I believe Joan of Arc was like an agent of the governement of Charles VII and her role was to be used as a psychological weapon. Joan played the role of a virgin saint sent by God, because it was what the French population and the French army needed at this time. And what better to legitimate the claim of Charles VII to the throne of France than a messenger sent by God?
JOB 11;7 CAN YOU DISCOVER THE DEPTHS OF GOD ? CAN YOU DISCOVER THE LIMITS OF THE ALMIGHTY ?. ISAIAH 40;18 TO WHOM THEM WILL YOU LIKEN GOD ? OR WHAT LIKENESS WILL YOU COMPARE WITH HIM ? JOHN 17;3 AND THIS IS ENTERNAL LIFE THAT THEY THAT MAY KNOW THEE THE ONLY TRUE GOD AND JESUS CHRIST WHOM THOU HAST SENT
EPHESIANS 6;11-18 PUT ON THE WHOLE ARMOR OF GOD THAT YOU MAY BE ABLE TO STAND AGAINST THE WILES OF THE DEVIL FOR WE DO NOT WRESTLE AGAINST FLESH AND BLOOD BUT AGAINST PRINCIPALITIES AGAINST POWERS AGAINST THE RULERS OF THE DARKNESS OF THIS AGE AGAINST SPIRITUAL HOSTS OF WICKEDNESS IN HEAVENLY PLACES THEREFORE TAKE UP THE WHOLE ARMOR OF GOD THAT YOU MAY BE ABLE TO WITHSTAND IN THE EVIL DAY AND HAVING DONE ALL TO STAND.
It's kind of like the "Allegory of the Cave". People see what they want to see and define reality based on their own judgments. Or better yet, like the monster from "Lord of the Flies".
Someone may not hold a faith but they'll believe in ghosts, or some strange phenomenon that was probably not a big deal gets misinterpreted in a way where the viewer takes on the role as the center or primary receiver.
I think this is nothing more than the ego trying to cope with its world around it.
Poor St. Joan i wish i took her place instead, i cried threw out this seen and the movie i dont believe she had any thing wrong with her i do believe she was visited by the divine, but others have different views for sure in this scene it was her guilt or killing that made her question her self but never was she insane or deluded in my opinion :D
Man, it would be difficult to be a charismatic saint these days, what, with all the doubtful atheists spewing out "psychological-illness" as their convenient explanation for the rationally inexplicable.
LOL, Satan relies on the atheists--the greatest trick the devil ever played was convincing the world that he didn't exist.
@contemplativegirl21 So sad that the advancement of our species and understanding of our world is a satanic thing to you. "Blessed be the mind too small for doubt"
@billyboyjennings I don't see atheism as an advancement of our world. Personally, I find someone who is unable to conceive of something that is beyond empirical science (viz. religion, God, Satan, etc.) as having a "small mind."
And I never claimed Atheists were Satanic--it's difficult to be Satanic if you believe in neither God nor Satan. I merely claim that Satan must be pleased at the faithlessness of the world today.
And there's your advancement: an empty world, void of morality and faith.
@contemplativegirl21 CONCEIVE and BELIEVE are two completely different things. Quite the opposite, it is the religious believer that has difficulty of conceiving that which he does not believe in because foreign ideas represent a danger to one's faith.
And no, not void of morality and faith, just faith!
Yea, because when humans stop believing in some magical god, they turn into mindless animals that rape and murder uncontrollably and have no reason to live and grow. Right?
@contemplativegirl21 really? How about all the murderers, rapists, thieves or pedophilic priests? I'm sure they do their part as well, It's a bit unfair to give atheists all the credit.
The belief in a supernatural source of evil is not necessary; men alone are quite capable of every wickedness - J. Conrad
So, you're indicating that murderers, rapists, thieves or pedophilic priests are evil, thus negating the role of Satan--that is, that evil is something produced by people, and not by some archaic entity with hooves and a forked tail?
I certainly won't argue that people are capable of great evil, but that doesn't mean that Satan doesn't exist--he thrives on our sins and our wrong choices. Of course, I'm not suggesting that one ought to blame Satan for his/her evil actions. We do have free will.
@contemplativegirl21 yeah, pretty much That people feel the need to look to the supernatural for a source of evil or that the devil is pushing people to do evil when they are more than willing to do it on their own.
And to suggest atheism makes the spread of evil easier. I think a short history lesson would show that Christianity and the promise of eternal life has been used to justify all sort of atrocities on Earth. 'If you want good people to do evil things it takes religion'
@saiyanprince09 Alone? Yea, I doubt that as well. But a delusional schizophrenic with an entire army supporting her CAN come inches away from liberating a nation.
See what 5 seconds of simple critical thinking can accomplish?
I wanted to reach through the screen and strangle Dustin Hoffman...he's an a-hole in real life and he's an a-hole in this movie...and so is the long-haired dude who screams at her with blood running down his face...poor Milla had her sister raped and murdered by the English she was a brave warrior she brought victory to the French I don't even like the French I like the Brits better but just saying...Joan of Arc was a brave hero she beat the British back she doesn't deserve the mad mouth from dh
@hurin1 She saved her country,and that is another demon trying to haunt her,or the devil,who cares?She saved her nation,she is a martyr and a fuckin hero and thats the bottom line
I absolutely love this scene. This had a HUGE impact on my life. This came out the year I graduated high school. Big changes in life. lots of things to think about especially the future. If I had to pick a moment of realization form my entire life, this would be at the top of my list. People do this all the time. I had done it myself. I was shaking at the end of this scene. I know what I am capable of and dont hide from it. I sometimes see things as I want vs what is reality.
Am I the only one who thinks people who personally think 'God' is speaking to them and they're on a special mission are just egomaniac fueled schizophrenics?
1) You have no idea who you are talkin to so dont generalize like that. you made me raise my eye brows there really. I'm not denying anyone's opinion. Its absurd for you to make such a statement.
2) What do you mean art is subjective?
3) You ARE in the mainstream group of seeing this in a secular fashion.
1 ) I didn't say you were denying opinion, I was offering satire to your argument that I'm in a 'mainstream generalization' and turned that on you and the stereotypical religious attitude, I apologize if you took it another way.
2) Art is the expression of human creativity, it's supposed to be a subjective viewpoint where people offer insight onto said art (In this case, the movie)
3) No, I am not, I do not agree with Dustin Hoffman's method, although I agree with his motif.
