User reviews

There's a lot of good things to say about the movie. As the drawings and paintings in the film, this one is a great work of art. It draws a beautiful love story between two characters, forbidden by the time it happens in. There's just a little something I feel was missing throughout. A bit more tension, a little bit more energy.

I would give this film 9 out of ten if it was solely based on how well it was directed, the cinematography, the acting. But I didn't emotionally attach to it for reasons I can't put my finger on. Admittedly, period drama/romance is not my genre. But overall a very impressive slow burner of two women falling in love in a patriarchal world. Feminists would approve.7 out of ten. My wife gave it 8 - she was more emotionally involved than I.

Beautiful film very artistic there's no doubt about that, but my expectations were a bit high, the Story seemed too slow....and the relationship, sadly, seemed unreal.

The average movie goer May find the movie boring as there is not much excitement or suspense. However, I loved the story and the acting, costumes, and cinematography was phenomenal!

I'm not a film connoisseur. To me, French films are about understanding the surroundings, reading the facial expressions, feeling how the characters feel and let the film draw something in your mind. I'm not very good at all these things but I enjoy trying.

Great lighting, locations and scenery, paintings, music.. The film is simply beautiful, and tells a beautiful story. With little details of added narrative to elevate it (Orpheus' tale, for example). It's simple and easy to follow, yet weird at times to give it an extra layer of intrigue/mystique.. a "je ne sais quoi". Both leads (doesn't work otherwise) start off as distant, but if you are like me, will yearn for them at the end.

It does feel a tad slow on the first act, but it will soon pick up the pace and you probably won't even notice. Go in blind, and be in the mood for a "movie movie".

This movie is beautiful. It's visually refreshing, sounds perfect, and is pleasant in all senses of the word. And it is sad, also pleasantly so. Not because the love could not be but because of the reasons it could not be so. Stunning performances, deeply sensual.

I enjoyed it but I am baffled by the 10 star reviews. The acting was good and it was an original story. But the days of good film critics seem long gone. They rave on anything slow and pretentious and it's getting old and boring. I miss Roger Ebert.

Perfectly lovely film - beautifully shot and great performances.. just don't really get the hype.. But yay for queer films with proper representation.

I've heard that It's wonderful movie. Maybe I had too much expectation. Scenes were beautiful, though. Héloïse's facial expression was restrained but beautiful. It's well made movie but it might be a bit boring for those who want to have a lot of fun.

I'd describe this movie as a beautifully shot, lesbian heavy, ASMR movie. The pace of this movie is very slow, however it works well and is a soothing watch for our busy world. Wasn't really into the lesbian stuff, but it was tastefully filmed so i had no problems with that. The drama in it was light, as in there didn't feel like there was much conflict and left me feeling emotionally underwhelmed. It seemed the scenes of the maid only purpose was to show the hardship of women of the period, the problem was it wasn't tied into the main story at all. Also, something felt unrealistic for the period but i can't put my finger on it. The movie was meticulously shot, each scene like a painting, and the sound minimalistic and intentional (hence the ASMR). The story was average and predictable but with really good dialogue, so it never became difficult to watch. The acting is also very good. This is definitely a good movie, but it's certainly is not one of the greatest movies of all time.

Makes me long for more, and sadder that more are not like this.

I kind of expected this movie to be one of the great romance stories of all time, based on its reputation. While I enjoyed it, I didn't quite feel the emotion as strongly as I'd hoped. The story had something of a stop-start approach, as opposed to building the desire between the lead characters. I understood how Heloise would come to trust Marianne, but not how their feelings for each other developed.

I read a review of another film by Celine Sciamma that likened by her directorial style of that of Jacques Rivette. Regardless of any underlying similarities, it's likely the comparison was brought to mind by this movie, which superfically resembles Rivette's 'La Belle Noisuese': the complex relationships between its characters brought out by the creation of a painting of one of them. I love Rivette's film, but at heart it is a male fantasy, a story of the ineffible woman. By contrast, Sciamma's film features an almost entirely female cast and is all about female desire. The two protagonists are actually quite similar (so much so, it's unclear which is the one supposed to be "on fire": the barrier to the development of their romance is their own pride and defensiveness, which itself is a consequence of living in a male-dominated world. This is a story about finding yourself through love of another; a key motif is the smile, which both characters refuse the world but eventually grant to one another. It's intense stuff, but the deliberateness with which they define themselves is understandable but reduces your sympathy: if you were there with them, they wouldn't need you, or feel compelled to soften that pill.

I don't usually enjoy French movies. I've watched some and I mostly find them only good in comedy.

This film is decent but nothing amazing in my opinion. Visually it's stunning and it has beautiful cinematography. I also find the performances very good. But other than that I find the film to be really slow and it has a lot of boring moments. It's a shame because the film is good but it's just not compelling. I get that it's a slow burner because it's kind of the build of a romance but I've seen similar films a lot better or at least executed better in terms of pacing but in terms of the directing, filmmaking and artistic choices it's really good making it a great film to analyse. Overall it's a good film that I would recommend.

Every frame is like the painting. And that is the best asset of this movie. Cinematography, colors, overall aesthetic part of the movie is very special and one of the most beautiful I've ever seen on screen. Another strong side is the astonishing beauty of the main characters. Their skin, hair, eyes, holding, etc. One of the main motives of the movie are female gaze and the question: "If you look at me, who do I look at?". This movie is, from my perspective strange and different, the plot is set in awkward undefined time and place, with some holes in the script, without a whole explanation, perhaps a little bit bizarre. That whole scenery is wonderful but not enough. Overall, nice, slow movie if you want rest your eyes on the beautiful shots and colors, with a lot undertext, which is left to the viewer's interpretation.

