Rating: 
Summary: Luc Besson didn't understand God in this movie
Review: He has ever had passion to explore some aspects of women, but now he's a "grown up". I don't want to see Englishmen, Americans and French themselves playing French in a movie describing history facts, we can not find THE REASON France fought with England when those emotions has been confused a lot. Though I like Milla Jovovich, always. About French's madness, if you are interested in it's beauty and mystery (in this movie, it is expressed little and not so completely), I recommend "Beatrice" and "the ninth gate"(but I've ever seen few French movies). Notice how those people betray God; the ways are funny sometimes and beautiful sometimes, though are cruel (cruelty is based on despair) the same time, of course. I don't know how successful the two movies are, in trying to touch the thought of God, since I myself do not really understand God and find it is hard to understand a little more; at least I am sure they are closer than this one.
Rating: 
Summary: POWER DRIVEN AND ALMOST PERFECT!!!
Review: Besson's "Joan Of Arc" is just short of a masterpiece! Many dismiss it as just show but Besson knew better and flanked his vision is powerful images of war, horror and outstanding acting! Jovovich deserved an Oscar Nomination for this film but due to the films minor flaws such as its often missed directed musical score and bad casting of John Malkovich, voters went cold. The story takes liberties here and ther but a deeper story is there taht no film has ever touched and to really grab the genrebending myths behind the real Joan of Arc who was really called "Joan The Virgin" makes this film even more compelling. Facts like the French may have been embrassed by a poor woman leading them to victory and that Joan was very afraid of being burned at the stake and jumped from the 70 foot high tower which was her prison without a scratch on her when she landed! obviously she was recaptured and burned but while at the stake the crowd began to change their views and demanded for her release. It took the executioner 5 trys to burn her at the stake due to the fire kept burning out! Joan was not on trial for crimes committed against an English king but for immorally corupt behavior due to her donning mens clothing which magically found its way into her cell! This is what she was killed for being a witch! The english belived it looked bad to give just a mere powerfull, intellignet, brave, self driven-19 yr. old the hand of death but to murder an all powerfull witch her last due was justified! Besson's take on this is brilliant painting Joan as a saint to those who love her and powerfull to those who fear her! The film does not paint her as diluted but as the English would want us to view her! Hoffman is brilliant as the FILMS voice of reason and as a whole the images and sounds take full advantage of the films epic scope! A must by alone to see a distraught Jovovich in a wheat field telling an army of thousands to "Fight Me If You Love Me"! About as close to the true Joan as we might see for a long time...a must own!
Rating: 
Summary: Saint or Heretic?
Review: That was the dilemma for those who were dealing with the real-life Joan of Arc, and it remains so in reel life in "The Messenger".I had got some free passes for this movie; my friend John was glad to come with me and my sister because he knew something about it. I guess what he knew was that IT WOULD BE VIOLENT, which is often a powerful motivator for menfolk. Well, okay, so it was violent--what of it? I think the essential value of this movie is that after you see it, you have a fairly accurate idea of how medieval warfare was conducted, how men had to rev themselves up for terrifying hand-to-hand combat with a truly mortal enemy. This is not a women's picture, no. Some things annoyed me about this picture. In the early pillaging scene, we see Joan is a little preteen girl. I thought, hey that's great, for once Joan is going to be a GIRL, you know, not a woman. But then we cut to the Dauphin/John Malkovich's castle where everyone's talking about the imminent visit from this strange visionary. She arrives, throws back her hood, and .... she's some other actress now! I really hate that kind of thing. This is a crucial scene; I have to trust my protagonist, and I don't even know this dame! She was also doing a lot of weird, border-line things that made you question her sanity. I don't think the real Joan comported herself like that--no one would have followed her into battle otherwise. Another problem was that a famous part of the Joan story is that she hears three saints' voices talking to her; they're the ones who inspire her to fight against England's invasion. But this Joan meets up with Christ himself, and later, with Dustin Hoffman. Lowdown on "The Messenger": if you like authentic-feeling fighting, then rent it for that. If you want something else--like veracity--then get out the encyclopedia.
Rating:
Summary: don't expect god to touch you through the television screen
Review: Ok.. this movie has obviously caused some debate about the legend of joan of arc. However, it seems obvious that debate was its intention. I suppose there are those who honestly believe that joan was God's messenger. And there are others who believe there must have been some other explanation. I think this movie can be described as the story of a girl who is so in love with god, and wants more than anything for him to be pleased with her, that she looks for his presence in everything that she encounters. This love and desire for God is brought nearer to her, as she witnesses her sister's death and subsequent err.. violation. She wants to know why the God she so loved would leave her alive, while taking her sister. The obvious conclusion: God needs her for something. From this point, the film starts the portrayal of the historical Joan. Many things are brought into question, such as her motivation, the nature of her visions, and even the consistancy of her actions. None of which are resolved to any specific conclusion, as far as i can see. I don't believe there is any reason to assume that this film portrays Joan to be a lunatic. It merely shows the character of Joan questioning herself about it, by means of her conscience (often humorously portrayed by Dustin Hoffman). She questions her motives, as any right thinking moral christian would, after directly causing the deaths of so many people. The conclusions that are drawn near the end of the film, are things that she comes to in her own mind, and nowhere is it stated that she was not sent by god to do her work.. only that she had personal motivation for it, and sometimes acted selfishly. I came away from the film convinced even more that this was a woman with undeniable courage, unshakable faith, and truly, above all, a servant of the God that she spent her whole life trying to be closer to. I feel that anyone who missed those points should see it again.
Rating: 
Summary: WONDERFUL!!!!! What more can I say?
