monimm18 I liked this film, but I think it could have been better. There were three things that, in my opinion, weakened its impact. The first thing was the presence of a narrator. I happen to believe that using a narrator in a film with characters and dialogue, although sometimes justifiable, is many times a sign of script or directing weakness; usually, if both the screenplay and the director are good enough, conveying all the information should be possible (and would be more powerful) without a narrator explaining what's going on.The second thing that bothered me was the acting. I found it impossible to connect with the characters, however poignant I found their story (OK, Liotti's looks grabbed my attention quite a bit, but I wouldn't chuck that up to talent...). I felt that de Ayala's acting lacked a certain depth and had a narrow range (most of it consisted of numerous infantile fits of rage in between scenes where she eagerly spread her legs). Liotti seemed lifeless, although I was told his voice was dubbed in Spanish, which usually lowers the power of a performance quite a bit (apparently, he originally delivered a lot of his dialogue in Italian).The third thing that bothered me was the film's (director's?) incapacity of explaining the roots and justification of Juana's mad love for Phillip. Yes, I know it was a powerful combination of lust and emotional dependency, that Juana was a passionate woman and apparently Phillip was quite a fiery lover, but I never felt the characters' passion.The film focused too little on Juana's personality/character and the way the chemistry between her and Phillip developed. I realized how powerful her passion for him was, but it was only thanks to the dialogue, not to the acting, neither to the filming style (does anyone else think the film needed more close-ups, mostly during highly emotional scenes?). In my opinion, the film scratches the surface emotionally and artistically, but fails to go deep.Having said all that, let me assure you that, overall I think it's still a film worth seeing, although definitely not for historical accuracy. The story, loosely based on the Spanish queen Juana de Castilla's life, is quite moving, maybe more for those who have experienced the kind of passion that Juana had for Phillip. A woman so passionately in love with her man, so consumed by her love and so anguished by his philandering and growing lack of reciprocity to her love that she becomes obsessed with possesing him and forgets she is a queen and that her first duty is to her people. I was just sorry to see such a passionate love story idea being presented in a bit of a lethargic manner.

millerbd-1 While this is not a film for the fainthearted, its explicit passion isn't gratuitous. And while the fair-minded viewer will find much to recommend it, "__Juana la loca__" (English title "Mad Love") is probably (and understandably) best appreciated by those who know the history, culture and language inspiring it. Two of the film's strongest features are its artfully ambivalent treatment of Juana's insanity (contributing to a debate that has fascinated people for over four hundred years), and its raising of all kinds of feminist questions. Into the bargain "__Juana la loca__" is gorgeously filmed, and well acted, especially considering themes and situations essential to the story that might seem like pure melodrama if less well executed. There are segments that could seem excessive in another context; but this is a story about excesses. Intelligent, thoughtful audience members will find much in the film worth pondering.

AZINDN Juana de Loco is a film that questions if love above duty is more natural for a woman than a man. Easily answered if one is Elizabeth I, or Catherine the Great, however, Juana lets her lust for her husband overtake her sense of duty. The film has a rich and sensuous look in staging of 15th century Spanish courtlife, but beyond that, its revisionist take on the historical record is questionable. Although Queen, Juana is a victim of the males in the court who surround her. Her lack of control permits the manipulation of her husband to have her declared incompetent to rule. An ambitious husband who, although a beauty, is none the less not in the same league as his highborn wife, he strikes a deal with her father, and using her jealousy against her, gets the throne and free rein to bed whomever. Smart guy. He plays the man's game and gets the throne. Juana on the other hand, plays the game according to the rules for women and gets incarcerated for the remainder of her life. Career or love?Actor de Ayala is competent in her role, but lacks any depth in presentation of emotions beyond a shrewish suspicion. Her emotional response to finding her husband's disloyalty is rage, but as Ayala presents it, she is a 15 yr. old loosing her boyfriend. Ayala's seems also limited by her costar, who is stunning, but vacuous. He never goes beyond a one- dimensional disinterested stare. I'm sure this must mean he is smoldering and sexy, but if this is acting, give me Antonio Bandaras.

earlynr Juana la Loca is the story of a 15th century young Spanish monarch, Juana. The set design and costumes are beautiful and authentic, the dialogue is excellent, the acting is first-rate. As Juana, Pilar Lopez de Ayala is beautiful, feisty, and full of passion for her husband bordering on madness. Her husband, played by Daniele Liotti is gorgeous. When he turns to rampant womanizing, Juana's heart is broken, and she begins to obsess on her husband, sacrificing her duties as ruler of the kingdom. This is a very good movie, and Lopez de Ayala plays the role very well. Is she really crazy? The writers leave it for you to judge. No one could ever play a young queen as well Cate Blanchett did in Elizabeth; but Pilar Lopez de Ayala is totally convincing as Juana la Loca -- Joan the Mad.