Honestly, if you go back and watch The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc today, it feels like a fever dream from a very specific era of filmmaking. Released in 1999, it was Luc Besson’s follow-up to the neon-soaked success of The Fifth Element. People expected another slick, crowd-pleasing epic. Instead, they got a blood-splattered, psychologically jarring, and deeply controversial take on France's national saint. It didn't just ruffle feathers; it practically set the historical community on fire.
Critics at the time were... let’s say unkind. They saw Milla Jovovich’s performance not as a visionary leader, but as a "twitchy, hysterical neurotic." But here’s the thing: looking back from 2026, the movie is a lot more interesting than people gave it credit for. It’s a mess, sure. A $60 million "gassy costume epic," as one critic put it. But it’s a mess with a very specific, very modern identity crisis.
Why The Messenger Joan of Arc Still Matters
Most historical biopics try to deify their subjects. They want you to leave the theater feeling inspired. Besson went the opposite way. He took the "Maid of Orléans" and stripped away the gold leaf.
📖 Related: The Real Housewives of New Jersey Season 8: Why This Is Still the Most Chaotic Era of the Franchise
Basically, the movie asks a question that most religious epics are too scared to touch: Was Joan actually talking to God, or was she just a traumatized teenager suffering from severe mental illness? By the time Dustin Hoffman shows up as "The Conscience" (basically a personification of Joan’s doubt), the movie has completely abandoned the "inspirational saint" narrative. It becomes a psychological thriller wrapped in a suit of armor.
The Kathryn Bigelow Drama
You can’t talk about this movie without mentioning the behind-the-scenes chaos. It’s legendary. Originally, Kathryn Bigelow—the director who eventually won an Oscar for The Hurt Locker—was supposed to direct a project called Company of Angels. Luc Besson was on board as an executive producer.
Everything fell apart when Besson insisted that his then-wife, Milla Jovovich, play the lead. Bigelow refused. She wanted someone else. Besson pulled his funding, the project died, and he immediately went and made his own Joan of Arc movie with Jovovich anyway. Bigelow sued for "stealing her research," and they settled out of court. This explains why the movie feels so aggressive—it was born out of a professional and personal spite match.
Historical Facts vs. Cinematic Fiction
If you’re a history buff, this movie will probably give you a migraine. Besson didn’t just take artistic license; he took the whole car and drove it off a cliff.
- The Revenge Narrative: The movie starts with a brutal scene where Joan’s sister is killed by English soldiers. This is entirely made up. In reality, Joan’s village was attacked, but her sister Catherine lived long enough to get married and die of natural causes. The movie invents this trauma to give Joan a "revenge" motive, which ignores her actual documented religious conviction.
- The "Massacre" Problem: The film shows Joan leading soldiers into gruesome slaughters. Historically, Joan of Arc famously claimed she never actually killed anyone. She carried her banner, not a sword, into the thick of it.
- The Modern Dialogue: Characters talk like they just walked out of a 1990s New York coffee shop. It’s jarring. It’s intentional, but it’s jarring.
The Cast That Shouldn't Work (But Kinda Does)
John Malkovich plays Charles VII like a bored, slightly incompetent doofus. It’s brilliant. He brings a weird, petulant energy to the French court that highlights just how out of place a peasant girl like Joan really was.
Then you’ve got Faye Dunaway as Yolande of Aragon. She’s the "serpent" in the room, wearing headdresses that look like they belong in a sci-fi movie. And of course, there’s Milla. Honestly, her performance is the most polarizing part of The Messenger Joan of Arc. She spends half the movie screaming and the other half looking terrified. But if you view it through the lens of a girl who thinks she’s hearing the creator of the universe in her head, the "hysteria" actually makes a weird kind of sense.
What Really Happened with the Box Office?
It bombed. Hard. In the US, it only pulled in about $14 million. Internationally, it did better—around $52 million—but when you’ve spent $60 million to $85 million (depending on which production source you believe) on a medieval war movie, that’s a disaster.
📖 Related: Hottest Wrestlers in WWE: Why the 2026 Roster is Breaking Every Rule
It didn't help that the movie was rated R for "strong graphic battles" and "a rape." Parents weren't taking their kids to see the "inspiring saint" story. Instead, they got a "trendy bloodfest" that ended with a girl being slowly burned alive while arguing with Dustin Hoffman. It wasn't exactly Braveheart.
The Action Still Holds Up
Credit where it’s due: the siege of Orléans is incredible. Even if the weapons—like those weird mechanical flails and giant stone chutes—are mostly fictional nonsense, the sheer scale of the production is impressive. They filmed in the Czech Republic, used thousands of extras, and focused on the "mud and blood" reality of siege warfare. It feels heavy. It feels dangerous.
Actionable Takeaways for Movie Buffs
If you're planning to revisit The Messenger Joan of Arc, or if you're watching it for the first time, keep these things in mind to actually enjoy the experience:
- Don't treat it as a biography. It’s a deconstruction. If you want the "real" Joan, read the trial transcripts. If you want a surreal psychological drama, watch this.
- Watch the Extended Version. There’s an international cut with about 10 extra minutes of footage that flesh out the court politics. It makes Malkovich’s character slightly more three-dimensional.
- Contrast it with Dreyer. If you really want to see why critics were so mad, watch the 1928 silent film The Passion of Joan of Arc. Besson’s film is basically the polar opposite of that masterpiece.
- Look at the production design. The movie won César Awards for Costume Design and Sound for a reason. The tactile nature of the armor and the sets is top-tier, even if the history is shaky.
This movie remains a fascinating relic of a time when directors could get massive budgets to make weird, personal, and deeply flawed "epics." It's not the best movie about Joan of Arc, but it’s definitely the loudest.
Next Steps for Your Movie Night:
Start by watching the Siege of Orléans sequence on a high-quality screen to appreciate Thierry Arbogast's cinematography. After the credits roll, look up the actual 1431 trial transcripts of Joan of Arc; you'll find that the "real" Joan was far more articulate and composed than the version Milla Jovovich portrays. This contrast makes the movie’s "madness" theme even more provocative.