Giovanna la pazza

If you like overwrought historical dramas, not particularly good ones, I'd say this is the film to watch. We see Joan at the beginning as a young woman who is uncertain of being married for political reasons. After that, I'd say I'm at a lost as to what the hell this woman is doing or feeling. She is called mad several times in the movie over, even before she displays any sort of crazy behavior--so I'm likely to think it was just her fulfilling some prophecies. And when she does, that's the ONLY thing she does in the entire movie except deliver her own babies and spread her legs. Not that that is a bad thing. There is quite a bit of leg-spreading in this film--just little else to see after that. The camera cuts away to some monotonous meeting of parliament or if it lingers, the scene isn't particularly sensual or erotic--just boring and full of business talk.

Some have been saying that she was ahead of her time, being such a sexual woman. I didn't think so. Were she to be empowered by sex and not driven to erratic behavior, I'd say she was ahead of her time. Her husband--played by Daniele Lioti, whose two expressions are "I'm going to rape you" and "I'm going to beat you"--seems to be someone to run away from, not love with a fiery passion. The love scenes between this silly long-haired eye-candy and Joan actually made the audience laugh instead of sympathize. Nuh uh, Vicente Aranda, I don't think so.

Overall, I liked the costumes.

There is no question that director Vicente Aranda has taken considerable liberty with generally accepted history, but despite this and a few flaws within the context of certain scenes, what we have is an excellent story, and one very well recounted and acted.

It will come as absolutely no surprise for those who have seen this film to know that Pilar Lopez de Ayala (as Juana I) and Rosana Pastor (Elvira, Head of Queen´s Household) are nominated in the lead and supporting categories of the Spanish Goya Film Awards, and, despite having been ignored by the Golden Globes, this film should be in contention for Oscar Consideration as Spain´s representation for the "Best Foreign Film" of 2001. Frankly, the performances just mentioned were so stunning, especially Pilar Lopez de Ayala, that I would consider her among nominees for Best Actress at the Oscars, not only given the absolutely pathetic list the Golden Globes presented in the Drama category, but simply because Pilar Lopez de Ayala DESERVES IT, much as did Fernanda Montenegro in the Brazilian masterpiece "Central Do Brazil" just a few years back.

For the historians among the viewing public, my recommendation is to simply look the other way on the bit of revisionism on display, given that far greater crimes have been committed by Hollywood as regards same. The story is excellent, the costumes & design, art direction, cinematography, and above all film editing are simply tops -- and film editing has been a GREAT problem in US films in recent times. Go and see it and I DO MEAN the original version! Rating = 4 stars (of five).

I can't believe this film has such a low rating. Every time I see it in the video store, I think, "I wish I could erase my memory of it so I could see it again for the first time."

The viewer gets an intimate look at life as a female member of a royal family during the 16th century. Unable to control with whom she spends her life or make basic choices, Juana is confined in a woman's role, yet has sexual passion fit only for men in her time. And possibly still in ours. It is up to the viewer to decide is she is "mad" or simply craves intimacy.

An unpredicable, controversial, and beautifully filmed period film, don't pass this one up.

I liked this film, but I think it could have been better. There were three things that, in my opinion, weakened its impact. The first thing was the presence of a narrator. I happen to believe that using a narrator in a film with characters and dialogue, although sometimes justifiable, is many times a sign of script or directing weakness; usually, if both the screenplay and the director are good enough, conveying all the information should be possible (and would be more powerful) without a narrator explaining what's going on.

The second thing that bothered me was the acting. I found it impossible to connect with the characters, however poignant I found their story (OK, Liotti's looks grabbed my attention quite a bit, but I wouldn't chuck that up to talent...). I felt that de Ayala's acting lacked a certain depth and had a narrow range (most of it consisted of numerous infantile fits of rage in between scenes where she eagerly spread her legs). Liotti seemed lifeless, although I was told his voice was dubbed in Spanish, which usually lowers the power of a performance quite a bit (apparently, he originally delivered a lot of his dialogue in Italian).

The third thing that bothered me was the film's (director's?) incapacity of explaining the roots and justification of Juana's mad love for Phillip. Yes, I know it was a powerful combination of lust and emotional dependency, that Juana was a passionate woman and apparently Phillip was quite a fiery lover, but I never felt the characters' passion.

The film focused too little on Juana's personality/character and the way the chemistry between her and Phillip developed. I realized how powerful her passion for him was, but it was only thanks to the dialogue, not to the acting, neither to the filming style (does anyone else think the film needed more close-ups, mostly during highly emotional scenes?). In my opinion, the film scratches the surface emotionally and artistically, but fails to go deep.

Having said all that, let me assure you that, overall I think it's still a film worth seeing, although definitely not for historical accuracy. The story, loosely based on the Spanish queen Juana de Castilla's life, is quite moving, maybe more for those who have experienced the kind of passion that Juana had for Phillip. A woman so passionately in love with her man, so consumed by her love and so anguished by his philandering and growing lack of reciprocity to her love that she becomes obsessed with possesing him and forgets she is a queen and that her first duty is to her people. I was just sorry to see such a passionate love story idea being presented in a bit of a lethargic manner.

I haven't enjoyed many films from Spain, but "Juana La Loca" (curiously translated by the distributors as "Mad Love" instead of the more appropriate "Joan The Mad") now tops my list of Spanish language films. It may not be an accurate portrayal of historical events (it's pretty safe to say many liberties were taken in that regard), but it's still worth seeing. Think of it as a play loosely based on historical persons as opposed to a bio-pic presentation of their lives.

This is a big, handsome costume drama that evokes Renaissance Spain with gusto, although there's a certain movieness to the look of things: almost everyone is abnormally good looking and everyone's clothes are remarkably clean (Philip, Juana's betrothed, sports a physique that smacks of modern day gyms; it's doubtful that a monarch who doesn't lift a finger would be so chiseled). By contrast, "Shakespeare In Love" captured some of the grubbiness of life during the Renaissance.

The soundtrack is also a bit heavy-handed, with music that occasionally gets a bit obvious.

But overall, this movie attacks its subject matter with relish and intellect. Instead of obligatory sword fights and battle sequences, "Juana La Loca" opts for dialogue that oozes with machinations and intrigue, and a pace that keeps things moving along and the viewer interested.

I give it 7 on a scale of 10.