The first time I saw this movie was when I was around six or seven (yep, my father made the mistake of buying this for me =P). Either way, now that I think of it this is a very important scene in my life because it taught me that religion is nothing but speculation and thus I am and will always be a sceptic on all matter of things.
Also, I view this character more as the 'demons' in her mind, nothing other than that.
never let a movie "teach" you anything, it is simply an interpretation from someone who may or may not entirely care of the subject you are learning about.
I have news for you.... all "teaching" is based on someone's interpretation. Either a college professor's interpretation, one from an author of a book or even your own interpretations of experiences in your life. The only proper way to learn is to allow as much teaching as possible and synthesize it - so I recommend the opposite, let movies teach you, along with friends, experience, school, debate and every other form of teaching. There is no such thing as knowing too much.
Movies are meant to sensationalize, and some are meant to distort from the original context. The DaVinci Code, while obviously a fictional movie, caused a lot of confusion amongst folks and their perception of the Church. If you spend anytime on Catholic message boards you would have seen this materialize several years ago. Affected communities then have to spend time and resources correcting the collateral damage caused by some movies and those who wish to "learn" from them.
I just love the vantage, that this movie allows a few view points: inspired by some "good" god, "evil," self-delusion/conscience, or mental illness... I always saw it as a movie that played it as her helping god, but making you trust it from it appearing like mental illness all along...
@Angmarr The only thing I can be sure of is that I have thoughts, the simple fact that there's things like Schizophrenia means that everything I think of as real may not exist.
@Angmarr I am sceptic of everything, there's a probability of everything being possible. However, when evidence points towards its feasibility its likeliness of it being true increases.
Moreover, I didn't avoid the question I answered it when I said that I am a sceptic. I may say I'm a born sceptic yet I may have (most probably do) areas in my knowledge where I am not a sceptic (and that's a flaw in me). So yes, I am a sceptic about my thoughts when I consciously analyse them.
Or do you just think you are? I mean, if you acknowledge your thougts then should you not acknowledge the thought-of-idea that the your thoughts are not thoughts? Seems a bit conflicting.
Hmm, I would say it sounds like you know whether what you are talking about is real which I dont see how you can know. Instead, you ought to say that you believe ideas are real. However, you must then also acknowledge the idea that ideas, and thoughts, are not real. Must'nt you?
I mean.. maybe your approach/methodology/arguments/conclusions are not that trustworthy? In other words, shouldnt you not just question everything you do, but also your perception of evidence, conclusions, thoughts, flaws, and most importantly, your recognition of your perceptions - is it real or not and if any, how can you trust what you just concluded. You see? Skepticism is a bottomless pit.
I think some folks posting here are misinterpreting the scene, her conscience is playing devil's advocate within her own mind. This wasn't meant to be a testament that she was wrong for what she thought was real. I think the final scenes with Dustin Hoffman were the most beautiful in the movie where the officiating Bishop was bound not to give her a simple confession, and her conscience, whom was questioning and second guessing her shared a final moment of charity to mediate her confession.
Devil's Advocate or not, the voice was right. And when her conscience absolves her at the end, she even CONFESSES THAT SHE WAS WRONG, and that she only saw what she wanted to see and said it was in God's name. Dustin Hoffman here is playing the role of Satan when he visited Jesus in his last hours. The difference here is that reason prevailed, rather than blind faith.
Howerver, what is important is that, whatever it was the reality, her thoughts or beliefs made her who she was and brought the best out of her. And THAT is what is important about beliefs, religions, gods, theories...
She confesses her pride, selfishness and cruelty. She never said she never had any visions, she simply confesses she saw them as she may have wanted to see them. The movie does establish that she was having visions before her sister's death though her interpretations of them may have changed afterwards. Although yes, I do believe this movie as a whole served as a bit of a subtle hit-job on the life of Joan of Arc, there is a little space left in it's interpretation to keep it within tradition
i think you're right and paradoxically you're wrong in the same time. Luc Besson mustn't have shown a heroic joan of arc or "rench "free massons" (actually anti-catholics lobbies more than those who are called "free masson") and french anti nationalists lobbies prevent him for describing joan of arc as a saint. However besson had made this movie because he admires her. And ti think that to him she is a saint, a heroic figure. But it's just my opinion
You know... I know it's not meant to be a funny movie, and for the most part, it's not...
But it does contain some hilarious scenes!! And if you should need a reason to watch this movie, this scene here is reason enough as far as I'm concerned.
The scene I like best after this one has to be where the King's stepmother "performs a miracle" as she calls it.
or god had uintended to unify the french and english thrones.. so as to have a stronger crusading force that could finally retake and hold the holy land.
No. I didn't talk to her pshychiatrist.However, symptoms such as visions, hallucinations, which she HAD, pshycological instablity, points out that she had mental issues. BACK in her time, it was called SAINT or Possesed by the devil. Whatever suits the situation. TODAY, it's called Schizophrenia.
'ehm, there is a big difference between Schizophrenia and visions/hallucinations.. '
From someone who has suffered psychosis, I must disagree, hallucinations are the quarter stone of psychosis, and with a dash of delusions it becomes schizophrenia.
Then you would probably know more of psychology than I do. That being said, I would say that schizophrenia is the belief that you are someone whom you are not or that you are more than one person, whereas hallucinations can occur from various other causes such as drunkenness.
@NotoHaters0 but remember this is a movie not really her, sure they read about her life but in an interview they said they took the books that was let behind and they made it in the image of how they thought she was, so in no way do we ever know that she was schizophrenic or Had Divine Vision since we never step foot in her life.
It amazes me that with a scene as explicit as this, there are numerous interpretations people take from it. "You saw what you wanted to see"; applies to Jeanne as much as to the audience it would seem.
That particular chapter on the DVD is called The Conscience. But it is meant to be dependent on how the individual views Joan. Was she deluded? Or was she visited by God? I as an atheist believe she was deluded(which gets to the question is being wrong being deluded). A believer, particularly in Joan, would see it as the Devil trying to get her to doubt herself. It is an interesting sort of Rorschach test on how one see things.
even if it is the Devil, it is irrelevant. What he says stands or falls on its own merits. Remember, it doesn't matter if Socrates was real or not. The Socratic method still works.
@hurin1 I like the way you said that, you said that good. But if I remember correctly in the film didn't she drop to her knees in this part of the film? She then asked to be saved. SO she did then too, beleive it was God and not the Devil.
