Product Details

• Rating: R (Restricted)
• Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
• Formats: Anamorphic, Full Screen, NTSC
• Subtitled in: English, French
• Running time: 148 minutes

Amazon.com
1999 may be remembered as the year of Joan of Arc: NBC created a miniseries in her honor, Carl Dreyer's long-lost The Passion of Joan of Arc was discovered in a mental hospital, and Facets re-released Jacques Rivette's Joan the Maid. Luc Besson rounds out the corpus with his stylistic and vaguely heretical grand-scale feature, The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc.

Besson (La Femme Nikita, The Fifth Element) challenges established notions about the Maid of Orleans as he creates a decidedly more human heroine than have previous biopics. The story line is the same--a young, illiterate peasant girl convinces the dauphin of France to give her an army, and she leads them to victory in Orleans, only to be burned at the stake for heresy--but Milla Jovovich, in the title role, is a woman possessed. Her influences are less than heavenly; as a child she witnesses the murder of her sister by the English, a death caused by the sister's giving her hiding place to young Joan, which causes an intense desire for revenge. Yes, God still speaks to Joan, but even this is undermined, as Dustin Hoffman, playing The Conscience, questions her motives.

Cinematically, The Messenger is stunning, with fantastical sequences of Joan in communication with higher powers. Yet the graphic violence (scenes include random decapitation and a dog gnawing on a body); the uneven accents, which make it difficult to tell who is fighting on which side; and the rewriting of lore may make this version of Joan of Arc appeal only to Besson fans. Jovovich is convincing, and while at times the film may drag (at times you wish they'd hurry up and burn her), it is a remarkable and insightful retelling of a well-known piece of history. --Jenny Brown

Customer Reviews

challenge a legend?
I admit to seeing the made-for-television version of Joan of Arc before viewing this version. If it makes a difference, I also read Mark Twain's "Personal Recollections of Joan of Arc" that previous weekend, regardless of my dislike of Twain's writing style. I admit to thinking of this logical, honest, and energetic historical figure as one of the most fascinating in history. So, after viewing the scewed version called "The Messenger" I am perhaps too biased to speak.
The Joan portrayed in "The Messanger" comes off as tempermental, insecure, and ultimately insane. This is not the Joan that is recorded in history as a kind and forgiving peasant who touched the hearts of thousands by loving them, and who never spoke ill of anyone. This is not the Joan that led fifty intelligent judges in circles of words by answering calmly, consistently, and logically all answers that were intended to lead her to the stake. This is not the Joan who claimed to hear the voices of saints who informed her of events long before they happen. No, this "messenger", in the midst of a cinematic mess, is a horrifying psychotic who doesnot possess the conviction that would make an army wake up let alone fight an imposible war.
I did not like this movie. I leave you to make your own opinion, but consider that Joan of Arc was a seventeen-year-old peasant who claimed to hear heavenly voices, created a vast army and battle tactics that won back much of France, and was burned at the stake as a heretic before being declared a Saint. There are many interptretations of this historical figure, and although I am perhaps biased by my previous exposures, I don't feel that "the messenger" should be one of them.

WOW!
I have seen the movie twice within a week, and will see it acouple of more times. I was shivering through the whole movie, it wasso real for me. ... how 'clean' Joan was. First, at the beginning of the film it turns out that she had been to the priest for the third time that day, to confess. Later on the knights do not understand her when she says 'I want to confess. I have not confessed ... today yet' - if your really pay attention, for the environment this is very strange. And, at the end of the movie, she confesses her 'crimes' again. What I want to point out that she had a very strong conscience and she intended to keep it clean. This makes her a candidate to be Saint - as she was given this title 500 years later.

This movie IS about reality, the betraying of Joan included. This is what I liked the most (the film being so real).

Further on, every split second of the movie is communicating something. If you watch closely, the faces, the looks of the actors, the music, are constantly telling you a part of the story, a message. Perfect timing features the cutting of this film. The conflicts are precisely designed. The actors are perfectly matching their roles. I admit, that the ending is a bit long, but basically it stresses the suppressive behaviour of the inqusition of that time.

Milla plays just perfectly. In this version of the Joan of Arc movies she is what she is and that is it. Luc Besson had an idea in mind and she realises it.

If you like Luc Besson, Milla Jovovich, Eric Serra, history, middle age, or if you are a rebel, this is a must for you.

The more you appreciate art the more you are going to like this movie.

Finally: this movie is fine art in itself, a classic piece. But you have to like the style Luc Besson paints...

Brilliant filmmaking with a fatal flaw
This is a rather irreverent and disturbing look at the life of Saint Joan of Arc. The portrayal of her early life was very good, giving her a sincerity and piety that made the child Joan an attractive character. However, once Milla Jovovich took over as the teen Joan, she became a raving lunatic. Clearly, this was no accident. She and director Luc Besson are husband and wife, and it is obvious that this is their combined interpretation of Joan.

The problem with this portrayal was that Joan was made to be appear so demented that she lost credibility as a believable character. Her belief in her voices was depicted more as mad fanaticism than unshakeable faith. Personally, I have no problem with this interpretation, since I am more apt to believe her voices were the result of an unbalanced psyche than the voice of God. The problem I have is believing that anyone, even in the 15th century, would give an army to someone who is so obviously over the edge. Moreover, it is a stretch to believe that even the most desperate of simple minded men would follow such a character into battle.

If the portrayal were just a little more balanced, with moments of piety, sincerity and lucidity, the viewer and the other characters around her might be justified in saying, `Is she divinely inspired or simply mad?' Only when that question resonates has Joan been portrayed effectively. In this interpretation there was never any question. She was clearly a madwoman. It was almost a relief when they finally did away with her.

That being said, I must say that from a technical standpoint this was a brilliantly directed film. Luc Besson has produced a compelling visual work of art. The opening scenes of young Joan running through the fields were exquisite. The battle carnage was authentically grisly and the action realistic. The costumes were wonderful and the locations and sets well chosen and well crafted. His camera perspectives gave great impact to every scene. His imagary of supernatural events was electrifying. In every regard, other than Joan's character interpretation, this was an inspired work.

Milla Jovovich gave a superb performance as Joan The Mad. Though I don't agree with the interpretation, I can't imagine such insanity delivered any more effectively. She really seemed well suited for a jacket with wrap around sleeves. In every scene she exuded white hot intensity, especially in the battle scenes. Her performance was truly tour de force.

Faye Dunaway was fabulous as the cunning Yolande D'Aragon. She was so nefarious and in control, deliciously evil and conniving.

John Malkovich did an excellent job portraying Charles VII, however he was a bit old for the part. Charles was born in 1403 and met Joan in 1429 at the tender age of 26. Malkovich has trouble passing for 46 (his actual age) no less 26.

Dustin Hoffman's minor role as the conscience was also quite well done. Unfortunately, it lost some effectiveness because he was never really put in context. Was he another of Joan's creations or an actual being? A little defining dialogue would have helped develop his character better.

This is a fine film with a fatal flaw. If the story is to work, Joan must be a beloved heroine. In this portrayal, she does not endear herself to the viewer. Contrarily, she is a disturbing and off-putting character. For this reason I rated it a 7/10, though it easily qualified as a filmmaking 9 or 10.