Considering that 'The Messenger' was deeply flawed, I took the vast majority of positive comments here to mean I would be in for a treat watching 'Joan of Arc' - particularly as I have a soft spot for Ms. Sobieski.
Unfortunately, post-viewing, I feel I must redress the balance on the comments board here because it is plainly not as good as many here are making it out to be. I was hardly impressed by the title at the beginning suggesting we were in the Dark Ages......in 1412. Was Joan of Arc really prophesised by Merlin? Why, after telling us seven years had passed on screen, did JOA tell her priest it had been six? Was she really ennobled? Did her peasant brother really come to fight with her - suddenly acquiring the trappings of knighthood (especially a horse?) and die just as quickly as he had arrived? We know all about the 'voices' - but did they really forewarn her of Charles's treachery? Were there really drinking glasses in 1430?
...And the clincher of course, is how did a 'rescuing' French army get all the way through occupied territory to camp outside the walls of Rouen (to make a charge against stone walls on horseback....which is pretty pointless) without anybody knowing about it?
The production was generally good, and some effort had been made on the sets, costumes and armour. The battle scenes were poor, however - never achieving anything approaching realism. When JOA is hit by an English arrow at Orleans, she recovers and rides back to the walls of the Tourelle (where, conveniently, the English foot soldiers have largely disappeared and helpfully left the French ladders against the walls of the Tourelle from the first attack. How kind!)
As for the performances, there are far too many lapses into American accents for the characterisations of any except Peter O'Toole and Shirley MacLaine to be truly convincing (though those two stalwarts truly shine when on screen.) Leelee - though I admire her so, is stilted and too uncharismatic in the lead role - a pre-requisite one would think?
The script, on the whole, is curiously un-engaging. It feels as if the writers were going through the motions. There is little in the way of memorable quotes.
As a piece of television entertainment, it fits the 'passing time' bill only. It is in no way a standout piece of television production, nor should it be treated as such. After watching this, I found myself reappraising 'The Messenger' with slightly more favour.
DICE MAN
Unfortunately, post-viewing, I feel I must redress the balance on the comments board here because it is plainly not as good as many here are making it out to be. I was hardly impressed by the title at the beginning suggesting we were in the Dark Ages......in 1412. Was Joan of Arc really prophesised by Merlin? Why, after telling us seven years had passed on screen, did JOA tell her priest it had been six? Was she really ennobled? Did her peasant brother really come to fight with her - suddenly acquiring the trappings of knighthood (especially a horse?) and die just as quickly as he had arrived? We know all about the 'voices' - but did they really forewarn her of Charles's treachery? Were there really drinking glasses in 1430?
...And the clincher of course, is how did a 'rescuing' French army get all the way through occupied territory to camp outside the walls of Rouen (to make a charge against stone walls on horseback....which is pretty pointless) without anybody knowing about it?
The production was generally good, and some effort had been made on the sets, costumes and armour. The battle scenes were poor, however - never achieving anything approaching realism. When JOA is hit by an English arrow at Orleans, she recovers and rides back to the walls of the Tourelle (where, conveniently, the English foot soldiers have largely disappeared and helpfully left the French ladders against the walls of the Tourelle from the first attack. How kind!)
As for the performances, there are far too many lapses into American accents for the characterisations of any except Peter O'Toole and Shirley MacLaine to be truly convincing (though those two stalwarts truly shine when on screen.) Leelee - though I admire her so, is stilted and too uncharismatic in the lead role - a pre-requisite one would think?
The script, on the whole, is curiously un-engaging. It feels as if the writers were going through the motions. There is little in the way of memorable quotes.
As a piece of television entertainment, it fits the 'passing time' bill only. It is in no way a standout piece of television production, nor should it be treated as such. After watching this, I found myself reappraising 'The Messenger' with slightly more favour.
DICE MAN