@hurin1 No my friend.A believer,such as me,wouldn't care about that.The results are indisputable and are not to be questioned.(Like Christ,you can question everything about him but not his work)She saved her country,and that is another demon trying to haunt her,or the devil,who cares?She saved her nation,she is a martyr and a fuckin hero and thats the bottom line
HOW the sword got there is not important, that's not the thing. It's the mere fact that it was there when she was - it was serenditpity - and that's "A Sign".
It's a belief that whatever the chain of events that led to the meeting of her and that sword were somehow fated or pre-destined by God. So it's more about whether you believe there is a reason for everything and a meaning to life, or whether it's all just random and meaningless. It really comes down to that.
But no one knows how the sword got in the field...there are guesses...but no one has come up to say how that sword got there...so it could have been anything...because there is no proof for or against of how that sword got there.
I love this film...One of my favourites, saw at cinema...In the beginning...At first I reasoned like you, ThePinnacle07...I think my interpretation is the right one...The only thing to do is to talk with the director, Luc Besson...Only he knows the truth...In fact I would always have want to talk with him to know if my interpretation was his...In short i think D.H. is the devil ad her visions come from him,( himself is a vision), but God permit the evil for a more high aim, a Superior Good.
joan was a schitzo D,H was just another halucination but it was also her coming to realization of the truth, he wasnt god or the devil it was her conscience manafesting itself in a schitzophranic vision
my uncle is a schitzo and he used to have encounters just like this one, this movie really portrayed it well
Hi! I`m from Russia and we have such people called "юродивые" Actually they were mad but in old time our people respect them as saints. Because they could tell the truth even to tsars. Nobody else did.
So i think Joan wasn`t just only schitzo, ill person, because she made very important things for her country.
So an all-powerful God sent a 19 year old girl to fight for him?
Sounds strange, but maybe God cannot participate in our world and so needs humans to do his work for him. Sounds fair enough.
So why does an all-loving God send a girl to lead an army to kill other human beings?
Yes the British rule in France was bad, but the British like the French are "God's children" and made in "God's image", so therfore God is commanding her to kill his children. LOL I could debate over this for days.
He could be the devil; she does say "Get thee behind me Satan." But his whole purpose is to get her to think critically, bring her to the truth and to give her what she needs most: absolution.
If he's not simply a hallucination I think it's far more likely that he's God.
I doubt that he is God. If he wanted her to renounce god then why would he let his son die on the cross, wouldn't he of just gotten Jesus out of that mess? Anyway she still burns so what would be the point in giving her absolution, god judges her anyway, as if a priest is in a better position to save her soul than god is, if that is in fact god. It is obviously the devil, using all his tricks so as to contradict god.
hahahahaha!Dustin Hoffman is awesome in this role!just look at his face,the tone/irony of his voice,the things he says,hahaha!pure delight!love this whole scene!(especially the part with the possible explanations about the sword)...
It's subject to interpretation. Whether Dustin Hoffman is the devil or not, in the movie credits, notice how it says Hoffman is "the conscience" not "Joans" conscience. Many people believe it is Joan's conscience, so I offer an explaination. Hoffman could have been both, a deul role. Joans conscience could have been real and subject to attack by the devil, in order to destroy Joan's faith. The devil or conscience attacked Joan's mind at her weakest point. The way the devil normally operates.
Its sad to read some of the comments posted here. Every person who believes in God and believes in his love and power, is automatically labled a nut. So yes...Joan did see what she wanted to see-what she believed to be God's voice and HIS truth, to help free France from the horrible British rule. From all the comments I've read, making Joan out to be a nut for the God she loved, and the good she did in God's name, shows me not much has changed in the last 500 years.
my fave scene of the movie! i think this scene show us the human side of Jeanne, the saint.. afterall, she's a human, just more gifted and blessed than any other average human.
"so its a case of who was the messages from? was it Gods work she did? or the Devil?"
you did say that, didn't you?
i did too think he was the devil, but being that he is her consciousness the only logical conclusion i could reach is that her mind (thirsty for revenge) twisted the truth it had before it and made her believe it was a sign from god when in fact it was one of the many possibilities her consciousness showed her on this scene. (one could say she realized she was lying to herself).
yes i did say that. and it was the devil, in my opinion as he tired as hard as he could to sow the seed of doubt in her mind. to trick her. then when she finally signs that confession he appears again with a big grin on his face and she panics and realises it was trick and wishes to go back and say it was a message from god (thus why she is burned). a bit like the story of jesus when some of his disciples say they dont belive to save themselves from the guards only later to wish they had not
basicaly when she signed that it was like saying 'i do not belive' and her soul was his so when she knew she had to burn for what she belived in. thats why she was happier and why she wanted to go that way.
she wasn't burned as a heretic but rather as a witch (i should watch the movie again, just to be sure) because of the clothes that the guards found near her (apparently created by her, but instead, brought at night by someone else).
when she said she didn't believe, they couldn't burn her as a heretic, but, as the English wanted her dead anyway, they managed to make her look like a witch.
This movie is not about a "test of faith" but rather what Dustin says on this scene. Is he right or wrong?
thats up to you but i would disagree greatly with you (because im like that) im am a atheist BUT this story is a religious one and the fact that she IS considered a saint just sways me more to the Devil/God way.
but yeah she probley was a nut job just like magic man jesus lol :P
it's not a religious story unless you make it one, and she's not a nut job unless you make her one. Joan is a saint because the church ultimately believed what she said.
from 3:18 to 3:44 resumes what i believe the whole movie is about, it's true message, that goes deeper than just "frenchies killing brits because a supreme being with a white beard told them to".
what I'm trying to say is... let's agree to disagree.
Hello! God here.
Just dropped by to say I got owned by this vid.
Carry on!
onedeadcat 1 day ago
In this scene, Rain Man tries to convince Alice that God is all in her head.
technicallyabsurd 3 weeks ago
the point is she is talking to a man who is not there and the "conscience" is right joan only saw what she wanted
Izziexoxoo 1 month ago
I believe Joan of Arc was like an agent of the governement of Charles VII and her role was to be used as a psychological weapon. Joan played the role of a virgin saint sent by God, because it was what the French population and the French army needed at this time. And what better to legitimate the claim of Charles VII to the throne of France than a messenger sent by God?
And it worked...
Joan was nor schizophrenic, nor visited by God.
