Portrait of a Lady on Fire (2019) User Reviews

An example of what cinema should be

[raidatlanta · 9/10 · 18 September 2019]

This film is an example of what cinema should be.

Yes, the plot isn't so "thick", it's a rather slow film.

Why I say this is what cinema should be, is because it has as it's base images. Its images speak louder than word ; you see what you have to know.

Everyone involved with this picture seems to have done an astounding job - may it be through directing, the actresses, the set, the photography, the costumes - everything is astounding and very well done.

When we saw this in theatres with my colleagues - mostly male -, we came out speechless. At the end of the film, there was a girl crying in the same row as I - the first time I see anyone crying to a movie (really crying from bing moved). With my colleagues, we walked out, and none of us spoke or said anything for at least 5-10 minutes, as we all obviously were affected by the nostalgic beauty that the picture captures. Finally someone broke the silence with the only thing that could break the spell - a banal exclamation "it was well done", as the only thing to be done after such a film is "a return to banality". This is a film I will gladly see again.

Every frame a painting

[sarthak889 · 9/10 · 6 April 2020]

This film's cinematography is beyond perfect. Every scene appears as though it was taken out of a masterpiece painting. The only other work I recall even close to its visual poetry is Barry Lyndon.

Every actor, especially the two leads, have done their job amazingly. Watch it if you haven't. This movie is art at its finest.

Beautiful movie

[MovieJunkie5 · 9/10 · 19 January 2020]

For starters, I can't possibly understand the lack of Oscar nominations for this movie. One of the best movies of the year, not only foreign. The acting is superb and would put Merlant (or even Haenel) instead of Charlize Theron for example. The cinematography is breathtaking, the shots are long and so beautiful put. It's such a smooth transition between the characters and the plot with such attention to detail. Really gorgeous and it locks your eyes on screen and the end... jesus christ, emotions running high. Really recommend it!

From a 20 year old used to superhero movies.

[transcendingemma-1234 · 10/10 · 3 April 2021]

I'm by no means a film critic, but I thought a review coming from my perspective might be helpful.

I watched two movies this weekend: Godzilla vs Kong, and Portrait of a Lady on Fire.

Godzilla was fun. I thought seeing giant monsters fight in Hong Kong was very entertaining. The plot and characters were a distraction from the action I was looking for. I watched it, thought, "hell yeah," and moved on.

This movie was an entirely different experience. I was enthralled in these characters. The cinematography spoke just as much as the dialogue did. The actors spoke as much with their silence as with their words. I was crying at the end, and expect this movie to leave an impression. This is art, just like the paintings of the film itself. Cannot recommend enough. Godzilla was brainless entertainment, this was a moving experience to be a part of.

No matter what movies you usually like, do yourself a favor and watch this.

One of the great films of the 21st century

[Camoo · 10/10 · 4 February 2021]

I haven't written a review in a while because frankly there haven't been too many great movies in recent years to warrant any. But then I watched Portrait de la jeune fille en feu, and found it so revelatory and refreshing that I thought I would add my dollop of daisy to the ocean of praise this film has rightfully been getting.

The film is about a love affair between a painter and her subject, both women, and in a sense it is as simple as that. There is a backdrop of male dominance overhanging the period in which the story is set - the film contains few men, and when they are seen, they appear as benevolent figures. But repression pervades each scene - the subject of the painting is an aristocratic woman who is on her way to be married, and yet she isn't thrilled at the prospect and she might not have a choice in the matter. The painter, a young woman, at the end of the film displays her work under the name of her father, unable to present her work under her own name. So the specter of control is injected throughout, although this theme is only hinted at. This subtle touch gives the film an essential underpinning to what is otherwise a beautiful love story.

Some thoughts about the film-making. First: what a beautiful thing to behold. Such refined artistry is a rarity in the days of quick-consumption digital, and it goes to show how the technicians that work behind the camera are as important as what is happening on screen. Each frame is a thing of aesthetic delight, of color coordination, of subtle lighting and design elements all married into a whole. The fact that it was shot in digital rather than a traditional film look for a period piece somehow heightens and modernizes the proceedings in a way that made its most visual moments feel fresh and completely new.

