Commentaires des utilisateurs

I went to this blind, as it were, not having read any reviews on here - I think this is probably the first - nor any of the critic reviews in the papers. I am a little surprised that it is showing so low on the star rating as, for myself and my wife, it was a throughly entertaining evening at the cinema. I knew very little about the Newlyn artistic set before but it would appear to have been as incestuous and fraught with failed and doomed relationships as the Bloomsbury literary group of a couple of decades later. Enter Florence, fresh from an overbearing father in London, to visit her brother who was already part of the set. Her beauty turns more than a few heads and A.J.Munnings, a wild and poetry-spouting bohemian, persuades her to sit as a model - and attempts to teach her the rudiments of drawing. Gilbert, in some ways the major-domo of the group but not an artist himself, also falls for Florence but she sees in him many of the traits of her strait-laced father and when Munnings proposes to her she accepts. Tragedy, as we will have garnered from what has gone before, will inevitably follow. The photography and cinematography is a pleasure to the eye and the producer has taken pains to get the period correct. Where it slightly falls down is in the character of Florence who, I have since learnt, was already unsettled and a depressive before she arrived at Lamorna. This would account for her later actions but we get no sense of her instability in the first half of the film. There may be an over-emphasis on "all down the pub for a jolly good drink and a sing-along and pay the landlord with a quick 10 second sketch for the bill" but overall we felt sufficiently interested in the history portrayed by the movie to do some subsequent research on the real characters portrayed.

It's beautifully acted and shot. Christopher Menaul, the director behind Belonging, Feast of July, Above Suspicion, 1st Night, Treatment and Punters, brings us this blob of nothingness. It's a true tale of love, liberty and scandal amongst the Edwardian artists' colony in Cornwall. I thought this film was fantastic in some ways and terrible in others. There's something for everyone here, though the two male leads were overcast. I refuse to totally dismiss this, because I find it quite engaging. The film's screenplay is tight and well-written, and worthy of praise. An intelligent script, with direction that does it justice. As a final rating, it receives 7 out of 10 from this reviewer.

We think of Alfred Munnings as someone born old - the reactionary curmudgeon grimly rejecting everything new in art. So a romantic tale of the young Munnings joining a Cornish artists' colony in 1912 makes an appealing topic, even though the film turns out to be little more than escapist wallpaper.

The screenplay is drawn from a novel based on real events, with the future Dame Laura Knight as the moving force behind the group, played with gusto by Hattie Morahan. Her patronising of gypsy communities may be called... well, patronising, but it lends colour to this film, along with the equine theme, giving us not only a dramatic race-meeting down on the beach, but also some well-deserved exposure for Munnings' acclaimed horse-paintings.

Artists' communes are always incestuous, and the main story is a love-triangle, with Munnings and his friend Gilbert competing for the hopelessly unstable Florence Carter-Wood, played in a suitably minor key by Emily Browning. A discreet view of a local artist's model emerging naked from the sea brings out the insecurity in Florence, who stands in front of the mirror anxiously comparing her own endowments. Later, when she is shown Munnings' portrait of her, proudly displayed at the Royal Academy, she attempts suicide because his portraits of other women are also on display. By now, Munnings and Florence have married, but the non-chemistry between them is painfully obvious. Gilbert's relationship with her is far more harmonious. But he is just off to the war, as the end-titles helpfully notify us.

The producers are obviously trying to achieve a Brideshead touch, but the characters are not sharply drawn, and we are mainly just drifting in an agreeable atmosphere of rocky coves, gypsy violins against the surf, passionate poetry recitals and credible period dialogue, not without appropriate elements of coarseness.

Laura's husband, the eminent Harold Knight, is somewhat thrown away. And one of the poems ends with the words 'Summer in February', which are left hanging there as the title of the film, though their meaning is hard indeed to fathom. IMDb mentions a running-time of 100 minutes, so my HD version at 82 must be missing some scenes. It is certainly missing professional post-production - ye gods, the audio is something like two seconds out of kilter with the video!

