November 19, 1999

1999, 2 hrs 20 min., Rated R for language and violence. Dir: Luc Beeson. Cast: Milla Jovovich, John Malkovich, Faye Dunaway, Dustin Hoffman.

I know most critics have waved off The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc as mediocre and a wannabe Braveheart, but I have a different take.

I went in with no expectations, but came away enthralled because this movie spoke to me. Fortunately, I was listening.

The drama, the action, the characters, the acting, the score, every element clicked to make this one of the more memorable films of 1999. The Messenger also affected me during the screening and afterwards, linking my interests in religion and history to make it almost a spiritual experience, a revivial of sorts.

The people who malign the film are the same ones who didn't like Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves because Kevin Costner didn't have an English accent. So what if every single fact isn't correct or that a few of the main actors don't use a French accent? That's not what I'm looking for; if I want exact authenticity then I'll watch a documentary or The History Channel. It's a movie, and I want to be entertained, be inspired, be at one with the characters. You have to be willing to stretch your expectations.

How do I know that the movie made a difference? First, I went right out and bought the score. Two, I have been doing a lot of research in my history books and on the Net to learn more about Joan and the period. Finally, I find myself constantly thinking about The Messenger and especially the trial and tribulations of young Joan.

Jeanne d'Arc, as she is known in the land of the Frogs, was a troubled young woman, a peasant girl who heard voices whom she believed to be saints speaking for the King of Heaven Himself. Others in France did not know whether she was a messenger or insane. In the fine tradition of French strategy, they decided to let this young girl lead an entire army against the more powerful English. Of course, she then became a legend by leading French troops to victory by ending the English siege at Orleans.

After putting Charles VII on the throne as she prophecized, he then abandoned her to be caught and sold to the English, who in turn had her tried by the Catholic church for witchraft, heresy and for wearing male clothing. She was found guilty, and was burned at the stake on May 31, 1431 at the age of nineteen.

In 1496, Jeanne was pronounced innnocent of the charges, was beatified in 1909 and, nearly 500 hundred years after the Catholic church burned her alive, she was canonized (made a saint) by the Vatican in 1920.

Milla Jovovich gets a lot of criticism for being a supermodel portraying Joan, but I don't think it made one lick of difference. She conveyed the mindblowing emotions that comes with doing God's will, whether you are truly a servant of God or someone off-kilter who believes they are doing His work.

Yes, Jovovich is an attractive young woman, but in The Messenger she is not made up to look like she's in a makeup ad. If you dismiss Jovovich because she's a model, then what future do you want for her in film? Should she only be in movies about modeling? Or as a token beauty in a T&A spring break flick? Give her credit where it is due, she plays conflicted pretty well.

All of the supporting actors representing other leaders in the army fit in very well, and even boosted my esteem for the film. John Malkovich, while being too old to play the Dauphin/King Charles VII (in his mid to late 20s) according to history, I like the actor and felt he was passable.

Faye Dunaway, portraying Charles' mother, Isabeau de Baviere, always adds a touch of class to a role. I must say, however, that the head attire for well-to-do women in this period was hideous, featuring wide and tall hats that look more like satellite dishes, under which all hair was hidden. If the look ever comes back, I will make it my mission to make sure no women ever adopt the fashion.

Not all was rosy in my viewing experience, though. There were a couple of methods used by director Luc Beeson with which I disagree, most notably the quick age transition. Joan goes from age 13 to age 17 without warning. We see her as a child, then we see Charles in his palace where they speak of the young shepherdess from Domremy who claims to be sent by God. When we see her next it is Jovovich, so we figure, "gee, guess we flashed forward a few years."

Second, I think Beeson should have allowed more time in the open for the graphics to be read. I didn't have time to digest the complicated facts that comprise the movie, and am catching up afterwards. Don't get me wrong, you can understand what happens in The Messenger and keep up without the graphics, but for me I like to know the backgrounds of pictures based on historical truth.

Was she, or wasn't she, sent by God? It appears in the end that Beeson didn't think that Joan was being led by God, but instead followed signs that Joan wanted to see in order to boost her own cause. As Edmund Morris inserted himself as a fictional character in his recent biography of Ronald Reagan, "Dutch," I believe Beeson used Dustin Hoffman.

The latter shows up while Joan is on trial as a vision, not from God but from her own subconscious. He is the Devil's Advocate, asking whether she really did work on God's behalf, or if she was a little insane, using the voices in her head as a means for revenge on the English for what they have done to France and her dead sister.

The problem is, we don't know what was really going on inside her mind. Joan was so young, 19 when burned, and 17 when she appeared to the Dauphin, Charles VII. Joan was a confused, ignorant, and simple peasant girl who claimed to do God's bidding in freeing France of her enemies. Being illiterate, she didn't leave behind any great papers to give us insight. We only know of her from the words of people she affected, and the clergy who condemned her at the Trial of Condemnation.

I do believe she was working God's will and the Catholic church was right to clear her name of the slander they incurred. I say this despite the fact that Beeson, in an attempt to make us wonder whether Joan was of God or herself, put in some items that are doubtful to have happened. I speak mainly of young Joan seeing her older sister raped and killed by the English while her village burned.

With further research, I do not find this supposed act in her childhood. I can only surmise that Beeson did not trust his audience enough to appreciate what is in the history books and think for ourselves, and he set out to make us think she wanted revenge against the English. As I stated earlier, I don't mind tweaking times or some facts for dramatic license, but inserting important but fictitious acts are questionable at best.

In the end, though, I still love the film by itself, and take up Beeson's "politics" of the matter separately. Go see The Messenger and learn about one of the most compelling figures in world history.