Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

PodBill Just what I expected

GrimPrecise I'll tell you why so serious

Aubrey Hackett While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

Mikooo I watched this just the other day, about 10 years since i first saw it, and have to admit its still a good watch.Sobieski was really a stand out for me, and considering how young she was when this was shot, she really did the role justice. I couldn't have seen anyone else playing this role with such maturity.I also liked the way this movie portrayed Joan, as the other film starring Milla Jovovich had her conveyed in a more schizophrenic manner. In this movie, Joan was shown to be a compassionate, intelligent, strong-willed young woman who was guided completely by her solid faith. It was really inspiring and a great insight into the life & struggles of one of the great saints.A good movie for the family, with an even better message behind it - truly captivating and faithful to the history.

anonymous124 As the film rolls past we catch the faces of many a Hollywood has-been. The last generations finest reduced to roles of utter humiliation. They do not give good performances. They look embarrassed and defeated and all too aware of their surroundings. Only Peter O'Toole has a spark of life in him - God knows what he was thinking when he took this role, he can't even save the scenes where he's the only one in the frame, and despite the fact he is one of the most respected actors in Hollywood, the makers of the film feel too above him to let this happen more than once or twice. Too bad. Instead, they fill the frame with Leslee Sobieski, who takes herself, the role, and this ridiculous, cliché ridden made for TV movie like she planned to upstage Maria Falconetti. Points for effort, but she doesn't attain much more of a performance than most porn stars do. She manages a grimace here and there, usually just before a battle. Then the camera cranes dramatically up and down and to the side while lots of people fight. 8 year old boys will be ready to praise because, whatever comes in between, there are battle scenes.Joan of Arc does not fall into the category of "so bad it's funny." It is not funny. It is simply bad. It is not filled with clichés - it IS a cliché. A cliché extended over several hours, and nearly unbearable to watch at that. Shirley MacLaine, a long way from "The Apartment," makes a brief, very dramatic cameo - the kind where we first see her feet step out and then the back of her head and finally her face. But she doesn't actually get to do anything besides some violent coughing. She exists to give the film some air of credibility, I suppose.The last section of the film, like many Joan of Arc movies past, does indeed use the actual dialouge Joan spoke during her trial. The 1928 film "The Passion of Joan of Arc" directed by Carl Theodore Dreyer was built entirely around this one section, and it was a devastating, brutally told real-time drama of unflinching power. The very same dialouge is used in this film, yet it is acted so terribly, and presented so blandly, that it's hard to believe they could focus on the same subject.Save the wonderful Mr. O'Toole, there is no redeeming quality in this film. It is indeed one of the worst films ever recorded onto celluloid.

