|Page 2 of 23:||           |
|Index||224 reviews in total|
Unfortunately it is indeed out! I have been waiting to see this version of Anna Karenina forever. I have recently read this book, and this version is the worst production. I said OK, Keira as Anna, it will be difficult to watch, her being such an inappropriate actress for this role, but in the end all the other parts of the movie made me say this is a huge waste of time... If you haven't read the book it will be very difficult to understand what this movie is about. The actors are poor, except Jude Law, their accent is also bad. The fact that they turned it into a low-budget movie just makes me really upset. It is over-directed, it is a kitsch.
I have never written a film review or offered an opinion on any site, but this movie drove me to it. Taking liberties with a great classic for the sake of making it film-worthy is one thing, but this confused and confusing attempt wound up less than effective and an interminable bore to boot. The history is muddled, the opulent costumes are not authentically of any period, let alone Russia of the time, and the scenery and stage sets add nothing but artifice to the overall effect. I won't attempt the wooden acting, or maybe that's the miserable direction, but the fictional yet palpable character of Anna Karenina has been wholly lost to some unrecognizable whim.
What a huge disappointment. I waited since summer for this movie. I am a huge Pride & Prejudice lover. The movie was dull, boring, incredibly distant from the passion of Anna and her lover. Aaron Johnson looked gay. Matthew MacFadyen was ridiculously frivolous and poor Mr. Gleeson was entirely out of place, out of his element and had less sex appeal than a rodent. Insufficient development of Anna's marriage. She just cried throughout. Using a stage as a prop was also ridiculous! Really? A stage? How boring. I nodded half way through and only stayed til the end out of stubborness. What a disappointment. Joe Wright had an opportunity to take us on a Russian voyage and he blew it! I'm still hopping mad.
Not much to say except this film is arty farty pretentious rubbish. Was looking forward to watching an engrossing film of a good book but after the first 30 mins gave up trying to understand what the heck was going on. Only glad that I hadn't paid to watch it if I had I would have been strongly tempted to ask for my money back. It would appear that the producers think that the inclusion of Keira Knightly is enough to guarantee box office success how wrong can they be. Whoever came up with the format of this film needs their head examining it may appeal to the cinema snobs but as far as the general public is concerned it's a candidate for the raspberry award.
Seriously? I thought I was watching the wrong movie. It looked like
Kevin Kline was one of the first actors. With the smirks and feeble
attempts at humor it couldn't be the right movie. No offense to Kevin
Kline, but A Fish Called Wanda vibe isn't what I expected in this
movie. It felt as if I was seeing a play on film without editing out
the set changes.
At Vronsky's first entrance (doing a good Gene Wilder impression) I'd had enough of this spoof.
Maybe this movie is okay if you haven't read the book, but having read it & loved it, this film is a joke.
Despite the title, let me begin anew by stating that I absolutely love
Joe Wright. He makes beautiful films, and this one is not the
exception. However, the script was nonsensical and lacked any sort of
sensitivity or heart (why is Anna even supposed to fall for Vronsky in
this version? And, why should we care? this movie did not give us
reason to do so), (most of) the acting (save Macfadyen, Macdonald,
Williams, and sometimes Taylor- Johnson) was ridiculous and
over-the-top, and the encompassing of the theater - while a brilliant
idea - was completely lacking for an on-screen venture.
This was basically a myriad of fashion photo-shoots for Miss Knightley. Should've just been a cheesy commercial itself.
And, I consider this a travesty considering that this review is coming from a moviegoer who absolutely adores Matthew Macfadyen, Jude Law, and Kelly Macdonald, who are all great actors. But unfortunately, this entire movie fell flat for me.
First and foremost a confession: I have not yet read Anna Karenina and
therefore can't judge how well Joe Wright's interpretation captured the
spirit, style and message of Tolstoy's novel.
What I do know is that I have just seen a daring and immensely powerful film. Clever use of tableaux, surrealist elements and breathtaking visual images bring out the character's emotions so strongly that halfway through the film I felt like I wasn't a mere spectator anymore. I WAS Anna, so completely and utterly was I engrossed in her world.
Knightley performs well. For years I was convinced she could only play one single type of role - the pretty girl who stands around and bats her eyelashes - but "A Dangerous Method" and now "Anna Karenina" have changed my mind. Knightley's matured as an actress, and now manages to give a depth to her characters that makes them utterly believable.
Though many have criticized him, I think Aaron Taylor-Johnson works as Vronsky. He's charming and seductive and it's easy to see why Anna cannot resist him.
And as for Jude Law, his portrayal of passionless, prudish, but oh, so decent Karenin was nothing less than Oscar worthy.
Wright's "Pride and Prejudice" is mediocre, his "Atonement" is good. His "Anna Karenina", however, is sensual and stunning and I can only recommend it.