Every movie must have a story that either invokes some sort of inspiration or realization for its viewers otherwise it is equal to reel of toilet paper. Well I wouldn't compare this to toilet paper, but it has everything except story. I don't know how related it is to the true story it is based on but I can say it feels as if something is happening in the background and the viewers are kept away. The characters are so indifferent to each other that at some point I felt like I will break the screen but then the beauty of the scenes stopped me. The actors/actresses are struggling to make sense of the dialogues and expression not knowing why they are doing so. If this movie is based on a book and as I read from other reviews that it is really beautiful then the director and the screenplay writer has to find another job. No wonder it is rated so low.

Once I got past the 'machine-knitted' hand-knits and the Mills and Boon score . . . perfectly watchable. Don't expect to be informed about artistic life or how to learn to draw and paint. I have got to say I think Emily Browning was miscast; though delightfully dinky and looking marvellous in her lace blouses and smocks . . she did not convey privileged entitlement or fragile mentality very well, not exactly wooden but leaning towards wet lettuce leaf. I feel a proper Cornish artist boho would be perfectly happy to be in love with two lovely men . . so bit of a plot hole there. The actress that played Laura Knight was perfect. Although location spotting was fun and authentic . . nothing else was. It seemed to lack real Cornishness . . a huge failing for me. Had I been directing I would have gone even more up the cheesy Mills and Boon route with it. Sorry but I was disappoint.

This was billed as a period romance, but in reality all it really is is a bunch of people roaming about the British seaside in 1913 with some art and poetry thrown in. The story is so weak and predictable and the characters are so bland even the most ardent Romance lover will end up disappointed. As far as the acting goes, Dominic Cooper is just horrible, and Dan Stevens is duller than cardboard, Emily Browning however, is thankfully somewhat better. I know the story here is based on real life events, and so calling it "weak" might not sound very just, but I feel that it is, for even if they were dealing with common themes and stories they could have at least tried to make them more interesting or even engaging, but sadly they don't. The only good part about it is that you get really beautiful views of the English seaside, so, in short, watch this is you really really really want to spend some time on the English seaside.

Okay so this is no masterpiece but 5.3 out of 10 is rather harsh, the story is what it is (based on book around true events), its not shot or acted overly badly (although I must admit I'm not totally convinced by Emily Browning) and the scenery and paintings are attractive which in turn means, I think at least, its not a bad way to spend just under two hours of your time.

Why has is been so badly review then, I have no idea I happen to quite like it not because its monumental, makes me cry with sadness or leap with joy, but because it quietly and affectively tells a story worth being told. Perhaps the bad reviews reflect more of disaffection with the story rather than the vehicle of its portrayal. Either way if you like period dramas and have the time on your hands give a go and see what you think.

I find it strange, that Cambridge educated Stevens chose to leave probably the most successful period TV drama of the last 20 years to star in exactly the same role in a period movie! He was very good, understated, doesn't overact - leaves that to Dominic Cooper to ham things up. But what was Matthew doing in Cornwall, and why did he feel the need to go to Nigeria? I didn't really care for the love interest either, and for a woman who was supposed to be educated and liberated a la Austen, why does she marry the most inappropriate ego-centric genius who happens to ask her.

There was a scene as she walks along the cliff where I was literally willing her to throw herself over -might have spiced things up a bit.

Having said that, I did enjoy the film, mostly for the scenery and the accuracy of the manners and costume. The story line was weak and the heroine unattractive and ineffective. The two male leads were overcast but made the whole thing work.

By the way, a shout out to Cornwall, the most beautiful coastline of anywhere in the world.

The only saving grace was the coastal scenery in this tedious film. The main characters are not convincing and I was left with the feeling that I had learned very little about the artists group and their work. In addition I do like much of Munnings work but now will have to shed Dominic' theatrical poetry recitals when focusing on a painting. Added to the Sunday evening drama style and the theatrical music it was a mix that led us to leave the cinema before the end as we really did not care what happened to any of the characters. A waste of a sunny Friday evening. However as an advert for Cornish tourism it worked a treat. I must remember to read more reviews before going to a film rather than after.

