, it thankfully doesn't borrow much of anything from the many previous films about Joan. Leelee Sobieski goes beyond being the best "Joan" in film so far. She so superbly plays the role that one could rightly say that she is the only Joan so far. For this reason alone, don't miss this film.

We don't know much about what Joan looked like, as no portraits or detailed descriptions of her were made from anyone who actually saw her during her short life. We don't know if Leelee Sobieski physically resembles the historical Joan or not and, since it seems we'll never know, it also doesn't matter. Joan was in her teens at her finest hour, Leelee is a teenager, and that's close enough. Furthermore, there are so many interesting facts pertaining to Joan's life, her character, her family, her friends, her enemies, the logistics of the battles, and so forth and so on, that a film would need to go on for hours to even begin to capture most of it, so I think it's quite fair to forgive the film's several omissions. If viewers are inspired to know more about Joan (and after seeing this film they certainly should be), then I'd recommend perusing Regine Pernoud's book entitled, "Joan of Arc by Herself and Her Witnesses," (Scarborough House; Lanham, Maryland; 1994), still considered by many to be the best written work on the subject.

One final and perplexing thought: the mini-series "Joan of Arc" is but one of several films on this character that are being produced within the span of only a couple of years. It almost seems as though Joan (after several hundreds of years have gone by) has somehow caught our imagination as we approach the end of the millenium. Perhaps in our uncertain times when heros seem to be in short supply, we somehow hope that the spirit of a young teenage girl from 15th Century France will guide us and lead us to freedom as we enter upon a new age in history. At any rate, aside from mere coincidence, I just don't know quite how else to explain this phenomenon.