Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

PiraBit if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

Kamila Bell This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Dalbert Pringle Fave movie quote - "I winged the witch!" Set in the 15th Century and apparently based on the "true" story of a "real-life" heroine who (supposedly under divine guidance) led France to victory against Britain in the Hundred Years' War - 1948's "Joan Of Arc" (a $4 million production) may have been able to boast about its fine costumes and its expensive set designs - But, boy, did it ever fail, in the long run, to satisfy this viewer on so many other counts.Filled-to-overflowing with a religious onslaught of emotionally over-wrought moments (courtesy of actress Ingrid Bergman) - Joan Of Arc (and all of its cross-bearing heresy) quickly managed to reduce itself to the level of laughable nonsense throughout a good part of its overlong, 146-minute running time.And, speaking about Ingrid Bergman (one of Hollywood's most bankable actresses of her day) - At the age of 33, I could never, ever be convinced to believe that she was portraying a heroine who was supposed to be a simple country girl of just 18 years. No way, Jose.All-in-all - I'd rightfully have to say that the most unintentionally hilarious scenes in this decidedly silly production (which certainly took itself way too seriously) would have to be those with Bergman, in a full suit of shining armour, leading the boys to battle as they fiercely fought their way on to an inevitable victory at Orleans.

Jimmy L. (NOTE: This review concerns the 100-minute edited cut shown on TCM.)This 1948 version of Joan of Arc's story is a big disappointment considering the talent involved: director Victor Fleming, who directed both GONE WITH THE WIND and THE WIZARD OF OZ in 1939, and a cast including Ingrid Bergman, José Ferrer, and Ward Bond. JOAN OF ARC (1948) fails to live up to any expectations.The editing is amateurish. There are abrupt cuts from one shot to the next, often cutting off bits of dialogue on the soundtrack. The voice- over does its job in setting the scenes within a historical narrative, but gives the movie an air of vintage "making of" TV specials. It almost seems as if stand-alone scenes were shot without knowing how to weave them together.The storytelling is too sincere and sentimental, giving the film an awkward hokey sensibility. Whereas Carl Theodor Dreyer's 1928 masterpiece THE PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC left room for interpretation regarding matters of divine intervention, this version is pretty straightforward about holy miracles, playing like a Sunday school movie. That is to say it's a religious fable about Ste. Joan of Arc, rather than a historical piece about Joan rallying her countrymen against English rule. (Not that there's anything wrong with that.)Ingrid Bergman was actually nominated for an Academy Award for her portrayal of Joan, a French teenager in the 1400s who believed she was called upon by God to raise an army against the English occupation of her country, later to be convicted of heresy by a council of pro-English clergymen. (It was Bergman's fourth nomination out of a career total of seven, including three wins.) José Ferrer also earned a nomination, playing the French Dauphin whom Joan fought to put on the throne. The top performances were by Bergman as Joan, Francis L. Sullivan as the corrupt judge, and J. Carrol Naish as a slimy one-eyed nobleman. Much of the supporting cast is second-rate.Maybe JOAN OF ARC is only unimpressive today as viewed by modern cynics. Or perhaps the trouble lies with the existing copies of the film. Whatever the case may be, the movie earned seven Oscar nods (including Best Editing!) and won an honorary award for its moral values.NOTE: Apparently the original release was a 145-minute cut, which was trimmed down to 100 minutes with added voice-over narration. This chopped-down version is shown on TV and is an embarrassing mess. The 145-minute version won the awards and is supposedly available on DVD.UPDATE 1/9/12: The full 145-minute version (just shown on TCM) is clearly superior to the edited-down version with the awful narration. It's an ambitious production, although its Sunday School tone is still a bit over-the-top (at least for this reviewer). The film takes itself way too seriously overall, but Jose Ferrer brings personality to the proceedings and Francis L. Sullivan stands out in his villainous role. The second half, with Joan's trial at the hands of the wicked Sullivan, is more effective than the first half and Ingrid Bergman's best moments are in her final scene.5/10 for the butchered version; 6.5/10 for the full-length epic

Claudio Carvalho In the Fifteenth Century, France is a defeated and ruined nation after the One Hundred Years War against England. The fourteen years old farm girl Joan of Arc (Ingrid Bergman) claims to hear voices from Heaven asking her to lead God's Army against Orleans and crowning the weak Dauphin Charles VII (José Ferrer) as King of France. Joan gathers the people with her faith, forms an army and conquerors Orleans. When her army is ready to attack Paris, the corrupt Charles sells his country to England and dismiss the army. Joan is arrested, sold to the Burgundians England and submitted to a shameful political trial in Rouen castle, when in 1931 she is sentenced to burn at stake.The story of Joan D'Arc is one of the most beautiful I have seen in the cinema, and Victor Fleming's version is no exception. I have seen Carl Dryer's and Robert Bresson's (the best), Luc Besson's (the weakest – actually a means to promote his girlfriend Mila Jovovich), Christian Duguay's (a great television version with Leelee Sobieski in the lead role) and all of them a good movies because the story of this martyr and saint "Maid of Lorraine" is actually awesome and doomed to please the audiences. Her history shows faith, betrayal and corruption in a period of treachery and domination of the powerful Catholic Church in Europe. Ingrid Bergman is miscast in the role of a fourteen to nineteen years old girl that can be confused with a man, but she has a great and shining performance and deserved her nomination to the Oscar. The debut of José Ferrer could not be better, performing a shallow and corrupt king. The Oscar winning cinematography is very beautiful for a 1948 movie. The DVD released in Brazil is completely restored but unfortunately there is a bug in chapter 6, stopping the movie. My vote is nine.Title (Brazil): "Joana D'Arc" ("Joan of Arc")

Andrew Schoneberg A very poor film translation of a stage play--rather than being tailored to the movie medium, this is very stagy, overly talky. The dialogue is arty and artificial. Everyone is obviously acting, giving a performance, though Bergman is radiant and her performance is passionate and sincere.All of the exteriors (outdoor shots) which feature close ups of the lead actors are obviously shot on a sound stage. Some beautiful outdoor footage is used occasionally for establishing shots or transitions between scenes, but Bergman never leaves the soundstage. On the positive side, the film is beautifully photographed, many individual shots are works of art, masterfully lit and composed. However, the camera moves only when necessary to follow the actors, the shots are static, adding to the staginess of the production. Which reminds me of CB DeMille; you could get a good idea of this film by saying it's like a DeMille film, only with more high art pretensions and less spectacle (no cast of thousands here).The most outstanding aspect of 'Joan of Arc' is the music, it's prominently featured, good and loud, and it deserves to be--it's gorgeous. The DVD has no extras at all, though the image and sound are excellent--a very good restoration job. A commentary track would have been very welcome; my guess is this was a challenging production, possibly with a long production period (three cinematographers are listed). It was a commercial failure, at least in part because of public condemnation of Bergman's personal life. I believe director Victor Flemming died soon after production. Lots of meat here for an interesting commentary or two.