Having read the book several times, to see the film was an absolute 'must'. It would have been difficult to adapt the whole story to screen, particularly into 100 minutes, the consequence of which, those who have not read the book may not easily grasp the real intricacies and make-up of some of the characters. However, it is a beautiful film, beautifully made. The music and the photography contribute in a magical but powerful way and all the actors play their characters superbly. It was obviously made with passion. It is a haunting and heartbreaking story, one that can be thought provoking. "Summer In February" is an emotional journey, but certainly one worth taking. I intend to see it again soon. Very soon.

Dominic Cooper sure has a talent for unsavoury characters. Plus the things I watch for Dan Stevens. Dan Stevens in period drama. That's an easy decision.

Painful to watch a gorgeous sensitive talented woman insisting on marrying a man, despite several misgivings, because everybody thinks he is a genius. Women making bad romantic decisions since the dawn of time. Geniuses make terrible partners. As for genius, I don't know, never heard of AJ Munnings, the epilogue tells us he was successful, maybe in his lifetime, he certainly hasn't remained in art history. Maybe in Britain, I don't know. Well, this served its purpose, I had never heard of these people or this story so everything took me by surprise, well, the main events let's say.

And all through the first half I had a strong feeling of deja-vu, as in the characters and entanglements were every familiar, but I had never logged this movie, so there must be another one very similar. I just can't remember which. It was another minor British one, not highly rated.

This is a decent, good-looking period drama, but I can't say I'm crazy about the subject matter. Worth it for Dan Stevens though, should you be so inclined.

"Summer in February" is a bio-pic based on real people--just the sort of story I usually like. The retired history teacher in me likes learning about actual events and characters. However, as much as I wanted to like the film, I found it very ponderous and unappealing.

The film is set just before the First World War. It begins with a small community of bohemian artists who have made the Cornish coast of England their home. Here, they seem happy and productive. However, when a newcomer arrives, things begin to take a turn towards the dark side. Florence Carter Wood (Emily Browning) is a rich young lady who wants to study from other artists and she's readily accepted by this group. One guy is infatuated with her but he unfortunately keeps this to himself. In the meantime, another artist, A.J. Munnings (Dominic Cooper) falls for her and asks her to marry him. The fact that she said she would marry Munnings is odd, at least in the film, because there isn't much build up to this--they meet, spend a bit of time together and suddenly they marry. I have no idea if their courtship was like this in real life, but I do know that their marriage was NOT a marriage made in Heaven! Again, this was a bit confusing, as you see Wood marry him willingly--but on their honeymoon, she tried to kill herself. The film seems to say that she knew he was sleeping around but still married him and then tried to take her own life. While this made little sense and the film tried to paint her as a sad but understandable woman, I assume she was mentally ill--though the film seemed to de-emphasize this. Again, this did seem a bit confusing as healthy and normal folks DON'T marry people who they dislike and don't try suicide on their honeymoon! This just isn't rational and I was looking for some possible explanation--and without mental illness, it left me confused--especially since you really aren't sure if Munnings actually did anything wrong and the film showed him trying, in vain, to make the marriage work--at least at first. What's next for the happy couple? See the film if you'd like to know.

When I went on the internet to learn more about Munnings and Wood, there wasn't a lot of information about their marriage. Munnings later went on to be one of Britain's most celebrated artists--that was easy to find. But, about Wood, there is very little information. So, how close this is to the true story, I have no idea. After seeing the film, however, I'm going to say something that usually violates what I want in bio-pics--I wish the story had been VERY different even if the film became more fictional than not! This is because I didn't like the characters--they all seemed brooding, dull and hard to relate to or care about in any way. This does make selling the film problematic--and when the film was recently released, it was a box office failure. Now, it's just been released to DVD--having debuted on Netflix this week. Considering how ponderous the film is at times and how contradictory the characters act, however, I just cannot recommend it. Now I am not saying it's all bad--the cinematography was lovely and the acting was good--but without likable characters (or at least ones you can understand) and a sluggish pace, it's really not a film that most folks would or could enjoy.

By the way, if you do watch the film, be aware that there is a fair amount of full frontal nudity in the first portion of the movie. It didn't seem gratuitous or inappropriate, as these artists painted nudes and, like true bohemians, had a different moral compass than the typical Brit of the day.

