BoardChiri Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

Manthast Absolutely amazing

Janae Milner Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

wes-connors Bathed in colorful cinematography, pretty little Ingrid Bergman (as Jeanne d'Arc aka "Joan of Arc") looks divine in a 15th century French church. Her farming family frets about Ms. Bergman's preoccupation with prayer. However, Bergman has a more direct line to God than anyone knows. Inspired by her savior Jesus Christ, Bergman decides to go to fight the British occupiers of France. She also sets out to ensure God's chosen man is crowned King. People tell Bergman it is impossible, but she insists, "I must save France!" To enlist, Bergman disguises herself as a young lad. With a busty figure, make-up and cute new French haircut, the actress simply does not look like a boyish teenager. The miscasting could have been successfully addressed by sticking with the original stage version's "play within a play" format. It was about a troupe of actors dramatizing the heroine's life. The stage format allows more leeway in casting...The last film directed by Victor Fleming, "Joan of Arc" was elevated far above its worth by "Academy Awards" voters. It won three Oscars and was nominated for five more, including a notable one for supporting actor Jose Ferrer (as the Dauphin aka Charles) in his film debut. Unsatisfied by all the attention, producer Walter Wanger refused to accept his special award because the film failed to be nominated in the "Best Picture" category. "Joan of Arc" has been restored to its original epic length, which turns out to be a mixed blessing.**** Joan of Arc (11/11/48) Victor Fleming ~ Ingrid Bergman, Jose Ferrer, Francis L. Sullivan, J. Carrol Naish

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

evening1 Ingrid Bergman, 32 at the time she played the 19-year-old Maid of Orleans, is totally convincing as an illiterate farm girl who wrestles with divinely inspired voices for seven years before going to battle against England for France.The slimy and mercenary churchmen and politicians who betray her are expertly depicted, as is the sole loyal priest whose faith in Joan never wavers. (How novice actor Jose Ferrer won an Oscar nomination for the cardboard role of dauphin is a mystery).The story of Joan's battles, though complicated and full of intrigue, is presented clearly, at times with stentorian voice-over narration. (For anyone who has tried to wade through her exploits on Wikipedia, this element is a godsend.)The climactic execution scene is handled with both horror and dignity. A memorable work.

tedg Spoilers herein.I wonder if there is anyone who can view this film with any sort of fondness today. Everything about it is false, with no element one can point to for relief.Yes it has Ingrid, but as wooden as a pike. Yes it has a powerhouse story, but rendered here lifeless. Even the Jovovich disaster had an energy and even mystery missing here. You can tell we are in trouble from the very first shot: actors acting actorly, staring into space. And that space is almost all painted backdrops.It may have seemed spectacular in its day. And thanks to the code, it may have even seemed a bit titillating (visions, sex, purity, death). But not now. Simply a disaster, and I'm talking about the 'fully restored' version here.Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.