Freez57fr 1 month ago
What movie is this????
tone99556 2 months ago
@tone99556
The Messenger: the story of joan of ark
alainman15 1 month ago
JOB 11;7 CAN YOU DISCOVER THE DEPTHS OF GOD ? CAN YOU DISCOVER THE LIMITS OF THE ALMIGHTY ?. ISAIAH 40;18 TO WHOM THEM WILL YOU LIKEN GOD ? OR WHAT LIKENESS WILL YOU COMPARE WITH HIM ? JOHN 17;3 AND THIS IS ENTERNAL LIFE THAT THEY THAT MAY KNOW THEE THE ONLY TRUE GOD AND JESUS CHRIST WHOM THOU HAST SENT
maxismax100 2 months ago
EPHESIANS 6;11-18 PUT ON THE WHOLE ARMOR OF GOD THAT YOU MAY BE ABLE TO STAND AGAINST THE WILES OF THE DEVIL FOR WE DO NOT WRESTLE AGAINST FLESH AND BLOOD BUT AGAINST PRINCIPALITIES AGAINST POWERS AGAINST THE RULERS OF THE DARKNESS OF THIS AGE AGAINST SPIRITUAL HOSTS OF WICKEDNESS IN HEAVENLY PLACES THEREFORE TAKE UP THE WHOLE ARMOR OF GOD THAT YOU MAY BE ABLE TO WITHSTAND IN THE EVIL DAY AND HAVING DONE ALL TO STAND.
maxismax100 2 months ago
Lawful Good just got owned.
CptVanguard 5 months ago 2
Hi guys!
Pocket pope here. Just remember this:
Anything (even logic) that says God doesnt exist = DEVIL
Anything (even logic too!) that says God does exist = EJECULATION
Scribble this down and keep it in your pocket.
onedeadcat 1 year ago
Don't show this to the pope.
onedeadcat 1 year ago
It's kind of like the "Allegory of the Cave". People see what they want to see and define reality based on their own judgments. Or better yet, like the monster from "Lord of the Flies".
Someone may not hold a faith but they'll believe in ghosts, or some strange phenomenon that was probably not a big deal gets misinterpreted in a way where the viewer takes on the role as the center or primary receiver.
I think this is nothing more than the ego trying to cope with its world around it.
Waxer3929 1 year ago
Poor St. Joan i wish i took her place instead, i cried threw out this seen and the movie i dont believe she had any thing wrong with her i do believe she was visited by the divine, but others have different views for sure in this scene it was her guilt or killing that made her question her self but never was she insane or deluded in my opinion :D
GodTowardSociety 1 year ago
Hard to imagine that this is the retard from Rainman..
Angmarr 1 year ago
Man, it would be difficult to be a charismatic saint these days, what, with all the doubtful atheists spewing out "psychological-illness" as their convenient explanation for the rationally inexplicable.
LOL, Satan relies on the atheists--the greatest trick the devil ever played was convincing the world that he didn't exist.
:-)
contemplativegirl21 1 year ago
@contemplativegirl21 So sad that the advancement of our species and understanding of our world is a satanic thing to you. "Blessed be the mind too small for doubt"
billyboyjennings 1 year ago
@billyboyjennings
lol when did she ever say that. You mis-represent her in a grotesque manner. Shame be to you..
Angmarr 1 year ago
@billyboyjennings I don't see atheism as an advancement of our world. Personally, I find someone who is unable to conceive of something that is beyond empirical science (viz. religion, God, Satan, etc.) as having a "small mind."
And I never claimed Atheists were Satanic--it's difficult to be Satanic if you believe in neither God nor Satan. I merely claim that Satan must be pleased at the faithlessness of the world today.
And there's your advancement: an empty world, void of morality and faith.
contemplativegirl21 1 year ago
@contemplativegirl21 CONCEIVE and BELIEVE are two completely different things. Quite the opposite, it is the religious believer that has difficulty of conceiving that which he does not believe in because foreign ideas represent a danger to one's faith.
And no, not void of morality and faith, just faith!
SerbAtheist 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@contemplativegirl21 "an empty world, void of morality and faith."
Yea, because when humans stop believing in some magical god, they turn into mindless animals that rape and murder uncontrollably and have no reason to live and grow. Right?
...Give me a fucking break.
billyboyjennings 1 year ago
@contemplativegirl21 really? How about all the murderers, rapists, thieves or pedophilic priests? I'm sure they do their part as well, It's a bit unfair to give atheists all the credit.
The belief in a supernatural source of evil is not necessary; men alone are quite capable of every wickedness - J. Conrad
CroNuS19785 1 year ago
So, you're indicating that murderers, rapists, thieves or pedophilic priests are evil, thus negating the role of Satan--that is, that evil is something produced by people, and not by some archaic entity with hooves and a forked tail?
I certainly won't argue that people are capable of great evil, but that doesn't mean that Satan doesn't exist--he thrives on our sins and our wrong choices. Of course, I'm not suggesting that one ought to blame Satan for his/her evil actions. We do have free will.
contemplativegirl21 1 year ago
@contemplativegirl21 yeah, pretty much That people feel the need to look to the supernatural for a source of evil or that the devil is pushing people to do evil when they are more than willing to do it on their own.
And to suggest atheism makes the spread of evil easier. I think a short history lesson would show that Christianity and the promise of eternal life has been used to justify all sort of atrocities on Earth. 'If you want good people to do evil things it takes religion'
CroNuS19785 1 year ago
I doubt a delusional schizophrenic would've had the ability to defeat entire armies and come inches away from liberating a nation.
saiyanprince09 1 year ago
@saiyanprince09 She doent defeated armies alone! she had a army to backup her!
her blieve was soo strong that others belivers did what she said, Like Bin Laden sending men explode thenselfes!
emaroja 1 year ago
@emaroja Could you say that again, only this time in English?
saiyanprince09 1 year ago
@saiyanprince09 Alone? Yea, I doubt that as well. But a delusional schizophrenic with an entire army supporting her CAN come inches away from liberating a nation.
See what 5 seconds of simple critical thinking can accomplish?
billyboyjennings 1 year ago
I wanted to reach through the screen and strangle Dustin Hoffman...he's an a-hole in real life and he's an a-hole in this movie...and so is the long-haired dude who screams at her with blood running down his face...poor Milla had her sister raped and murdered by the English she was a brave warrior she brought victory to the French I don't even like the French I like the Brits better but just saying...Joan of Arc was a brave hero she beat the British back she doesn't deserve the mad mouth from dh
XxowendanxX 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This was the best part of the whole movie. That sudden realization that "Oh crap... there were other explanations..."