This movie is about a love triangle between the new girl in town, Florence (Emily Browning) and her two biggest fans, AJ and Gilbert. Everyone wants to paint Florence, but when it comes to the latter half of the film, it stalls in keeping the story flowing in a good pace.

Emily Browning has full frontal nudity at around the 22minute mark, but after that, its a bit of a drag.

I knew nothing of this artistic group and was keen on discovering their story. But everything is so dull! You do not feel the passion and turmoil in the characters (Dan Stevens has one and a half expression throughout the film) or it takes the form of violent outbursts that seem unexplainable or just the result of neurotic impulses. You do not feel the connection of the painters with nature, apart for the omnipresence of horses (unescapable considering the type of paintings AJ became famous for). The scenes are overly repetitive (Dan Stevens fishing, filmed in the same way) and Florence taking poison twice with the same type of shots. Besides, everything is too heavily predictable. The beautiful scenery of Cornwall cannot make up for an utter lack of substance and conviction. Very boring, eventually.

Biographical films do their job depicting the real events, but the way they were transformed to the screen matter a lot, This one was decent as a film, but as a someone's real story I was impressed. I learn about the world and its famous people by watching films. I did not know this person, so thanks to the film. It centres on the three people as seen them on the poster, but mostly Florence's perspective that beautifully played by Emily Browning. She was introduced by her brother to his circle where she develops a true feeling for one and later decides to marry another for the different reason. The remaining film narrates her life falling apart and can she make it all right to the end.

Being a biopic is what its strength, but the story is another version of many films and the people around us. The cast was great, but Emily Browning was on the top of the show. Shot in beautiful places, and I loved the background score. These things make it worth a watch, but if you are interested in the art and artists, you might enjoy it well. If you decide to watch out of the interest, make sure you keep low expectation, especially for the final part. Because people are disappointed how it ended than what it revealed. In a biopic they can't change just to please the viewers, instead the viewers have to learn to accept the truth.

My issue was the filmmaking, I was not that impressed with that. It was adapted from a book of the same name, but the film narrated only a few years of the life of Florence. Especially around her romance and marriage life, prior to that events are not known. So that makes the story too familiar compared with the other films. It should have improved a bit with the additional details out of the original source. A small research would have helped them on that. Other than that this film was quite interesting with some unexpected development in the important portion. So it can be watched once, but you won't remember for a long.

6/10

Yes Dan Stevens, Dominic Cooper and the actress who played Elinor from Sense & Sensibility (BBC 2008) were all cast in this movie about the artist A.J. Munnings who lived in a bohemian art colony in Cornwall in 1913.I was not aware that this artist later became president of the Royal Acadamy.My wife & some of her friends went to the R.A. recently and saw "Lady on a Horse" the celebrated painting of Munnings wife who later committed suicide.They returned from this trip to one of the friend's house and saw the DVD of "Summer in February".Knowing I am a keen amateur artist my wife generously bought me a copy of the DVD (together with a R.A. brochure of his work) so I could see for myself which I did today.

Criticism? I would have liked to have seen more of Munning's paintings and less of his character spouting poetry and his negative personal character traits.We also did not learn enough about his art technique.I agree Cornwall provides an artistic backdrop having visited the county myself several times e.g. St Ives.I was never convinced I was seeing anything but a bunch of actors pretending to paint.I would like to have seen a professional artist painting e.g. convicted fraudster John Mynott who has the ability to paint in the style of the masters with suitable certified paintings after spending a year in prison - see his "Confessions of an Art Forger" videos on www.youtube.com. which are instructive.Film producers dub on professional musicians when doing biopics of famous historical figures and likewise get professional painters to ape famous artists' work.Mediocre I gave it 6/10.

If you are still mourning over Dan Stevens dying in Downton Abbey, here is a picture with the blond-haired, dreamy eyed Englishman. However, don't expect much when it comes to the story, except that Dan comes across pretty much the same as Matthew Crawley.