Second, the respect for the audience, to not settle for petty narrative cliches when there were so many opportunities in this story to resort to them. It is one of these very pure and true stories, told with love and respect for the characters as well as those watching them breathe, yet we keep waiting for a moment of emotional violence between the main players, which doesn't occur. When I became aware of how delicate this story was as it unfolded to its end, I was moved to my core.

This is a revolutionary and passionate film on many levels, and I believe those who have seen it can only attest to that. It kind of defies criticism beyond that fact.

Achingly beautiful

[jcc_murray · 10/10 · 5 June 2020]

I cannot recall the last time I watched a film that had me utterly mesmerised from the very start to the very end without a single interruption. Everything about this film is so lovingly crafted, from the nuanced and commanding central performances to the cinematography and subtly woven storyline - they all combine to produce a genuine piece of cinematic art. The lighting and palette drew inspiration from 18th century paintings, there are scenes in this film that will stay with me fore some time... and the slowly building inevitable climax to the story is heart achingly gratifying. An utterly original and beautiful instant classic that somehow didn't capture the attention of the Oscars Academy!

Review from a Lady on Fire

[grab-it-gee · 10/10 · 19 October 2019]

The ending of this film left me in tears, but the good kind where you simply emote from the pleasure of seeing a work of art.

I had to figure out how to log back into my IMDb account, just to express my humble opinion for a moment.

I had to give it a 10/10 because it filled me with the emotion described above -- the entire movie was pure, honest art. The acting was excellent, as well as the entire direction of the film, visually and otherwise.

The film accomplished what it set out to do --share a love story worth remembering. In this case, a special romance that was expressed in the most succinct and captivating way.

What may have cost this movie a star for others (looking at you, 9/10 people), I do not know. I just know that special feeling only certain movies give me after the first watch and this one had it.

It's a beauty speaking to all lovers.

[JohnDeSando · 8 March 2020]

"When you asked if I had known love. I could tell the answer was yes. And that it was now. "Marianne (Noemie Merlant)

No art form has struggled more to get the depiction of love just right than film. Portrait of a Lady on Fire gets it almost perfect, and it's Sapphic! All you modest types don't need to worry-writer director Celine Siamma stresses the longing and the dance of love much more than its physicality. Two young women spend most of this beautiful romance just getting to the first dance, and the journey is as exciting and anguishing as it was for us in those early years of exploring.

Late 18th century Marianne has been hired to paint young Heloise (Adele Haenel) for her wedding portrait. Not that you can't guess what is going to happen while the first portrait is being painted, but the film languishes long and deep on the glances between these two potential lovers. Those gazes encapsulate the truth of their affections and the high-mindedness of their intentions.

Perhaps the business of painting lends the ethereal quality to their love, which is born of the imagination and fleetingly put on canvas forever. It's just that the slow, loving pace of the camera and the conceit lend a mystery (Will they connect?) and a sweetness (how transforming love can be from a scowl to a smile).

The cinematography, especially of the rugged cliffs and the sea, is well-aligned with the power and danger of their tender love. Not even mother's (Valeira Golino) affection for her remote daughter pales next to the burgeoning passion of the leads.

Portrait of a Lady on Fire fiercely speaks to the fire, conventional or not, that can burn in all of us. Leave it to film to bring out the love in our hearts.

"To love pure and chaste from afar." Man of La Mancha

Work or Art

[aheaven2005 · 7/10 · 24 June 2022]

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.

Portrait of a Filmmaker with Something to Say (I mean that as a compliment!)

[Quinoa1984 · 10/10 · 4 March 2020]

Well, that was.... incredibly satisfying (you thought I'd say lit, didn't you?)

I don't know how long I could expound about how Portrait of a Lady on Fire completely took me in and made me awed by how writer/director Céline Sciamma slowly (and it may be too slow for some, certainly not for the majority of critics) develops this relationship between an artist and the figure of her focus, what it means for anyone with creative aspirations to open oneself and find what *you* see, with a laser focus, on how faces and eyes and bodies and just these two amazing women look at each other on screen - Merlant and Haenel have some of the most electric chemistry of any performers I've experienced in a film, it's that damn good - or how she has the bravery to bring in moments that may confound a little (that feast where all the women start singing a hymn or some type of song out of nowhere, leading to a practically literal representation of the title) and disturb (what happens with Sophie about two thirds of the way through somehow made me shocked by how simply Sciamma shows what happens to her), while her camera is so focused on getting us to see HOW art and that process needs time to develop when it comes down to the soul, but.... What I'll try to bottle up in this is to say this:

You know the term "Male Gaze" when it comes to certain (a lot, too many) filmmakers? Sciamma showed me what the "Female Gaze" is like in all of its uncompromising hues. More importantly, this is just an artist with a vivid, sometimes surreal and harrowingly romantic point of view - not to mention, these two women are just staggering in what they're able to achieve here.