KFSIMONATL Do great times call forth grand souls or do grand souls change great events or both? Joan's World - Historical Background. It was a time when the English crown controlled huge territories in France - and not by way of some invasion or occupation, but as the direct result of the fact the English King, Henry IV, (also Duke of Lancaster) and his son Henry V (both of Shakespeare fame)were descendants of the original French Duke of Normandy, William, who had conquered England in 1066 and thus the King of England continued to remain the feudal "owner" of Normandy, Brittainy and Acquitaine. This English King, Henry V would stake the biggest claim and actually force the King of France to appoint this same English King, his "lawful" successor to the French throne. Combine this with the fact the the English had a willing French ally in the form of Charles, Duke of Burgundy who was a rival for the French crown. Its no surprise that the Burgundians were the bully boys of this era. They were allies of the English and thus their French-speaking local "enforcers." The English would control these areas for over 300 years. The "Hundred Years War" would be fought to maintain that English control. So at the time of this story, the Dauphine of France, the weak French prince Charles was not yet the crowned King of France and controlled only a fraction of the country. Even he saw his chances for the crown as limited. Another Charles, the Duke of Burgundy, France, was far more powerful than the Dauphine and to offset his limited powers, Burgandy had allied themselves with the English.It was into this was brutal world, that Joan of Arc was born. A savage time of "might makes right" and a nobility class-sanctioned brutalization of a citizen population caught in a titanic chess match as pawns between a class of nobles who, although they had taken ancient oaths sworn to guard the defenseless, nevertheless preyed on the very people they were sworn to defend.There are parallels to many parts of the world where so-called "war lords" have re-imposed a modern-day feudalism of protectors and protected.Joan was inspired, (and just by what/who, remains a hotly debated theological and psychological discussion to this day) to free France of English domination. Why? Catholics might argue that she was called to this by God in order to preserve France as a bastion of Catholicism against the invading "heresy" of the Protestant Revolution. Think how events might have turned out if England had conquered all of France and imposed Protestantism on France.Historical Sequel to Joan of Arc.Henry V would die in France of a fever and never assert this claim. With Joan's military successes as precedents, and the Duke of Burgandy eventually abandoning his English allies, Henry V's son, Henry VI, a weak-willed but pious monarch, would be VERY unsuccessful in asserting any of his father Henry V's claims even though another war, the "Thirty Years" war would be fought by Henry VI's dukes to try to take back lost regions. The English would eventually lose that war and surrender, city by city, castle by castle, the entire regions of Normandy and Aquitaine back to the French. Ultimately, the Ennglish would control only the port city of Calais before losing that last foothold on the Continent. A new war in England, a civil war between the houses and Dukes of York and Lancaster would be fought, in part, from the failures of the Lancastrian King, Henry VI to keep those hard-fought territories - "The War of the Roses." Now why is the movie great? Because it faithfully captures the life of a illiterate and simple peasant girl, called by unseen forces to change the world around her in direct conflict with the brutality, the conflict, the religious zeal/fanaticism and the lust for power of he times into which Jean D'Arc was born into.If you don't know much about either Joan or the times, you learn a great deal from this wonderful movie. Joan was on a "mission from God," at least to her way of thinking and the religious forces of her day in the form of the Church hierarchy were dumbfounded initially and enraged, eventually that some "mere girl" would dare to tell them anything about God's will for either herself, let alone her King and country.The Maid of Orleans' life is a testament to one person, even a unschooled young girl's in an age of female political impotence to change events on a grand scale.

Marcin Kukuczka A lot of films have been made about this person, but none of them seems to be as powerful as this one. The reason is not only the fact that few films of such topics include such a great cast (most of the characters are played by great stars of cinema). It is, I think, the way that Mr Duguay portrayed Joan of Arc, really as she most probably was like: a young, sweet maiden who dared say the British: "I will lead my nation to victory through God's help!" She turns out to be a saint rather than, like in some other movies, a religious fanatic.The portrayal of Joan is created perfectly by a young, beautiful actress, with Polish ancestry, Leelee Sobieski. Throughout the movie, she beautifully stresses her innocence and gentleness going in pairs with the capability of leadership. In my opinion, no matter if Leelee will appear in other 50 films in her life career, this role will always be UNFORGETTABLE!Others who shine in their roles are, of course, Peter O'Toole as bishop Cauchon. On the one hand, he judges Joan and accuses her of pride and vanity; but on the other hand, fights for her "eternal soul". Maximilian Schell also gives a fine performance as a cruel and double faced representative of inquisition. But I particularly like Peter Strauss as La Hire, a commander of the French army. This role is typical for him: someone hesitating and doubting, but in the long run, opening his eyes and totally setting his heart on the values. "I stopped to believe in others and started to believe myself only. At Orleans, I stopped to believe myself, I started to believe in you," as he says once to Joan - REALLY POWERFUL!The mini series about Joan of Arc is a must in my film gallery. Without hesitation, I give it 9/10. GREAT STORY, WONDERFUL CAST, EXCELLENT MUSIC, MEMORABLE QUOTES, GREAT LOCATIONS (old castles in the Czech Republic)! This movie is really visually stunning. Do see it! Having seen once, you will feel a need to see this at least for the second time.