Now, if only we can get people to look at other mythological events like that.
MysteriousAya 1 year ago
One of the best scenes I've seen. Not THE best, but still very good.
Alexc3217 1 year ago
Very good scene in a mediocre movie imo.
flyyyer 1 year ago
Reality check at its best
MikeRomulus 1 year ago 6
I like the contrast between the great performance and Dustin Hoffman and the acting of Milla Jovovich...
Freez57fr 1 year ago
Comment removed
Freez57fr 1 year ago
Was this scene meant to be funny? Sure seems that way...I laughed twice.
cheeseNrice981 1 year ago
Agreed... I did state that a bit too flatly. The point is still relevant regarding it being a test into how an individual views matters.
hurin1 1 year ago
@hurin1 She saved her country,and that is another demon trying to haunt her,or the devil,who cares?She saved her nation,she is a martyr and a fuckin hero and thats the bottom line
Elspethknighterrant 1 year ago
lol the guy who just trow his sword away was relly funny i laughed for hours although this is a serious movie
DragoonDude25031993 1 year ago
non si vede bene ....cazzo!!!! ....è la parte bella del film ...l unica
...mr hoffman m inchino davanti alla sua bravura
YUMYUMYAAH 1 year ago
Probably the only scene from the movie that was actually note worthy.
lordcrapalot 1 year ago 2
I believe that all through history God has spoken and worked through many people. Joan may or may not have been one of them.
Malfoyfan1 1 year ago
It is faith and religion that freed France. Rationalize that.
icimblind 1 year ago
Rationality is no friend to religion.
reichmarshall 1 year ago
@reichmarshall
Dont confuse religion with fanaticism.
Angmarr 1 year ago
I absolutely love this scene. This had a HUGE impact on my life. This came out the year I graduated high school. Big changes in life. lots of things to think about especially the future. If I had to pick a moment of realization form my entire life, this would be at the top of my list. People do this all the time. I had done it myself. I was shaking at the end of this scene. I know what I am capable of and dont hide from it. I sometimes see things as I want vs what is reality.
jedimastereric 2 years ago
@jedimastereric
How can be so sure of the distinction between the two..
Angmarr 1 year ago
Am I the only one who thinks people who personally think 'God' is speaking to them and they're on a special mission are just egomaniac fueled schizophrenics?
cmwissy 2 years ago 2
@cmwissy
No, you are just following the mainstream trend of your post-modern materialistic consumerism society.
Angmarr 1 year ago
@Angmarr
No, you are just following the mainstream religious denial of others opinions and insight into art.
Art is subjective, people have different views and insights into the meaning, don't throw me into a 'group' for seeing it in a subjective way.
cmwissy 1 year ago
@cmwissy
1) You have no idea who you are talkin to so dont generalize like that. you made me raise my eye brows there really. I'm not denying anyone's opinion. Its absurd for you to make such a statement.
2) What do you mean art is subjective?
3) You ARE in the mainstream group of seeing this in a secular fashion.
Angmarr 1 year ago
@Angmarr
1 ) I didn't say you were denying opinion, I was offering satire to your argument that I'm in a 'mainstream generalization' and turned that on you and the stereotypical religious attitude, I apologize if you took it another way.
2) Art is the expression of human creativity, it's supposed to be a subjective viewpoint where people offer insight onto said art (In this case, the movie)
3) No, I am not, I do not agree with Dustin Hoffman's method, although I agree with his motif.
cmwissy 1 year ago
Joan of Arc has a pure heart.
pouchichi 2 years ago
@pouchichi
Anyone who murders people in cold blood does not have a pure heart.
With or without 'divine' intervention.
cmwissy 2 years ago
And if Universe was more simply than humanity could imagine ?...
jayce7602 2 years ago
The first time I saw this movie was when I was around six or seven (yep, my father made the mistake of buying this for me =P). Either way, now that I think of it this is a very important scene in my life because it taught me that religion is nothing but speculation and thus I am and will always be a sceptic on all matter of things.
Also, I view this character more as the 'demons' in her mind, nothing other than that.
Miryr 2 years ago
never let a movie "teach" you anything, it is simply an interpretation from someone who may or may not entirely care of the subject you are learning about.
jose30076 2 years ago
It never taught me per se, I just noticed that religious experiences can be attributed to psychological disorders.
Miryr 2 years ago
I have news for you.... all "teaching" is based on someone's interpretation. Either a college professor's interpretation, one from an author of a book or even your own interpretations of experiences in your life. The only proper way to learn is to allow as much teaching as possible and synthesize it - so I recommend the opposite, let movies teach you, along with friends, experience, school, debate and every other form of teaching. There is no such thing as knowing too much.
elfthehunter 1 year ago
@elfthehunter
Movies are meant to sensationalize, and some are meant to distort from the original context. The DaVinci Code, while obviously a fictional movie, caused a lot of confusion amongst folks and their perception of the Church. If you spend anytime on Catholic message boards you would have seen this materialize several years ago. Affected communities then have to spend time and resources correcting the collateral damage caused by some movies and those who wish to "learn" from them.
jose30076 1 year ago
I just love the vantage, that this movie allows a few view points: inspired by some "good" god, "evil," self-delusion/conscience, or mental illness... I always saw it as a movie that played it as her helping god, but making you trust it from it appearing like mental illness all along...
ebc0118 2 years ago
@Miryr
Be a sceptic to your own scepticism then..
Angmarr 1 year ago
@Angmarr This statement is sort of redundant any sceptic is sceptic about everything, especially their own thoughts.
Miryr 1 year ago
@Miryr
So your sceptic towards what you just said? Doesnt seem like it though..
Angmarr 1 year ago
@Angmarr The only thing I can be sure of is that I have thoughts, the simple fact that there's things like Schizophrenia means that everything I think of as real may not exist.
Miryr 1 year ago
@Miryr
Plz dont avoid the question :p
Angmarr 1 year ago
@Angmarr I am sceptic of everything, there's a probability of everything being possible. However, when evidence points towards its feasibility its likeliness of it being true increases.
Moreover, I didn't avoid the question I answered it when I said that I am a sceptic. I may say I'm a born sceptic yet I may have (most probably do) areas in my knowledge where I am not a sceptic (and that's a flaw in me). So yes, I am a sceptic about my thoughts when I consciously analyse them.