The creation of a piece of art is a process, a development, sometimes a search for an answer, a desire for fulfilment. Eyes looking, and then looking away at the canvas and in this case, each other. I saw the relationship between the two as the work of art. Relationships are very unique and sometimes hard to paint, as a viewer we see their relationship being painted, there's a story. The frustrations and the beauty are gently portrayed with attention to human detail. Very minimal (no music) and somewhat calming (no testosterone perhaps) with most frames looking like a painting. Prepare to go on a journey with two french ladies in love...there's a lot of feeling and mystique.

Portrait of a Lady on Fire is a gorgeously shot and acted film. A tragic love story between two star crossed lovers that selves into the study of the feminine form and the feminine gaze. A movie with quite possibly one of the best endings I have ever seen that really drove home that rather than how you see something, it's what you're seeing that takes far more importance.

This is a rare bird: an artsy film that is properly artistic (as well as being, in some small part, about art). This could have done with a little bit of extra weight to the dialogue, but it has a remarkably strong visual identity, both delicate and bright, bringing the feelings of the characters and the hopelessness of their situation relentlessly to the fore and examining them in brilliantly lit scenes. Everything about the film is gorgeous: composition, costumes, cinematography, the one musical interlude, locations. I could particularly appreciate the craftsmanship since the exteriors were filmed down the path from my granny's house and I could recognise the actual rocks that I used to clamber on as a kid; but in the real world, the light there is never as bright, and the sea never as gloriously turquoise as it is in the film.

On the flip side, the two leads did not really convince me that they had as much mutual attraction as is necessary for the story, the dialogue is a little flat, and the film could maybe have been brought in under 1.5 hours, with a little less necking and longingly-gazing, without losing much impact.

Brittany in the 18th Century. Marianne (Noémie Merlant) is a painter, central to this amazingly sparse, subtle and evocative film. Landing on at remote location by tiny paddle boat to paint Héloïse (Adèle Heaney). She spends the opening scenes largely fending for herself in a stately but barren and echoey house, lit by candle. Removing dust sheets from mirrors and furniture. It's seemingly a fresh start for everyone, a blank canvas if you like. Except there's history, Héloïse has returned to this quiet home from a convent. Her sister has recently died and she's to be married. The idea being that the painting will entice a suitor in Milan for her. It sounds rather ridiculous to modern ears, as it does to Héloïse, who resists. Opposing the potential marriage and the commissioning of the portrait. Another painter has attempted the portrait recently... but failed. The task therefore is for Marianne to paint Héloïse, without her knowing. It's a patient film. Much like painting I suppose. Minutes go by with barely a word. Creating a peaceful world within what appears to be a vast house and a wilder world outside on the coast, exposed to the elements. Héloïse likes to take walks on the beach, which looks stunning and by the cliffs worryingly, as it seems jumping from one was how her sister ended her life. These walks are the ruse for Marianne being there, she's company and these moments are her only chance to study her model. It seems impossible, but the painting itself doesn't feel all that important. It's the relationship between Héloïse and Marianne that's revealing itself. Marianne understands Héloïse, understands her sadness, her reluctance and upon completing her first attempt at the portrait, confronts Héloïse with the truth. The painting doesn't tell the truth, Héloïse sees it and Marianne too knows that she must dig deeper. What transpires is a wonderful account of friendship and perhaps something much deeper. Héloïse's mother, the architect behind the painting and the potential marriage leaves on the understanding that Marianne has one more attempt at the portrait. And so the two women are left alone, with only the young housekeeper, who it turns out is pregnant. Very much a side plot, but evoking further the need for the women to stick together, finding strength from each other. Fire is a constant. Cooking, warmth, light. It feels like the elephant in the room. On a rare foray out of the calm isolation of the house, the three women join others from an unseen village at a nighttime gathering on the moorland. There's fire once more and striking a capella singing that really makes me wish I'd been watching this in a cinema. This scene is pivotal. Cementing something within Marianne, something inevitable. A touching story of forbidden love. I'm not sure it would stand up to much repeat viewing, but on first watch it's pretty arresting. A final coda rounds the story perfectly, without being obvious, yet remaining satisfying and I must confess I really fancy a visit to Brittany.

Overall, the film could have been very good. Instead, it just looks nice but that's really about all there is to it. Worth seeing? Perhaps...but far from a must-see.

7,5/10

As a professional photographer and a pedestrian movie consumer, I found this film disturbing. The story touched me, but the exquisite photography distracted me. The photography enthralled me, but the story interfered with my viewing. I kept wanting to pause and enjoy, yet when I did: plot chaos ensued. I need to watch it twice, once for the story, and again for the virtual art gallery. But great art, and this Portrait Fire is great art, often dissolves with such bifurcation.

It was a good lesson nonetheless. In this case, the visual art ascended the verbal art. I once attended a ballet where the music was written to underwrite the dance choreography. Until then, I had assumed dance must be fashioned after the music. How bigoted was I. Now I see the bigotry challenged again. Perhaps the story serves the photography...

This portrait created a fire of discontent: aloneness, remembrance, and passion. May there always be a page 28 in all our lives of remembrance.

Outstanding cinematography where most scenes are like a painting but the movie is slow and long and the story a bit boring. Good if you enjoy nice paintings.