Review: I completely love action/war movies. One night when I went to Hollywood Video, that's what I was exactly looking for. I found "The Messenger" sitting on the shelf in the action section. I read on the back that Tcheky Karyo (I love that guy!) was in it so I decided to rent it. At the time, I have only heard of Milla Jovovich. When I watched it, I was left breathless. Milla delivered an outstanding performance as Joan of Arc as well as all the other actors including Tcheky Karyo as Dunois (of course). This movie is definitely a must-see. I can't wait till the DVD comes out!
Rating: 
Summary: Postmodernist
Review: Despite a promising start , I found the movie extremely disappointing.
There was some good acting but the storyline completely distorted the message of Joan of Arc.Instead of the courageous and noble young lady that I believe her to have been ,in this post-modernistic , oversophisticated era of cheap thrills she is portrayed as a pschotic ,ultraneurotic who the movie seems to suggest was motivated by selfish and bloodthirsty reasons which anyone who has studied Joan of Arc would know is not true (Read or see George Bernhard Shaw's Saint Joan which shows more genius in one sentence than this movies wise guy writers and producers could ever write in their collective lifetimes) I am going to see the other Joan of Arc video and hope it is better than this one and reflects the genuine values of freedom and justice which so many older movies (but also quite a few new ones ) more satisfyingly portray
Rating:
Summary: A Movie For Those "Who Have Eyes To See"
Review: Whoever says this is not a great movie has no eyes to see, and no heart filled with devotion. From start to finish, this film is a wonder. Milla Jovovich's performance as Joan of Arc is memorable. A wild-eyed believer with a mission from God. I truly believe that this movie captures some of the grandeur and "electricity" of Joan's time. It is perhaps because the life of a mystic is so generally misunderstood, that our generation has "no eyes to see." But for those who do see, it is a compelling and moving story, and a wonderful way to introduce to those whom you love the life of a very great Saint.
Rating:
Summary: Disney's Pocahantas was more accurate...
Review: I know all the critics panned this film, but a few people I know said it was still worth watching. They were wrong. I'm pretty sure the only reason Jovovich even got the role is because her husband's the director. I can promise you it wasn't because of her acting ability. I truly respect Joan of Arc and find her story quite inspiring. This film turned a strong, noble woman into a babbling psycho bent on revenge for something that never even happened. Very, very few things in this film were even historically accurate. John Malcovich and Dustin Hoffman must've lost a bet...that's the only explanation I can think of for their prescence in this filth. The film does have Braveheart level (in violence, not quality) battle scenes, so you may want to be careful about letting little ones view this. There is a scene in the very beginning where young Joan witnesses her sister get brutally killed and then raped, which was truly disturbing. In addition to being one of the creepiest moments on film, the event never actually happened. If you really want to know the story of Joan of Arc, watch any other film. If all you want is 2 and a half hours of mind numbing battles with special effects, this is your flick.
Rating:
Summary: It's not "about" Joan of Arc
Review: First of all, let me say that Luc Besson is the greatest director of all time and this film is a great display of his talents.
Now, with that out of the way, it's obvious that Besson took many liberties in his interpretation of the LEGEND of Jean d'Arc. He never claimed to be portraying the events exactly as they happened. After all, a good portion of the film takes place in the mind of Jean, and no one--not even historians--know what that was really like. If you want a history lesson, watch PBS or the History Channel. If you want a thrilling, disturbing, inspiring, gorgeous, brilliant, and innovative lesson in true Christianity, then watch this movie. That's what this movie is all about--Christianity. In a sense it's an anti-Catholicism film; however, it urges a close relationship with God. It displays the horrors of giving over to one's personal desires and ignoring the message of Jesus Christ. The film is an indictment of misinterpretation of the Bible and of feelings of superiority over others. It's not "about" Jean d'Arc! It just uses her--a well-respected and almost idolized figure--to get across a vital message. That message is that we mere humans--all of us, including priests, popes, and saints--can not begin to fathom the purpose of existence, that we do not have the wisdom or the right to judge others, and that giving over to our worldly desires will be the end of us.
Rating:
Summary: Total disservice to the legend of Joan of Arc
Review: Being a person who admired the Joan of Arc of our history, I was very much looking forward to the releasal of "The Messenger." I had hoped it would portray Joan in an updated version. How wrong I was. For starters, the movie ran just too long. Movies that are long that people don't mind, such as "Forrest Gump" are tolerated because they were good. This movie was just plain bad. Aside from the fact there are fabricated characters such as Dustin Hoffman's "Conscious," it was historically inaccurate. John Malkovich was too old to play Charles, the interactions Joan had with the English were looked over in order to spruce up the special effects of the wars and it just simply concentrated on the wrong topics of her story. I wanted to know more about Joan, not watch the soldiers brutalize each other. The great disservice this screenplay did was portray Joan as insane rather than having a gift from God. Only a few "miracles" were actually illustrated, such as Joan picking Charles out of a crowd. Jovovich's portrayal of Joan as a shuddering, twitching mental patient was simply unnerving, not at all enlightening. Historic reports indicated that Joan was not at all like the movie version -- quite the opposite in fact. This movie is also more graphic than I could bear. The raping of her sister's corpse was just plain disgusting -- as well as false. This did not happen and Joan's visions began way before any catastrophe... The Messenger concentrates too much on special effects and the action factor of war. Joan is dismissed as a saint in this movie and merely portrayed as an insane woman who pretty much got lucky with people listening to her rants. I have never been so disgusted in my life with a biopic, which is usually what we expect -- a factual version of a historical figure. My recommendation is to SKIP this... and look up an older version of the movie or check out PBS' website for information on specials of Joan of Arc -- they care more about facts than special effects and shock value...
|
