Cool News
Janestreeter takes a look at THE MESSENGER: THE STORY OF JOAN OF ARC
Hey folks, Harry here. Well here's the review that Moriarty said would be coming. You see... when I asked Moriarty about what the average BRAVEHEART fan would think of this film... after already hearing his praise for THE MESSENGER, he told me that he felt that a large portion of the audience would hate the film. That this wasn't the film that 70% of the audience want to see. That it isn't the easy epic with tons of battles. That the film deals far more with spiritual issues.... along the lines of a KUNDUN or THE THIN RED LINE. Two films that I personally love, but... for whatever reason just didn't reach a wide audience. Personally... everything I've seen from the film thus far has been to my likening. But will the film follow through for me. I'm hoping so... I love Besson's past work, and from the trailers it feels like an epic by way of Terrence Malick. And that... I'm dying to see. I don't know if a single kind word is uttered towards the film below.... But it is this person's honest opinion. Here it is...
Dear Harry,
Last evening on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, I had (what I hoped to be) the privelege of seeing Luc Besson's new film, "The Messenger:
The Story of Joan of Arc," which will be released, unfortunatley, nationwide on November 12th.
This film is hardly even worth a review. There was not ONE single redeeming or inventive aspect of this two-hour-twenty-five minute debacle.
Before the film began, a nervous Mr. Besson appeared and told the audience that because this film takes place in the 15th Century, the pacing
of the film would not be the fast MTV-style of editing that we may have come to expect ( and immensly enjoy) from his films.
Besson's prologue for the film was my first indication of the depths to which this film would suck. And to my dismay, it was hardly the last.
There is so much wrong with this film that it is hard to know where to begin, but it's somewhere around the 23rd frame.
Rather than going into the story of the film, the remainder of this review will deal with the film itself. (If you want to know more about the
subject, a remedial high school European History textbook would be quicker to read and immensly more enjoyable.)
Acting:
Milla Jovovich, star of "The Fifth Element" and Besson's former girlfriend, plays Joan in such an over-the-top way that even her natural beauty
begins to annoy. Never for a moment could I believe the idea that a spokeswoman for Loreal Hair Color was leading an army of buffonish
Frenchmen into war. However, I could not help but feel sad for this young woman whose waifish body constantly looked as if it was being
crushed by the weight and pretentiousness of this project.
Beyond its star, the film boasts a list of top American acting talent. I stress "American" because this is a film concerning the people of France
and England during the 15th Century and the casting of these minor, but important, roles does nothing to sell the audience on the idea that we
have been transported back to the time of the Hundred Years war. John Malkovich plays King Charles VII of France like a diva in waiting. This
would have been forgiven if there was a scene where he was shown trying on various ladies undergarments of the period, but unfortunatley
that never came. Faye Dunaway, in a costume retrieved from David Lynch's "Dune," is wasted in each of her three scenes. Last, and certainly
least, Dustin Hoffman embarrases himself as Joan's mental image of the big guy himself. Mr. Hoffman may be able to pull off playing Tootsie,
but it's a little harder to accept him as the voice of God. I only hope his children get some extr toys this Hannukah for his efforts.
Directing:
There really is no one more to blame for this insipid spectacle than Besson himself. What happened to the cool Frenchman who blew me away
with "La Femme Nikita" and "The Professional"? This film offers so little that it hardly resembles any of the traits that I associate with Mr.
Besson. For example, the scope or aspect ratio of this film appears to be 1:85 to 1, not 2:35 to 1 that normal widescreen film is shot it. What all
this technical jargon means is that large scale battle sequences look as if they could have been filmed in my backyard. The depth in both the
imagery and the characters is so underwhelming that no obvious attempt to schock the audience (decapitations, the rape of a freshly killed nun,
etc.) had any effect except the urge to exit.
Script:
A mess. The original script is credited to Andrew Birkin, however Besson couldn't keep his grubby hands of this either. I really believe that
most of the problems with this film are due to the lack of both originality and quality in the script. My biggest complaint is that half of the
actors, mostly the French ones, speak in a way that is reminiscent of the picture's time, while the American actors speak like they've just handed
their double mochachino latte to thier respective assistants. This lack of consistency in the writing is not only unforgivable, it's embarrasing.