It made me feel like I've seen the rebirth of the French New Wave - the New-New, more precisely. Ok, I'll stop now.

Movie was decent but quite overrated

[daisyfperez · 6/10 · 2 March 2020]

Stunning cinematography. Slowly evolving plot. I expected more from the ratings. Struggled to finish it.

Already a classic

[portraitofaladyonfire · 10/10 · 6 January 2021]

I watched it 5 days ago and I still think about it.

Rather like looking at a painting

[reginadonk · 6/10 · 1 November 2019]

This movie is a French period piece and it tells the simple tale of a female artist commissioned to paint the future wife of a Duke. The artist travels to the woman's seaside place of residence and the movie covers the period of the painting of the canvas and the initially touchy, but ultimately loving, relationship that develops between these two young women. The setting is intimate, the cast is small, and the plot is almost wafer-thin. The pace is almost painfully sedate, but one gradually becomes accustomed to it, and to appreciate the opportunity to soak in the imagery, and the detail (Rather like looking at a painting, I guess) The cast is almost exclusively female, as is the director, and this is clearly a deliberate and dedicated woman's movie, in every sense. However, any man who actually likes women will have no problem being entertained and ultimately rewarded by giving this film a watch. Naturally any kind of open love between two women of social status was never going to be a potential option in the 18th century, so how are these two going to reconcile the passion that emerges between them. This is the only plot device and jeopardy element. Not much to work with, but I felt that this was a statement by the producers to show that in the woman's realm deep feelings go a longer way than plot twists and high dudgeon. The acting is controlled and meaningful, the interior settings are explored to the point that you almost fill in the smells yourself, and the sequences at the beach linger long enough that you begin bracing yourself against the coastal winds. The high-point of the film is when the community of women gather on a cliff to associate, drink a bit, and sing a particularly haunting mantra-like song. My all time favourite film (La Belle Noiseuse - Long version) also attempts to capture an artist busy in the process of painting a picture. It is not an easy thing to do on film. Naturally I believe my favourite movie does, but does this film achieve that too? Well, to a point, although, for me, the creation of the picture here is more a metaphor for the falling in love, than about the artistic pursuit as of itself. Did I enjoy watching this film? Yes, I did, but a week later I am struggling to recall more that a few vivid moments or to reconnect with it on an emotional level. A worthy film certainly, an important woman's work for sure, but one to be more admired than ever relished.

Lovely cinematography but unconvincing story telling

[calorne · 5/10 · 2 March 2020]

I really liked this film visually in terms of the scenery and the way the characters were posed in the scenes. But I was not convinced by the relationship of the main characters. I was always conscious that they were actors playing roles and I think it was the way they were placed on set to make appealing images that contributed to this. Somehow the beauty of the imagery reduced the plausibility of the action as it was too staged to seem genuine. It was like looking at carefully arranged photographs rather than watching a movie.

The connection between art and love.

[HenrikBakke94 · 10/10 · 15 December 2020]

The story of "Portrait of a Lady on Fire" is mostly told through cinematography. The way the characters stares at each other really transfers the tension growing between them to the viewer. This plays out brilliant in the way the characters unfolds and start to see each other as equals, both in real life and in the making of the portrait.

The cinematography, which is done by Clarie Mathon, resembles a classic piece of art, a sort of a moving portrait of the lives of french women in the late 1700's. As a big fan of cinematographic storytelling, I must say that this is one of the best movies I have ever seen.

A feast for the eyes

[richard-1787 · 9/10 · 17 October 2019]

The acting by the two principle actresses in this movie is first-rate. The direction, though it moves slowly, is very good.

But what made this movie remarkable for me was the cinematography. The most striking scenes feature the blonde character walking along the shore against a relatively light-blue sea. You have to see it to experience how beautiful those scenes are.

