Portrait of a Lady on Fire (B or 3/4 stars)
Passion runs high in Celina Sciamma's romance, 'Portrait of a Lady on Fire'. Brittany, France, 1770: French noblewoman/countess (Valeria Golino) hires a ladies' "companion", Marianne (Noemie Merlant), for her beautiful daughter, Heloise (Adele Haenel), who has just come out of a convent & stills feels a crippling grief from the loss of her suicidal sister. Under the guise of this "companion", Marianne is actually an artist that the countess has commissioned to paint a portrait of Heloise in secret because her strong-willed daughter refuses to pose for a portrait. The countess wants to show-off the portrait to Heloise's wealthy, 'arranged' fiancee in Milan as a way of getting him to finally view his future bride -- and Heloise wants no part of this marriage.
During the day the two ladies go for strolls along the cliff side sea, which gives Marianne a chance to intensely gaze at her subject's face/body to commit it to memory so that she can paint her at night. Heloise takes notice that she is being observed and, becomes aware of WHY only when Marianne - disappointed in her work - destroys the half-completed portrait. Marianne confesses her ruse and, with burgeoning feelings towards her {and vice-versa}, Heloise allows to paint her for a 2nd portrait. Their relationship blooms. In the 2nd portrait, in a landscape locale, the hem of Heloise's dress catches fire before it is expediently put out. Over the next days, an intense, yet gentle love affair ensues btwn. the two women. But in 18th c. France, and with the days ticking by until Marianne's commission will end, what - if anything - could become of this liaison?
Critics have raved this film for Celine Sciamma's direction/writing, the acting, the cinematography & its LGBTQ themes. For sure, 'Portrait of a Lady on Fire' is an aesthetically pleasing, 18th century desire-filled romantic drama. However, for me, I was ultimately left a bit cold by the film {and the central romance}, even this is an assured production with actors who are more than game. I oddly liked the 1st half of the film more; watching the slow burn obsession grow btwn. the artist & the subject of the titular painting -- I was eager to see where it all went. That said, once the reveal came {that Marianne is not a hired companion, but a painted} and the 'love' aspect takes hold, the story became standard; like I've seen this all before.
Their love is built on an erotic female gaze -- interesting. But I never felt that their passionate affair went as deep & tortured as it could get. But I don't want to get too negative. The ending, as an isolated cinematic sequence, is superb. We watch Heloise at a concert look down at the stage from her balcony box while a stirring version of Vivaldi's Four Seasons {very important to the plot} blares on below. The emotions that trip across her face for a solid 3 minutes are as engrossing as anything we saw during the rest of the film; or for most films this year, for that matter. The sequence reminded me of the riveting 'stare at the stage while emotions roil inside you' moment that Nicole Kidman gives us during 2004's Birth.
I commend the filmmakers for providing a beautifully-made sexual obsession tale told from a woman's artistic perspective. But I maintain feeling a coldness -- many viewers might feel more heat & passion from it than me. I also wasn't onboard for an odd subplot involving the ladies helping Heloise's maid through an abortion. There's nothing wrong with that, I just didn't see how it as pertinent to the already languorous plot. I can't fault the performances; well modulated, with perfectly calibrated hushed silences, longing looks, et al. Claire Mathon's cinematography is painterly & exquisite. And despite my feelings of the romance/film leaving me cold in the end, I commend this sensitive, accomplished feminist telling of a patriarchal society-set romance btwn. a commoner female & her noblewoman subject.
During the day the two ladies go for strolls along the cliff side sea, which gives Marianne a chance to intensely gaze at her subject's face/body to commit it to memory so that she can paint her at night. Heloise takes notice that she is being observed and, becomes aware of WHY only when Marianne - disappointed in her work - destroys the half-completed portrait. Marianne confesses her ruse and, with burgeoning feelings towards her {and vice-versa}, Heloise allows to paint her for a 2nd portrait. Their relationship blooms. In the 2nd portrait, in a landscape locale, the hem of Heloise's dress catches fire before it is expediently put out. Over the next days, an intense, yet gentle love affair ensues btwn. the two women. But in 18th c. France, and with the days ticking by until Marianne's commission will end, what - if anything - could become of this liaison?
Critics have raved this film for Celine Sciamma's direction/writing, the acting, the cinematography & its LGBTQ themes. For sure, 'Portrait of a Lady on Fire' is an aesthetically pleasing, 18th century desire-filled romantic drama. However, for me, I was ultimately left a bit cold by the film {and the central romance}, even this is an assured production with actors who are more than game. I oddly liked the 1st half of the film more; watching the slow burn obsession grow btwn. the artist & the subject of the titular painting -- I was eager to see where it all went. That said, once the reveal came {that Marianne is not a hired companion, but a painted} and the 'love' aspect takes hold, the story became standard; like I've seen this all before.
Their love is built on an erotic female gaze -- interesting. But I never felt that their passionate affair went as deep & tortured as it could get. But I don't want to get too negative. The ending, as an isolated cinematic sequence, is superb. We watch Heloise at a concert look down at the stage from her balcony box while a stirring version of Vivaldi's Four Seasons {very important to the plot} blares on below. The emotions that trip across her face for a solid 3 minutes are as engrossing as anything we saw during the rest of the film; or for most films this year, for that matter. The sequence reminded me of the riveting 'stare at the stage while emotions roil inside you' moment that Nicole Kidman gives us during 2004's Birth.
I commend the filmmakers for providing a beautifully-made sexual obsession tale told from a woman's artistic perspective. But I maintain feeling a coldness -- many viewers might feel more heat & passion from it than me. I also wasn't onboard for an odd subplot involving the ladies helping Heloise's maid through an abortion. There's nothing wrong with that, I just didn't see how it as pertinent to the already languorous plot. I can't fault the performances; well modulated, with perfectly calibrated hushed silences, longing looks, et al. Claire Mathon's cinematography is painterly & exquisite. And despite my feelings of the romance/film leaving me cold in the end, I commend this sensitive, accomplished feminist telling of a patriarchal society-set romance btwn. a commoner female & her noblewoman subject.