We watched this movie and were completely enthralled in it from start to finish! As a way to draw people into history it is a remarkably fascinating movie! It's believable on its own without the story of Joan behind it to give it a dramatic edge. The actors were believable in their parts without the over the top acting that one so often sees in a medieval movie. This is something that I would watch again!I found the historical facts and the legend were all personified to a very believable extent, and the attention to detail in the wardrobe was good. It would have been easier to gloss over the gorier aspects of the legend here, but the ending scene paid full justice to what happened. There were a few discrepancies in the footage (seen as goofs) but honestly, until they were pointed out we never noticed them.

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

The story of Joan D'Arc has always interested me, because this was a girl who stood by her beliefs till the end, no matter what she was threatened with or who tried to make her doubt them. She had great conviction, and especially in the Middle Ages, where women's roles were passive, the fact that she was able to rise up, lead an army, and defend herself with extreme wit and cleverness from the onslaught of treachery before and during the famous trial, shows just how remarkable this young girl was (19 when she died).This movie captures brilliantly the cleverness and strength of this brave heroine. Acting was in the most part very good, as one is gripped from the great opening sequence all the way to the end. While there are some unconvincing CGI effects (mainly of Joan's saints), the battle sequences are very believable to watch. One has to note, however, that the writers took quite a few liberties with the script. The viewer has to be careful to not take every event as fact. I won't go into detail, but please read about the history of Joan, as, even though this movie does a great job in showing Joan as a smart, God-loving person, some events in the movie did not happen historically, or else the writers changed them to suit their own goals.In the end, however, the main point about Joan, is that she was able use her faith, head, and heart to thoroughly aggravate and embarrass those who would have her dead. In the end, she is still the victor. And the movie reflects this.

This is a very good movie and I think that this film is very realistic how it was back then. The actress who looks almost exactly like Helen Hunt Leelee Sobieski stars as the title name and she has a powerful performance. Powers Boothe, Jonathan Hyde, Peter O'Toole, Robert Loggia, Shirley MacLaine, Maximilian Schell, Neil Patrick Harris, and Peter Strauss all put on great performances. The music in the film is very good. I think everything looks very realistic and there maybe few battles but all are good. Back to her performance, Sobieski acts very convincingly as Joan. This is a very good film that is emotional, interesting, and exciting and really shouldn't be missed by any big movie fan or fans of Gladiator and The Lord of the Rings trilogy. I strongly recommend this title!