Ultimatley, that's how I felt for Mr. Besson as he plodded to the front of the theater for a brief Q&A, embarrassed. As the film cut to black, 90%
of the audience jetted for the nearest exits. Not a good sign for the director who admitted beforehand that this would be the first time he
screened the film with an audience.
I'd like to think that this was a bump on the road of Mr. Besson's career as a filmmaker, but "The Messenger" feels like more of an atomic bomb
from which no recovers and anyone who experienced it first hand doesn't like to discuss.
Save your money and, more importantly, your integrity,
Janestreeter
-
+ Expand All
-
I have seen Joan of Arc, and I'm betting my cojones that this Sarin Rufus twit has not. And from the look of it, the "reviewer" hasn't either. First of all, JOAN is shot in 1 : 2,35 SCOPE format, and not in flat as he says. Also, the "nun" that is raped after she's killed (yeah - freaky, I know...) is actually Joan's sister. Considering he didn't even figure that one out (it happens ten minutes into the film) I would take his views with a truckload of salt if I were you.l Sure, the film isn't as divine as Moriarty thinks IMHO, but it's a damn fine film, and one that dares go a bit further than simplistic shite like Braveheart does. You're supposed to THINK FOR YOURSELVES! Was Joan a true messenger of God, or just a zealous nutcase? The film takes no stand in this matter. The scholars still debate this. And sure, Milla plays it more like the latter, but that makes it more indecesive and interesting methinks. And the visuals are brilliant as always with Luc, as is Eric Serra's score. And for the guy who wondered about Bigelow's lawsuit, it is still pending. But she's working on WEIGHT OF WATER starring Sean Penn, Sarah Polley etc now, so I guess she's occupied. Don't judge this film until you see it. I'm sure a lot of you will hate it, but not for the reasons mantioned in the review. As for the eternally hemorroidically irritating Sarin Rufus - if you think THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH is going to be really, really good while JOAN isn't, well, that just goes to show what a hypocrite you are. The 90's suck, isn't that your credo? Yeah right... And shouldn't an "intellectual" like yourself be somewhat better at spelling? And don't get on my back. My first language isn't even English. And I'm halfway drunk. So there.
-
Harry let me write and right this wrong. I'm sorry, everyone has a right to an opinion on this site but this review wreaks of a studio sabotage. Harry I'll get to you to post asap a quick FEATURE PRESENTATIONMAN write up but almost point for point she is guilty of creating mostly a false negative or seizing on every possible issue of debate ignoring totally the breathtaking, emotionally wrenching, shot in widescreen CINEMASCOPE which is 2.35:1.....well suffice to say, using her error in lens ratio as a metaphor to her observations of this mighty production: She denies absorbing Mr Besson's passionate and human vision by a deliberate pan and scan of her thoughts on AICN to fulfill it seems a predisposed poisonous presentation that to all of us who embrace life letterboxed can only shrug and say...one day, maybe soon, she'll see the big screen.
-
Calm down. I thought the movie was beautifully shot and had some deep messages, but it also suffered from a hack editing job and immense lapses in logic and continuity. Who knows? Maybe a longer director's cut will make sense of some of the lapses. A great director sometimes isn't always great. Mallick has done some fine work, but this was sub par for him. It was visually stylistic with some great moments butthe central story was shredded. Yes, I know in his style the central storyline was secondary to his images and messages (which I loved) but that doesn't mean he should make a mess of it. I personally think in his effort to cut the running time yet keep all the cameos, he fucked up his plot and left huge nonsensical holes in it. What was your Wild Wild West comment all about? Were you trying to suggest that because I was disappointed in THE THIN RED LINE that I must be a heathen of some sort. A piece of Hollywood crap like WWW you assume will be illogical nonsense. But you don't expect that kind of logic in TTRL. When an artist like Mallick flubs a movie with so much early potential (the first half was teriffic) it's a real let down. Sorry that's how I felt about it as did a lot of my friends.