But some of the interior scenes have face lighting that will make you think of Rembrandt. (The movie is about a painter, so it's not surprising that the lighting of faces should be very important.)

There are other scenes where you have one deep red dress against a white background, again to very striking effect.

I just saw this movie in France, so with neither dubbing nor subtitles. I don't know how it will work with either of them.

But if you can understand the language - which is very clear, very classic standard French with little background noise behind it - you will discover a remarkable study of two women photographed in a truly astounding manner.

This Movie Is Beautiful

[aimeedreux · 9/10 · 28 January 2020]

All I can say about this movie is that it is beautiful. From the cinematography to the soundtrack to the acting everything about the movie is perfectly executed creating an emotionally connected experience for the viewer. If you have not yet seen this movie I recommend that you put it at the top of your to watch list because it's what I believe to be one of the best movies of 2019

As if Mona Lisa had frame rates

[adrianeylers · 10/10 · 5 February 2021]

This film is art. The script is one of the best i've ever seen, the acting is unbelievably good by all three lead actresses. The film is slow, but it need to be to capture the full range of emotions going on. I also love how still the camera is most of the time, which merely captures the moment being played out and letting the viewer observe even the small details that all brings forward the feeling of intimacy. A film that sheds a very real light on how life for these women in the eighteenth century might have been.

Spellbinding!

[mandshurt · 8 March 2020]

Amazing cinematography and acting! Beautiful film! Minimal dialogue made up for with major body language and emotional expression.

Picture perfect bug boring script

[marybbloom · 6/10 · 27 November 2019]

Beautiful scenery, artistic photography but otherwise not interesting at all, sorry it was boring most of the rime. Some very cliche images like the baby in the scene the abortion or the mirror placed on a certain spot ... in another scene. Embarrassing

It's as if love is the eye of a talented painter

[AlbertCinefilu · 10/10 · 17 December 2020]

The only movie I remember that resembles slightly but not quite the visual style of this movie is Phantom Thread. And I adored that way of telling a story mainly through visuals ...but I have to say that ''Portrait de la jeune fille en feu'' exceeds all my previous experiences with visual storytelling. It bewitches me!

I wished so much it would make me feel more intense feelings while watching it but then I realised it's not necessarily a lachrymose film. For me it's that kind of movie that you watch, understand but never fully grasp it, has a powerful impact upon you and after it ended it starts to have a second, even more powerful effect as you think back about it. A piece of art, not just a one-time experience.

A 10 out of 10 from me.

Too artsy and slow....and the relationship, sadly, seemed unreal.

[planktonrules · 6/10 · 23 October 2019]

"Portrait of a Lady on Fire" is not a film for everyone. After all, it's about lesbianism in the 18th century and not everyone is excited about seeing such a picture. As for me, I applaud the lesbian subject matter....but I think the film itself left much to be desired.

The film clearly is intended as an 'art film'. In other words, instead of telling a story in a normal way, it's very, very slow and deliberate....too slow. Oddly, however, despite the glacial pacing, when it comes to the relationship between the two women is the opposite. They go from not even talking to each other to lovers...and you cannot help but think something is missing. There is simply little chemistry or joy between the pair.

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.

The Inception of a Genius Female

[danielnikrasov · 10/10 · 7 August 2019]

I watched this film at the 36th Annual JFF (Jerusalem Film Festival) and it was worth it. First, before the review, I want to point out that the movie touched my heart very much. Every scene and scene is pure and very real. The characters in the movie were a revelation to me and I don't doubt that the cast of the two main actresses, as I will explain below, impressed me greatly. Without wasting time, we set off!

* This Review does not include spoilers *

Portrait of a Lady on Fire, directed by Céline Sciamma (Fascinating, by the way) is a period love drama that takes place in 18th century France, when Marianne (the impressive Noémie Merlant), a beautiful young painter, is hired to paint the portrait of Eloise (Adèle Haenel is a high-class revelation) for her upcoming wedding. However, Eloise is not interested in getting married, and therefore refuses to cooperate with the wedding preparations in general, and with the portrait painting in particular. Marianne decides to hide the fact that she is a painter and presents herself as a companion designed to stir Eloise's time. At the same time, she watches her day after day and paints her secretly.