I wanted to see Tolstoy but instead I thought I saw Mel Brooks. This
movie could be renamed Springtime For Anna. Except it wasn't funny.
A great cast poorly used in a pretentious adaptation.
Jude Law did well with the material given. Keira Knightley, always a pleasure to look at, was miscast in this one. Aaron Taylor-Johnson as Vronsky reminded me of Gene Wilder in Young Frankenstein.
The switch from stage play scenario to movie scenario only confused the plot.
Thank God Tolstoy is not alive to seek legal recourse.
I wonder how IMDb could give this film a 7.0.
Some nice visuals all that can be said in its defense.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Leo Tolstoy's Anna Karenina is one of the most acclaimed novels of all
time, not least of all because of the excellence of the book's themes.
These themes of Tolstoy's are expressed extremely well in Joe Wright's
adaptation of Anna Karenina. First and foremost and the area that
really sets the film apart is the theatricality of certain settings in
the film. Many scenes take place on sets made to resemble the stage,
especially early on. I was initially baffled by this choice but I
slowly came to realize that it functions as a way to make visual the
artificiality of the world inhabited by Anna Karenina, specifically its
outdated values. It's extremely clear that Russia was undergoing a
major transition during the time in which the narrative is set. Trains
and railways play a major role in the film and of course trains are a
common symbol of technological progress. There's more than passing
reference to the freeing of the serfs and the radical ideology even of
some aristocrats, which echoes the life of Tolstoy himself. Much is
also made of the cultural shifts in Moscow and St. Petersburg, the
former of which had apparently become rather old-fashioned compared to
the relatively progressive Petersburg at the time. The film suggests
that the reaction of the country's upper class was to ignore the major
changes that were occurring and cling all the harder to the past,
especially with regards to social institutions. Thus the eponymous
heroine finds it impossible to escape her loveless marriage with any
social standing intact, which eventually drives her mad.
This isn't just a plainly literal translation of the source, however, as Wright's clever use of the stage is just one of many visual techniques he uses to make this material cinematic. Wright's use of landscape is unusually strong, particularly in the surreal final shot. His use of mirrors made me think of some of the works of RW Fassbinder, another supreme visual stylist. Another neat touch is having background characters freeze and fade into the background to suggest the heightened emotional state of the main characters, particularly in the scene where Anna has her first dance with the rakish Vronsky. Overall, another excellent movie from one of the most promising English language directors of his generation and the best 2012 film I've seen so far.
There have been many cinematic versions of Leo Tolstoy's epic novel
ANNA KARENINA but for this viewer none matches the creative excellence
and power of this very different version. Tom Stoppard wrote the
screenplay for this adaptation and the work was directed with eye
toward timeless artistry by Joe Wright. There will be some detractors
who feel that cinema is cinema and stage plays are stage plays, but
Wright's decision to combine the two works extraordinarily well. The
flavor of Tolstoy's story and mood are maintained and yet made somehow
more vital by Wright's electing to place this story as though it were
happening on a theater stage (including catwalks, backstage, audience
and theater boxes etc.) The story is theatrical and Wright embellishes
the last of the Czarist days with great aplomb.
The story needs no summary: Anna Karenina (Keira Knightley more beautiful to behold and brilliant in acting than ever) is married to Alexei Karenin (Jude Law in a tour de force acting role) and is happy in her station with her slightly cool husband but very warm young son. Then quite unexpectedly her eyes meet those of the wealthy Count Vronsky (Aaron Taylor- Johnson in a career making turn) and their love is immediate. The flirtation is enhanced by some of the most beautiful waltzing choreography on film. We are in St. Petersburg, Russia and divorce is something only a man /husband can initiate so as the love affair reaches a point of no return Anna must decide whether to bear the shame of a divorced woman or just be the mistress of the incredibly handsome Count and remain married. In contrast to the Anna/Vronsky duet is the passion of the country lad Levin (Domhnall Gleeson) for the aristocratic Kitty (Alicia Vikander) and throughout the story the two forms of love are paralleled. Anna becomes pregnant with Vronsky's child, an act that quietly infuriates Karenin as it makes Anna's affair public - a condition no one can tolerate in that society - and subsequently results in Anna's leaving her beloved son after she gives birth to the daughter belonging to Vronsky: Karenin will care for the child. The climax comes with Anna's infamous suicide and the story ends with all loose ends tied.
The exceptionally strong supporting cast includes such fine actors as Matthew Macfadyen, Kelly Macdonald, Olivia Williams, Ruth Wilson, Emily Watson, Michelle Dockery, and Shirley Henderson. The luxuriant costumes are by Jacqueline Durran, the cinematography is by Seamus McGarvey, and the glorious musical score is by Dario Marianelli. A Stunning Film.
|Page 2 of 23:||           |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Official site||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|