-
Calm down. I thought the movie was beautifully shot and had some deep messages, but it also suffered from a hack editing job and immense lapses in logic and continuity. Who knows? Maybe a longer director's cut will make sense of some of the lapses. A great director sometimes isn't always great. Mallick has done some fine work, but this was sub par for him. It was visually stylistic with some great moments butthe central story was shredded. Yes, I know in his style the central storyline was secondary to his images and messages (which I loved) but that doesn't mean he should make a mess of it. I personally think in his effort to cut the running time yet keep all the cameos, he fucked up his plot and left huge nonsensical holes in it. What was your Wild Wild West comment all about? Were you trying to suggest that because I was disappointed in THE THIN RED LINE that I must be a heathen of some sort. A piece of Hollywood crap like WWW you assume will be illogical nonsense. But you don't expect that kind of logic in TTRL. When an artist like Mallick flubs a movie with so much early potential (the first half was teriffic) it's a real let down. Sorry that's how I felt about it as did a lot of my friends.
-
That was an accident. My response was also meant for someone who posted below my response. I don't know how it got up there.
-
Oct 15, 1999 4:09:56 PM CDT
Refer to Moriarty's brilliantly observed review 2 weeks past. H
by trailer man
No need to even have a go with writing a post or review or take janestreeter to issue any further. For those who may have missed or for those that want to enjoy again a terrific piece of writing, Moriarty's review of THE MESSENGER is dead on after just reading it again. HOWEVER HE HAS A MAJOR SPOILER NOT WARNED ABOUT! Read and enjoy review. But stop towards end when he begins about her sentencing at the stake, because truly discover on your own the cinematic brilliance Besson crafted in translating Joan's faith and purity that delivers a level of visceral ecstacia you won't soon forget.
-
I don't care what anyone says, ask madboy about Garbage Pail Kids. I want to see this flick so I'm gonna see it, even if it doesn't have MTV editing. Besson hasn't disappointed me yet, so my confidence isn't ruined by the above review. Sarin Rufus we know you didn't see this movie. It's okay. You don't have to lie to make us like you. We don't like you anyways. Are you sure you didn't watch the Sobieski version of Joan Of Arc instead? It really does sound like something you would do. You know sometimes it sucks not living in LA. Straight Story opened there but not here in AZ...hate when they do that...I might just have to jump in my car and take a little road trip to LA. Hope no one tailgates me.
-
Go Luc! Go Milla! Go Bruce! Oh, wait. JOA is going to rock-ass! I can't wait! Yahoo!!! I really don't care about the reviews on this site anyway. I like this site, I like the news, but the reviews SUCK! According to the reviews on this site, only 3 or 4 bad movies came out this year. Hahahahahaha! I still laugh when I remember how many glowing reviews of Austin 2 came in. But Iron Giant WAS really good. Anyway, go Joan! (BTW. Am I the only one worried that Bruce Willis is going to 'wuss-out' Tom Hanks-style?)
-
I won't go and see this movie because this one review sucked? Wow. I don't know what else to say. Wow.
So what if I say it's the best bloody movie in the entire world? If I wrote a review praising it and saying it was the most awesome experience in my whole life?
I haven't seen it, so I can't say if it's good or bad. But you know what I'm going to do. I'm going to do one reasonable thing - I'm going to go to my local cinema and see the movie, and afterwards I'll make MY OWN judgement. I never listen to other people's judgement, simply because I know that what some people like, I may not like and vice versa. So I don't really care about reviews. I care about making my own opinion after seeing the movie, not before it. I gotta say I don't understand those who bitch about the beforehand without having actually seen it.
Just go see the movie and then make your own judgement. If you think it sucks or if you think it rocks when having seen it, then it's OK. I won't complain about that. We all have different opinions.
But please, spare me and the rest of us of the "this movie will stink big time" crap if you haven't seen the movie.
If the reviewer has seen the movie and thinks it stinks, fair enough. That's the REVIEWER'S OPINION. Now go make up your own.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 419 total posts 209 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 131 total posts 129 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 123 total posts 122 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 124 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 191 total posts 47 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 43 total posts 43 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 42 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 27 total posts 27 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 506 total posts 26 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 77 total posts 24 posts