Miryr 1 year ago
@Miryr
Do you also consciously analyze the thought and process of consciously analyzing your skepticism? ;)
Angmarr 1 year ago
@Angmarr As I have said the ONLY thing I can be certain is that my thoughts exist.
Miryr 1 year ago
@Miryr *the only thing I can be certain of
Miryr 1 year ago
@Miryr
How?
Angmarr 1 year ago
@Angmarr Because through my thoughts I sense and interpret everything.
Miryr 1 year ago
@Miryr
In other words, you think therefore you are? :)
Or do you just think you are? I mean, if you acknowledge your thougts then should you not acknowledge the thought-of-idea that the your thoughts are not thoughts? Seems a bit conflicting.
Angmarr 1 year ago
@Angmarr No, I simply acknowledge the existence of ideas I cannot be certain of nothing else.
Miryr 1 year ago
@Miryr
Hmm, I would say it sounds like you know whether what you are talking about is real which I dont see how you can know. Instead, you ought to say that you believe ideas are real. However, you must then also acknowledge the idea that ideas, and thoughts, are not real. Must'nt you?
Angmarr 1 year ago
@Angmarr The mere fact that I am pondering about whether or not ideas are real means by de facto that the concept of an idea is true.
Miryr 1 year ago
@Miryr
There's a difference between them being real and them being "true"...
Angmarr 1 year ago
@Angmarr Them being real is only what I can be certain of, I can't be sure that they aren't completely off.
Miryr 1 year ago
@Angmarr
I mean.. maybe your approach/methodology/arguments/conclusions are not that trustworthy? In other words, shouldnt you not just question everything you do, but also your perception of evidence, conclusions, thoughts, flaws, and most importantly, your recognition of your perceptions - is it real or not and if any, how can you trust what you just concluded. You see? Skepticism is a bottomless pit.
Angmarr 1 year ago
I think some folks posting here are misinterpreting the scene, her conscience is playing devil's advocate within her own mind. This wasn't meant to be a testament that she was wrong for what she thought was real. I think the final scenes with Dustin Hoffman were the most beautiful in the movie where the officiating Bishop was bound not to give her a simple confession, and her conscience, whom was questioning and second guessing her shared a final moment of charity to mediate her confession.
jose30076 2 years ago 3
Devil's Advocate or not, the voice was right. And when her conscience absolves her at the end, she even CONFESSES THAT SHE WAS WRONG, and that she only saw what she wanted to see and said it was in God's name. Dustin Hoffman here is playing the role of Satan when he visited Jesus in his last hours. The difference here is that reason prevailed, rather than blind faith.
monuke 2 years ago
Howerver, what is important is that, whatever it was the reality, her thoughts or beliefs made her who she was and brought the best out of her. And THAT is what is important about beliefs, religions, gods, theories...
xfryan 2 years ago
May be in this movie but not in the real history of joan of arc
mardochee2009 2 years ago
She confesses her pride, selfishness and cruelty. She never said she never had any visions, she simply confesses she saw them as she may have wanted to see them. The movie does establish that she was having visions before her sister's death though her interpretations of them may have changed afterwards. Although yes, I do believe this movie as a whole served as a bit of a subtle hit-job on the life of Joan of Arc, there is a little space left in it's interpretation to keep it within tradition
jose30076 2 years ago
i think you're right and paradoxically you're wrong in the same time. Luc Besson mustn't have shown a heroic joan of arc or "rench "free massons" (actually anti-catholics lobbies more than those who are called "free masson") and french anti nationalists lobbies prevent him for describing joan of arc as a saint. However besson had made this movie because he admires her. And ti think that to him she is a saint, a heroic figure. But it's just my opinion
mardochee2009 2 years ago
You know... I know it's not meant to be a funny movie, and for the most part, it's not...
But it does contain some hilarious scenes!! And if you should need a reason to watch this movie, this scene here is reason enough as far as I'm concerned.
The scene I like best after this one has to be where the King's stepmother "performs a miracle" as she calls it.
yugisr 2 years ago
Brilliant movie
o0Navras0o 2 years ago
Jeanne had a Schizophrenia. She was mentally ill person.
And this conversation with her own conscience only shows to us, how deluded she was. Same as the most of religious zealots.
NotoHaters0 2 years ago 11
or god had uintended to unify the french and english thrones.. so as to have a stronger crusading force that could finally retake and hold the holy land.
But no, she just had to mess things up ;)
nelemak 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Thanks to our Heavenly Father we are not british!!!!! Merci Seigneur!!!! Messire Dieu premier servi !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
mardochee2009 2 years ago
ah! so you had talked to her psychiatrist?
mardochee2009 2 years ago
@mardochee2009
No. I didn't talk to her pshychiatrist.However, symptoms such as visions, hallucinations, which she HAD, pshycological instablity, points out that she had mental issues. BACK in her time, it was called SAINT or Possesed by the devil. Whatever suits the situation. TODAY, it's called Schizophrenia.
NotoHaters0 2 years ago 12
@NotoHaters0
ehm, there is a big difference between Schizophrenia and visions/hallucinations..
Angmarr 1 year ago
@Angmarr
'ehm, there is a big difference between Schizophrenia and visions/hallucinations.. '
From someone who has suffered psychosis, I must disagree, hallucinations are the quarter stone of psychosis, and with a dash of delusions it becomes schizophrenia.
cmwissy 1 year ago
@cmwissy
Then you would probably know more of psychology than I do. That being said, I would say that schizophrenia is the belief that you are someone whom you are not or that you are more than one person, whereas hallucinations can occur from various other causes such as drunkenness.
Angmarr 1 year ago
@Angmarr
You are mixing up dissociative personality disorder and Schizophrenia (It's a common misconception)
None of the symptoms of Schizophrenia are loss of identity.
cmwissy 1 year ago
@NotoHaters0 but remember this is a movie not really her, sure they read about her life but in an interview they said they took the books that was let behind and they made it in the image of how they thought she was, so in no way do we ever know that she was schizophrenic or Had Divine Vision since we never step foot in her life.
GodTowardSociety 1 year ago
conscience is the voice of reason . every event has an infinite number of causes , so why choose one .
costadelsilencio08 2 years ago
It amazes me that with a scene as explicit as this, there are numerous interpretations people take from it. "You saw what you wanted to see"; applies to Jeanne as much as to the audience it would seem.
