AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
5,5/10
420
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaIn medieval Europe, a pious young woman becomes a scholar of theology, disguises herself as a man, rises through the Catholic Church hierarchy and is elected Pope.In medieval Europe, a pious young woman becomes a scholar of theology, disguises herself as a man, rises through the Catholic Church hierarchy and is elected Pope.In medieval Europe, a pious young woman becomes a scholar of theology, disguises herself as a man, rises through the Catholic Church hierarchy and is elected Pope.
- Director
- Roteirista
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
A persistent rumor which has lasted for centuries is that there once was a Pope who was secretly a woman and she was later dubbed 'Pope Joan". There is no evidence to support the 13th century rumors about this 9th century 'Pope'...but with rumors and conspiracy theories this isn't surprising that it persists. One reviewer even praised it for its historical accuracy...not realizing it was fiction. What also isn't surprising is that the notion of a lady Pope resulted in several movies about this supposed woman...I counted at least four as well as a musical.
I should point out that there are two versions of the movie. One is the original one which met with little success in theaters as well as a truncated version which elminated some of the flashback scenes. Sadly, the only version I could find was the truncated version...though the re-edited version was called "The Devil's Imposter" when it was later released...and this one DID bear the title "Pope Joan"...even though about 30 minutes of the original movie is missing.
So, if I ignore that the film is based on a myth and the version I saw was truncated, was it still worth watching? Well, maybe. You should be warned that the film is pretty depressing and war, death and the like are the sorts of things you'll see in the film. Additionally, the rape and masturbation scenes were handled poorly...being vague and confusing more than anything else. It also was VERY earnest...perhaps too much so. These all turned me off and I thought that at least a myth could be more fun to watch.
I should point out that there are two versions of the movie. One is the original one which met with little success in theaters as well as a truncated version which elminated some of the flashback scenes. Sadly, the only version I could find was the truncated version...though the re-edited version was called "The Devil's Imposter" when it was later released...and this one DID bear the title "Pope Joan"...even though about 30 minutes of the original movie is missing.
So, if I ignore that the film is based on a myth and the version I saw was truncated, was it still worth watching? Well, maybe. You should be warned that the film is pretty depressing and war, death and the like are the sorts of things you'll see in the film. Additionally, the rape and masturbation scenes were handled poorly...being vague and confusing more than anything else. It also was VERY earnest...perhaps too much so. These all turned me off and I thought that at least a myth could be more fun to watch.
There is not much one can say about 'Pope Joan' except that it was a huge failure with critics and the public, opening in New York for a brief run of nine days before being yanked into oblivion. This is another of those all-star films popular in the '70s, totally wasting a talented cast--and again, you have to wonder if anyone really read the script before agreeing to do the film. Look at the cast...Liv Ullmann, Trevor Howard, Maximilian Schell, Keir Dullea, Olivia de Havilland, Lesley-Anne Down. The color photography is great and the choral music in the background score is impressive--but the notion that a credible story could be made based on an unfounded legend of a woman who briefly became Pope Joan in the 9th century, is one that would have defeated even the best screenwriter. Given limited release in Europe and only a few showings in the USA, let's hope this is one film that never gets a restoration. No one is seen to advantage--an embarrassment for all concerned. As noted by Tony Thomas in his book, "Films of Olivia de Havilland": "It is a pity to see so many fine actors wallowing in medieval mire."
There is a novel (Pope Joan/ I Papissa Iwanna) by Greek writer Emmanouil Roidis (1836-1904). It's written at the language of those times. Papissa means a woman Pope. Only now there are women in churches. Writer lived at Syros (Ermoupolis). There were many Catholics in that Greek island. This novel was not loved by church... And the writer was a blasphemy for the church exactly for this reason. The film's story is relative to this novel? John Briley knew Roidis' novel? IMDb's review don't say anything about this. If someone knows about it, please write... You can see about the novel and the writer in internet. There 're many relative sites. I 'm waiting for any answers about this. Thank you!
I found the film version of the Pope Joan story compelling viewing because it conveyed the force and importance of Joan's spiritual calling yet portrayed her as an breathing human being (this may be somewhat ironic since it is possible she is only a legend). Here is a woman who hears God's voice and the voice of carnal longing. She is neither the lowly whore nor the ethereal virgin. Also, it is refreshing to see films where spirituality and belief in God are taken seriously.
I found the performances to be excellent, especially those of Liv Ullman and Trevor Howard. Ullman is very good at portraying the vertical pull of spirituality and the wrenching ambiguity of living in the material world. Trevor Howard's performance was utterly convincing. Also, Susan Winter had a quiet presence about her in her brief performance as the young Joan, which impressed me. What a tenuous thing to be a young girl in the Medieval age - what a microcosm she is of all human existence.
This film has its flaws, most notably the disjointed editing and jarred pacing. I do not quibble, however, with the less than ideal sound quality of the dialog or the occasional white lines which momentarily appear on the screen now and again because when I watch a film, I accept the film on its own terms; I do not wish it was something it isn't - a film made on a modest budget in 1972 should not be expected to look and sound like a mega-budget blockbuster filmed in 2006. On the whole, this movie is a success.
Cautionary note: not a movie for kids.
I found the performances to be excellent, especially those of Liv Ullman and Trevor Howard. Ullman is very good at portraying the vertical pull of spirituality and the wrenching ambiguity of living in the material world. Trevor Howard's performance was utterly convincing. Also, Susan Winter had a quiet presence about her in her brief performance as the young Joan, which impressed me. What a tenuous thing to be a young girl in the Medieval age - what a microcosm she is of all human existence.
This film has its flaws, most notably the disjointed editing and jarred pacing. I do not quibble, however, with the less than ideal sound quality of the dialog or the occasional white lines which momentarily appear on the screen now and again because when I watch a film, I accept the film on its own terms; I do not wish it was something it isn't - a film made on a modest budget in 1972 should not be expected to look and sound like a mega-budget blockbuster filmed in 2006. On the whole, this movie is a success.
Cautionary note: not a movie for kids.
I saw the film on TV, quite by chance. I found the film gripping: the story, the atmosphere and the historical detail.
I have no religious interest, but it made me curious to find out more about 'pope Joan'. The film is a work of fiction based on a legend, with very little factual basis.
Nevertheless, one could really get a sense of life in those times (9th century Europe). Poverty, illiteracy, corruption. The place of women. The violence, that life was worth very little.
Sadly, I think much of the world is just like that today, so perhaps it is a little window on humanity.
I have no religious interest, but it made me curious to find out more about 'pope Joan'. The film is a work of fiction based on a legend, with very little factual basis.
Nevertheless, one could really get a sense of life in those times (9th century Europe). Poverty, illiteracy, corruption. The place of women. The violence, that life was worth very little.
Sadly, I think much of the world is just like that today, so perhaps it is a little window on humanity.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesAfter a muted critical response, the film was severely re-edited. In its original incarnation, the film contained many flashbacks and flash-forwards, quite a progressive style for 1972. These were all removed to create a more linear story and the film was then released as "The Devil's Imposter". These changes were reinstated for a 2009 reissue.
- Versões alternativasIn the version shown on BBC TV on 22nd October 2005, the 20th-century bookend scenes are cut, Keir Dullea and Robert Beatty do not appear, and the film ends abruptly with the crowd descending on Joan.
- ConexõesFeatured in A Quiet Revolution (1972)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Pope Joan?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- The Devil's Imposter
- Locações de filme
- Brasov, Romênia(mountain top castle scenes)
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
- Tempo de duração
- 2 h 12 min(132 min)
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 2.35 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente