Avant toi

Emelia Clarke's work on Game of Thrones is the only reason I watched this movie in the first place. She is occasionally transcendent in that role, where she must keep her eyebrows restrained, and I wanted to see what would happen if her amazingly mobile brows were set free ... free as her dragons.

There are a lot of solid things about this movie. The story (of a young woman who cares for a quadriplegic young man) is strong, the direction and cinematography good though not exceptional, the screen writing also good-not-exceptional, the supporting cast (especially Janet McTeer and Charles Dance)and leading man (Sam C.) quite good, and the emotional notes it hits, though all predictable and often a bit overwrought (cue swelling, heartwarming music...), ring true enough for an unabashed romance.

So, not really my type of movie. But I am happy to say that I was (almost) completely taken by Clarke's performance. Her character here is nothing like her GoT role, but is in many ways an equally fantasy-based role (but with clumsy shyness and striped leggings instead of fireproof skin and dragons) -- and Clarke manages to pull this character out of romantic fantasy into believability as effectively as she brings to life her role as Mother of Dragons. She has the combination of charisma, physical beauty, character-acting chops, and inner luminosity to pull a fairly nice, 7-of-10 heartwarmer up to a 9-of-10 charmer.

Felt very derivative of Intouchables I did however really enjoy the romance that was in this film.

Emilia Clark has the most expressive face I have ever seen on camera.

Watch her eyebrows! That's all I have to say. You could almost watch this entire movie just staring at her eyebrows… I had a hard time not doing that.

I really enjoyed her character. She is a silly, eccentric, perpetually happy girl. With a pretty eclectic sense of style.

Emilia Clarke was perfectly cast for this role.

She ventures far from her intense power house character the Mother of Dragons from Game of Thrones.

At times it was hard to tell if Emilia Clarke the actress is just extremely expressive with her face, or if it was something she was doing for the role… which I suppose speaks to how well she did.

Because I'm thinking she was exaggerating it, therefore she played the part marvellously.

The male lead is Sam Claflin, who you will more than likely recognize but not be able to place. His largest role as of late is the water proficient fighter from the Hunger Games.

I also feel he played the part very well. No complaints, He has a great smile, or smirk, that he does through out, which allows us to empathize with him a little more when he seeming unlikable.

There are a lot of light moments, actually the whole movie has a very light tone to it… it's a serious topic, but with Clarke's character it's hard for anything to be too serious or solemn. There are those sombre moments, which is, I'm sure, why I was given a tissue box at the advance screening.

There were only a few editing aspects I didn't enjoy. There were far too many cuts in certain scenes… Emilia walking up to the mansion for the first time and her conversation on the bench with her boyfriend. They were distracting. This was sprinkled throughout the film to greater or lesser degrees.

I think the film looked pretty, great locations. And a wonderful set, really. The house Claflin's character lives in looks very nice. I loved all the walls that opened when pushed on. Very modern, and expensive I'm sure.

There is a little treat for any Harry Potter fans! Neville Longbottom, all grown up and looking fit, he plays the part of Emilia Clarke's boyfriend. I hope to see him in more roles, maybe even a lead one day.

As for family friendliness, this movie is a G, it is good to go. In the opening scene Claflin is presumably being intimate with his girlfriend, they are obviously naked, but nothing is shown, they are under sheets.

There is no cursing or obscenities in this movie worth mentioning.

The movie really was adorable! I knew exactly what to expect since I read the book, but I loved the adaptation.

What helps the movie most is that the novelist, Jojo Moyees, wrote her own screenplay. She did a great job transitioning the story from paper to screen. Little things that were left out of the novel weren't really needed to move the story along.

Both Emilia Clarke and Sam Clafin were excellent. Her facial expressions were amazing and her insane eyebrows deserve some type of award all on their own.

I thoroughly enjoyed the soundtrack as well.

Don't listen to critics and go see this movie.

Absolutely brilliant film. Those who criticise it for dealing with the subject of disabilty should look past the fact Will is disabled and look at the film in the light of what it aims to be, a touching, romance film. Emelia Clarke is great. Sam Claflin is brilliant. A definite must see film.

How can so many people get this this movie wrong, especially the critics? The high point of the film is the performance by Emelia Clarke. She is hair-brained, and scatty, completely adorable and wonderful.The camera-work is gorgeous and the soundtrack is second to none.

Lou (Emilia Clarke) gets a job as a carer to a man (William) who is paralyzed more or less from the neck down. A budding friendship/romance develops; and this is 90% a feel good movie.

The criticism of the movie that it depicts a life with profound disability as almost worthless is completely mistaken. The movie depicts William's life as worthwhile and precious. It is William's own judgment that his life cannot go on as it is, and that he would prefer to die.

With regard to this, the movie does tend to downplay the pain and suffering that William experiences. Instead it focuses on the good times and precious moments he spends will Lou. And as already stated, the character of Lou is completely adorable. I am in love.