Where do I begin? Hum, well, it's a period movie, apparently about a factual event. Dominic Cooper plays A. J. Munnings, a talented artist who went onto to be a famous English painter. Set on the Cornwall coast in England, it's a story of a group of artists who do nothing but paint. Dan Stevens, who plays Gilbert Evans, is not an artist, but a friend of A.J. and in the military.

The story is a strange love triangle. Enter Florence Carter Wood, another young wannabe artist. She arrives in Cornwall to be with her brother and meets both A.J. and Gilbert. Gilbert quickly falls in love with her, but A.J. wins the spoils instead. However, the entire affair is nonsensical. Florence, who comes across as a pretty, young aristocratic woman, finds A.J. fascinating because of his talent. However, he has a dark side wherein he is moody, belligerent, and drinks too much. Even though his personality is well revealed before the wedding, she for some odd reason proceeds with the marriage as if she is helpless to do so otherwise. Of course, her decision reaps an unhappy life, while Gilbert broods over his loss of his true love.

Since I don't want to give the "spoils" away on this plot, I'll keep my remaining comments minimal regarding the final outcome. The location on the Cornwall coast has spectacular scenery. There are a few unnecessary scenes of total frontal female nudity, which added absolutely no value to the story whatsoever. (Three of these individuals in Summer in February also starred in the 2008 BBC Sense & Sensibility - Dominic Cooper, who played Willoughby; Dan Stevens, who played Edward Ferrars; and Hattie Morahan, who played Elinor.) Unfortunately, I cannot come away with anything lasting about this movie. Though well acted, the story itself turned out to be a melodramatic affair that made no sense to me whatsoever. The only pleasure in it was seeing Dan Stevens once again in a familiar period piece.

As a hopeless romantic, I found this film beautifully satisfying. I knew nothing about the artists group depicted here, but I have certainly been motivated to learn about them as a result of viewing this film. The Cornish setting is so evocatively filmed, the score so compelling, the costuming so authentic and the performances so skillfully done, that I was captivated from the start. Seeing Hattie Morahan, Dan Stevens and Dominic Cooper together again--they were all in Sense and Sensibility on Masterpiece a few years ago--was a delight. I think they are all such excellent actors. I had only see Emily Browning once before, but I found that I could hardly take my eyes off her when she was in a scene. Now I want to visit the Cornish coast and stay in the little hotel depicted in the film! The IMDb rating is much too low for this film!!

Summer in February feels like one of those movies that knows it's not going to get nominated for any Academy Awards, especially since the film is a United Kingdom (UK) productions and the producers probably weren't even sure if it was going to get released in the U.S., but somehow ends up feeling like an "accidental Oscar Baiter". The story is based on the true story of the Lamorna group in the U.K., and centers around three characters. It is a love triangle between AJ Munnings (Dominic Cooper), his new wife, Florence Carter Wood (Emily Browning), and his friend and Florence's eventual lover, Gilbert Evans (Dan Stevens).

Summer in February is a beautifully shot movie and feels like a period piece with the correct costumes, and some of the acting is pretty good, but for my taste, it just lacked action. The three leads are good in their respective roles. Dominic Cooper, in the role of AJ, brings an easy level of energy, though he seems somewhat incapable of yelling. His character, true story or not, is just unlikeable. Are we supposed to sympathize with a man who abuses his wife that way? No wonder she had an affair with his friend. Sure, he changes his attitude near the end, but it's just too late for me. Dan Stevens is good as Gilbert, though he has moments where he overacts (hence the Oscar bait feel). His character is way more likable than AJ's, and that just seems somewhat unnecessary. Emily Browning is easily the weakest of the three. She is an Australian actress, and I thought she was sounded Australian, rather than British, but eventually, I got used to her, although, she does have a slow delivery, and no real chemistry between either of the leads (Dominic Cooper and Dan Stevens). There are other actors and characters in the film, but none of them were as well developed as the three leads.

The direction by Christopher Menaul (unlike Dallas Buyers Club) seems to be playing it easy for the most part. The musical score by Benjamin Wallfisch is melodramatic and supposedly "uplifting" as to be expected in a period drama. I know this based off a true story, but that doesn't excuse the messy nature of the film. Summer In February just feels like one of those films that they made and forgot to give a flavor to.