Tallwhitemocha 2 years ago 3
She say get behind me Satan because she is rebuking doubt. That is her conscience, a manifestation of the doubt in her mind.
richman360 2 years ago
i don't see duston hauffman as her conscience. he is the devil. Au nom de dieu le plus haut
Jerrychrist666 2 years ago
That particular chapter on the DVD is called The Conscience. But it is meant to be dependent on how the individual views Joan. Was she deluded? Or was she visited by God? I as an atheist believe she was deluded(which gets to the question is being wrong being deluded). A believer, particularly in Joan, would see it as the Devil trying to get her to doubt herself. It is an interesting sort of Rorschach test on how one see things.
hurin1 2 years ago 4
even if it is the Devil, it is irrelevant. What he says stands or falls on its own merits. Remember, it doesn't matter if Socrates was real or not. The Socratic method still works.
ctvwr 2 years ago 2
@hurin1 I like the way you said that, you said that good. But if I remember correctly in the film didn't she drop to her knees in this part of the film? She then asked to be saved. SO she did then too, beleive it was God and not the Devil.
lostpinup 1 year ago
@hurin1
Not every believer would that. Dont generalize.
Angmarr 1 year ago
@hurin1 No my friend.A believer,such as me,wouldn't care about that.The results are indisputable and are not to be questioned.(Like Christ,you can question everything about him but not his work)She saved her country,and that is another demon trying to haunt her,or the devil,who cares?She saved her nation,she is a martyr and a fuckin hero and thats the bottom line
Elspethknighterrant 1 year ago
heh, and there i thought that was god, without stating so..
nelemak 2 years ago
@Jerrychrist666
That's not the devil, he's really her conscience (she speaks to herself...)
Freez57fr 1 year ago
For me, it's one one the best movie scene ever.
But I find french voices better :(
Napo124 2 years ago
The sign is a matter about uncontiousness
No matter your contiousness is mad or normal,
it doesn't influence uncontious part.
No matter what it was,
the important thing is that it touched you.
benjaminyad 2 years ago
Well put!
HOW the sword got there is not important, that's not the thing. It's the mere fact that it was there when she was - it was serenditpity - and that's "A Sign".
It's a belief that whatever the chain of events that led to the meeting of her and that sword were somehow fated or pre-destined by God. So it's more about whether you believe there is a reason for everything and a meaning to life, or whether it's all just random and meaningless. It really comes down to that.
Aspetta17 2 years ago
Basically, NANANANANA U CAN'T USE LOGIC ON MEEEEE!
You fail, so, hard. Lern2logic.
ctvwr 2 years ago
idk why but 3:14 with the sword being thrown is sort of funny
ThePhantomsSuperGirl 2 years ago 3
SaintSanguine maybe you're right, but for me she remains a Saint.
75Bluesea 2 years ago
good scene and good movie. just be sure to watch directors cut because it has a few more parts and you will dig it.
082076 2 years ago
The sword. The sword lying in the field. That was a sign.
No. That was a sword in a field.
Ulfius254 2 years ago 4
But no one knows how the sword got in the field...there are guesses...but no one has come up to say how that sword got there...so it could have been anything...because there is no proof for or against of how that sword got there.
KathrinHart 2 years ago
poor jeanne..
Ulfius254 2 years ago
lol the sword floating down was fucking hilarious, dustin hoffman made this movie
SaintSanguine 2 years ago
I watched it on demand the other day and i died when i saw this part.
Zeyegin 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
lol i watched it on demand yesterday
SaintSanguine 2 years ago
comcast?
Zeyegin 2 years ago
you bet lol
SaintSanguine 2 years ago
thats how i saw it!
Zeyegin 2 years ago
I love this film...One of my favourites, saw at cinema...In the beginning...At first I reasoned like you, ThePinnacle07...I think my interpretation is the right one...The only thing to do is to talk with the director, Luc Besson...Only he knows the truth...In fact I would always have want to talk with him to know if my interpretation was his...In short i think D.H. is the devil ad her visions come from him,( himself is a vision), but God permit the evil for a more high aim, a Superior Good.
75Bluesea 2 years ago
joan was a schitzo D,H was just another halucination but it was also her coming to realization of the truth, he wasnt god or the devil it was her conscience manafesting itself in a schitzophranic vision
my uncle is a schitzo and he used to have encounters just like this one, this movie really portrayed it well
SaintSanguine 2 years ago
Hi! I`m from Russia and we have such people called "юродивые" Actually they were mad but in old time our people respect them as saints. Because they could tell the truth even to tsars. Nobody else did.
So i think Joan wasn`t just only schitzo, ill person, because she made very important things for her country.
nasty3hka 2 years ago
i never said anything bad came from it, the church was just too damn ignorant and supersticious to see she needed help so they killed her
btw i hope you dont take offense but im kindov a lenin fan
SaintSanguine 2 years ago
Good post.
082076 2 years ago
Comment removed
75Bluesea 2 years ago
Comment removed
75Bluesea 2 years ago
So an all-powerful God sent a 19 year old girl to fight for him?
Sounds strange, but maybe God cannot participate in our world and so needs humans to do his work for him. Sounds fair enough.
So why does an all-loving God send a girl to lead an army to kill other human beings?
Yes the British rule in France was bad, but the British like the French are "God's children" and made in "God's image", so therfore God is commanding her to kill his children. LOL I could debate over this for days.
ThePinnacle07 2 years ago
If you want to see the fortress where the movie was made, go to Beynac, France.
Impressive.... You will even recognize this room..
choupoff 2 years ago
Hoffman is Ace in this movie!
TheFragile89 3 years ago 6
Fuck yeah he is
tysonboy82 2 years ago 2
he's either Satan (Lucifer) or God, I can't figure out which one but most likely God because at the end he blesses her before she burns.
aqualuvor95 3 years ago
He's her conscience. She make peace with herself at the end.
Svartegrim 2 years ago 6
ohhh... thanks!
aqualuvor95 2 years ago
He could be the devil; she does say "Get thee behind me Satan." But his whole purpose is to get her to think critically, bring her to the truth and to give her what she needs most: absolution.
If he's not simply a hallucination I think it's far more likely that he's God.
McFudpuck 3 years ago
I doubt that he is God. If he wanted her to renounce god then why would he let his son die on the cross, wouldn't he of just gotten Jesus out of that mess? Anyway she still burns so what would be the point in giving her absolution, god judges her anyway, as if a priest is in a better position to save her soul than god is, if that is in fact god. It is obviously the devil, using all his tricks so as to contradict god.
theshininggenji 2 years ago 2
He never wanted her to renounce God; he wanted her to realize that her "visions" were her simply imagination.