The film is a visual poetry, with a feast for the ears and eyes, each richly textured frame and unique sound design, overpowering the most immersive viewing experience, and I recommend watching cinema instead of sitting in front of a small screen on the comfy couch at home. Every theme in the movie about love and self-discovery of the characters is serious and powerful, the dialogues between the characters are very interesting and very honest. The atmosphere in the film is both realistic and clearly poetic. The relationship between the two main characters is exceptional and also helps build the character of the characters. Noémie Merlant and Adèle Haenel's cast are a revelation and don't see it every day, which makes me want to see them in more movies. Claire Methon's photography was very wonderful, reflecting the historical background of 18th century France. The ending left a mark on the film and this is one of the most amazing and exciting endings I've ever seen.

Had the film been written and directed by someone else (even if it is a man or a woman), the film would have felt fake and pathetic, and the relationship between the characters would have been unreliable. Fortunately, here comes Sciamma, whose feminine perspective and innovative demeanor transform what could have been a time-lapse into the powerful power of art, the enhancement of feminist cinema and the empowerment of modern and early audiences. There were some notable interactions in the film that one, I think, hint at the end of the film, such as a discussion of the significance of the Orpheus and Orodice Greek myth debate. From this it can be concluded that Siama's passion and humanity shows that it is the director's unflattering vision that is her most poetic.

Full of people wonder why the movie is named after that. The truth is, the movie has a lot of meaning. First and foremost, this refers to an actual portrait drawn by the main protagonist, Marianne, but he also cites the film as a cinematic study of the lady in question, Lewis, whose dress is on fire at one point, as if the love and passion she experienced towards Marianne made her shatter Spontaneously brooding.

The film won the Best Screenplay Award and the Queer Palm Award at the 2019 Cannes Film Festival and it deserved to win at all costs.

"Portrait of the Girl on Fire" is the most genuine and sincere artistic film I have seen in the past decade and in my opinion the most LBGT movie I have ever experienced. This movie is a must watch movie and not home, remember well.

Overrated, dull.

[chrisquarrie · 6/10 · 2 May 2020]

Very slow, not much plot. Beautiful to look at and... but it put me to sleep 3 times.

IMPRESSIVELY boring & almost entirely charmless

[Stay_away_from_the_Metropol · 3/10 · 15 March 2020]

Though the trailer did not speak to me, I began seeing all the rave reviews, and more importantly remarks from friends whose tastes I trusted, along the lines of, "it's beautiful- you will cry", and "...might be the best movie I have ever seen".

Well, I must say that not only do I not understand how someone would see this as one of the best movies they have ever seen, but I can't even comprehend how anyone would enjoy sitting through this movie AT ALL. I know this is going to be a cliche and expected thing to say, but, it is so fitting that the movie is about painting because this is the closest film equivalent I have ever seen to "watching paint dry".

First, the positive things: it was quite pretty to look at.

Now, the negatives: it is actually mindblowing to me just how boring this movie is. Like, one would have to purposefully write, cast, and edit this exactly as it is with the intention of making it one of the most stagnant films of all time. The characters are all completely drab and lacking any hint of unique characteristics, or even the most base level of charm. It is not at the fault of the cast, as it is clear that they are all very capable actresses, however the script does not allow them to do much with their performances, considering all the characters are so lifeless that it drains them of all likability by default. A love story intended to be emotive simply does not work when the characters are so unlikable. I did not care for any of the characters and by the time it was halfway over I really just wanted them to get whatever it was they were trying to do over with so I didn't have to see them anymore. I understand it was relevant to the era, but their inability to be honest with themselves or take ANY sort of action whatsoever, for so long, was slightly irritating to watch. Though I'm often a fan of slow-burning films, the snail's pace of this one does not do it any favors, considering there is almost zero pay off. The dialogue is so bland and empty, it feels lobotomizing. So much could have been cut from this dismal offering. I understand the film is about painting, but I could not find a purpose for the many long shots of brush strokes which all looked the same, and by no means represented anything symbolic. It did not help that the movie had almost zero music score, outside of a few scenes where music was relevant to the story (some of the only stimulating scenes in the entire film). The movie was so quiet, basically silent for half the time, and because of this I could hear the sub bass and epic soundscape scoring from The Invisible Man in the next theater over, and naturally, wished I was watching that grippingly entertaining movie again instead. I mean it when I say: this is one of the dullest movies I have ever seen.

"Not for me, mate"