McFudpuck 2 years ago
The inexplicable... the moment at 3:17 had me laughing for the rest of the scene... XD I have no idea why
xNymphetamynexGurlx 3 years ago 5
heiuaheuiahiuea yeah...LOL i laughed so hard on that... :D:D:D
666AmyLynnLee666 2 years ago
hahahahaha!Dustin Hoffman is awesome in this role!just look at his face,the tone/irony of his voice,the things he says,hahaha!pure delight!love this whole scene!(especially the part with the possible explanations about the sword)...
steveharrismetalgod 3 years ago 2
Definitely the highlight of an underrated film (almost to the point where the rest of the movie is superfluous).
gefan3 3 years ago 7
I don't think he is the devil because near the end of the movie he recites the Trinity in Latin, something the devil would never do
notredamexc 3 years ago 3
it's been a while since i saw this movie, so i could be wrong, but i think you're missing the point in this movie completely.
doesn't this specific scene ring any bells?
(in case you're a believer: never mind me and go with christ n stuff.)
(btw, hurin1, THANKS FOR POSTING!! i've been looking for this scene quite a while. is it complete?)
jankendorf 3 years ago
It's subject to interpretation. Whether Dustin Hoffman is the devil or not, in the movie credits, notice how it says Hoffman is "the conscience" not "Joans" conscience. Many people believe it is Joan's conscience, so I offer an explaination. Hoffman could have been both, a deul role. Joans conscience could have been real and subject to attack by the devil, in order to destroy Joan's faith. The devil or conscience attacked Joan's mind at her weakest point. The way the devil normally operates.
MCA678 3 years ago 2
Its sad to read some of the comments posted here. Every person who believes in God and believes in his love and power, is automatically labled a nut. So yes...Joan did see what she wanted to see-what she believed to be God's voice and HIS truth, to help free France from the horrible British rule. From all the comments I've read, making Joan out to be a nut for the God she loved, and the good she did in God's name, shows me not much has changed in the last 500 years.
MCA678 3 years ago 2
I remember seeing this movie, but can't remember when... Good movie.
kuonankrma 3 years ago
yup i agree
trevorgodchild 3 years ago
i love this scene
Tuulish 3 years ago 2
my fave scene of the movie! i think this scene show us the human side of Jeanne, the saint.. afterall, she's a human, just more gifted and blessed than any other average human.
j'adore jeanne!
bluebluefeeling 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And I was round when jesus christ
Had his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate
hes the devil
rblwoaclu 3 years ago
Can you pleaaaase put on the full version of the conversation!! PLZ PLZ I beg you!! I love it! Specially the end!
Keenan4life 3 years ago
I love Milla Jovovich in this scene. She and Dustin Hoffman, play off each other so well here.
HarperGT88 3 years ago 2
Does he play her conscience? I thought he was God
tanyabranning 3 years ago
no, i thought he was the Devil. so its a case of who was the messages from? was it Gods work she did? or the Devil?
handsandfaces 3 years ago
you didn't get it, did you? she just saw a sword and assumed it was a message from god when it was just a sword on a field.
deep inside of her, she knows it to be true, but cant accept that it was just coincidence, an excuse to avenge her sister.
kenijaru 3 years ago
sorry was you talking to me or tanyabranning? i did get it thanks. lol
handsandfaces 3 years ago
"so its a case of who was the messages from? was it Gods work she did? or the Devil?"
you did say that, didn't you?
i did too think he was the devil, but being that he is her consciousness the only logical conclusion i could reach is that her mind (thirsty for revenge) twisted the truth it had before it and made her believe it was a sign from god when in fact it was one of the many possibilities her consciousness showed her on this scene. (one could say she realized she was lying to herself).
kenijaru 3 years ago
yes i did say that. and it was the devil, in my opinion as he tired as hard as he could to sow the seed of doubt in her mind. to trick her. then when she finally signs that confession he appears again with a big grin on his face and she panics and realises it was trick and wishes to go back and say it was a message from god (thus why she is burned). a bit like the story of jesus when some of his disciples say they dont belive to save themselves from the guards only later to wish they had not
handsandfaces 3 years ago
basicaly when she signed that it was like saying 'i do not belive' and her soul was his so when she knew she had to burn for what she belived in. thats why she was happier and why she wanted to go that way.
handsandfaces 3 years ago
after all this is a story from the bible. another test of faith. and joan is considered a saint
handsandfaces 3 years ago
she wasn't burned as a heretic but rather as a witch (i should watch the movie again, just to be sure) because of the clothes that the guards found near her (apparently created by her, but instead, brought at night by someone else).
when she said she didn't believe, they couldn't burn her as a heretic, but, as the English wanted her dead anyway, they managed to make her look like a witch.
This movie is not about a "test of faith" but rather what Dustin says on this scene. Is he right or wrong?
kenijaru 3 years ago
what's great about this movie is that you get to choose the "ending".
you can choose the atheist explanation, Her Consciousness is right and she's a delusional nut job.
or, the believer's explanation, Dustin is in fact the Devil and what she saw were actually signs from god.
(i go with the atheist explanation)
kenijaru 3 years ago 2
thats up to you but i would disagree greatly with you (because im like that) im am a atheist BUT this story is a religious one and the fact that she IS considered a saint just sways me more to the Devil/God way.
but yeah she probley was a nut job just like magic man jesus lol :P
handsandfaces 3 years ago
it's not a religious story unless you make it one, and she's not a nut job unless you make her one. Joan is a saint because the church ultimately believed what she said.
from 3:18 to 3:44 resumes what i believe the whole movie is about, it's true message, that goes deeper than just "frenchies killing brits because a supreme being with a white beard told them to".
what I'm trying to say is... let's agree to disagree.
kenijaru 3 years ago
yes, i think its best to LOL
handsandfaces 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And I was round when jesus christ
Had his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate
hes the devil
his name is yahshua not heilzuess
rblwoaclu 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And I was round when jesus christ
Had his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate
hes the devil
rblwoaclu 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And I was round when jesus christ
Had his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate
rblwoaclu 3 years ago
this part of the movie turned into a Phsycological thriller...
peacemaker707 3 years ago
its not funny but rather sad I think, I'm sorry for Joan...
Dhomen 3 years ago
I swear I was literally LOLing by the sword in a field part. That... that was a sign! No, that was a sword... in a field. I think I love Dustin.
Ayoshen 3 years ago
yeah dustin