Reviews

  • Jul 16, 2020

    The fact that it was filmed on location in Russia, the gorgeous and intricate costumes, and the intelligent casting (Sean Bean is fantastic as Vronsky) make this the most enjoyable film adaption of Tolstoy's masterpiece. While I believe the script itself could have been more thoughtful, the film captures the essence of the novel and is truly visually brilliant and very true to the novel. I absolutely recommend this version over the 2012 one.

    The fact that it was filmed on location in Russia, the gorgeous and intricate costumes, and the intelligent casting (Sean Bean is fantastic as Vronsky) make this the most enjoyable film adaption of Tolstoy's masterpiece. While I believe the script itself could have been more thoughtful, the film captures the essence of the novel and is truly visually brilliant and very true to the novel. I absolutely recommend this version over the 2012 one.

  • Sep 19, 2019

    The best adaptation of Leo Tolstoy's novel by far.

    The best adaptation of Leo Tolstoy's novel by far.

  • Sep 14, 2019

    Exeptional film adaption, with an outstanding Sophie Marceau.

    Exeptional film adaption, with an outstanding Sophie Marceau.

  • Aug 18, 2015

    not the best version of this.

    not the best version of this.

  • Doctor S Super Reviewer
    May 29, 2015

    I can't tell you how faithful this opulent version of the classic tragedy is, but it was very highly regarded compared to other film versions according to reviews I read. What I can tell you should come as no surprise - squeezing 600 pages into two hours and change results in much collateral damage to the material. One peerless aspect of the production is the sense of time and place, filmed entirely in Moscow and Saint Petersburg which is where Tolstoy's story unfolds to the stirring swells of Rachmaninoff and Tchaikovsky on the soundtrack. A very interesting choice involves the language. The actors in all the major roles speak English with their native accent, which is the way to go if you can't get the dialog in the original tongue. Nothing sounds phonier than actors speaking English with a Russian accent to try and convey that they are actually speaking Russian. But to add to the sense of immersion, director Bernard Rose hired many Russians for the minor roles and subtitled their speech. The lead actors even say a couple lines in Russian to add to the authenticity. Overall, I found these tactics unusual but very effective. Nevertheless, while I love Sophie Marceau and feel she has the capacity to successfully play Anna speaking her native tongue, something goes missing in her English interpretation. Obviously the producers felt confident in hiring her to star in this extravagantly expensive venture, which is a testament to the international appeal she showed in her role in Braveheart. There are certainly other problems in evidence - I didn't feel much sympathy towards Anna and the Duke Vronsky, never been a sucker for undying love at first sight, and I felt they rather deserved what they got, Anna's extreme fateful decision notwithstanding. Also the story of Alfred Molina's character Levin must have been important to the social commentary of the book, but his scenes seem completely independent to the events in the rest of this movie, and thus his usual quality performance is rendered inconsequential. On the whole this is a version worth watching for the unprecedented authenticity of the production which helps cover the gaps of emotional resonance.

    I can't tell you how faithful this opulent version of the classic tragedy is, but it was very highly regarded compared to other film versions according to reviews I read. What I can tell you should come as no surprise - squeezing 600 pages into two hours and change results in much collateral damage to the material. One peerless aspect of the production is the sense of time and place, filmed entirely in Moscow and Saint Petersburg which is where Tolstoy's story unfolds to the stirring swells of Rachmaninoff and Tchaikovsky on the soundtrack. A very interesting choice involves the language. The actors in all the major roles speak English with their native accent, which is the way to go if you can't get the dialog in the original tongue. Nothing sounds phonier than actors speaking English with a Russian accent to try and convey that they are actually speaking Russian. But to add to the sense of immersion, director Bernard Rose hired many Russians for the minor roles and subtitled their speech. The lead actors even say a couple lines in Russian to add to the authenticity. Overall, I found these tactics unusual but very effective. Nevertheless, while I love Sophie Marceau and feel she has the capacity to successfully play Anna speaking her native tongue, something goes missing in her English interpretation. Obviously the producers felt confident in hiring her to star in this extravagantly expensive venture, which is a testament to the international appeal she showed in her role in Braveheart. There are certainly other problems in evidence - I didn't feel much sympathy towards Anna and the Duke Vronsky, never been a sucker for undying love at first sight, and I felt they rather deserved what they got, Anna's extreme fateful decision notwithstanding. Also the story of Alfred Molina's character Levin must have been important to the social commentary of the book, but his scenes seem completely independent to the events in the rest of this movie, and thus his usual quality performance is rendered inconsequential. On the whole this is a version worth watching for the unprecedented authenticity of the production which helps cover the gaps of emotional resonance.

  • Apr 23, 2014

    It was good to learn this famous story in a much shorter version than the book! I did find the attraction between Anna and count vronsky a bit artificial but I did like the way Marceau portrayed how she was upset. I couldnt see the love in kitty's eyes either. It was a good film though. Even at home without surround sound the extremes in noise levels seemed obvious and too much for some reason.

    It was good to learn this famous story in a much shorter version than the book! I did find the attraction between Anna and count vronsky a bit artificial but I did like the way Marceau portrayed how she was upset. I couldnt see the love in kitty's eyes either. It was a good film though. Even at home without surround sound the extremes in noise levels seemed obvious and too much for some reason.

  • Feb 27, 2013

    I loved this as much as the latest adaptation starring Keira Knightley!!!

    I loved this as much as the latest adaptation starring Keira Knightley!!!

  • Sep 25, 2012

    Oyuncu seçimleri Tolstoy'un eseriyle genelde uyumlu. Ama bu kadar uzun bir eseri 108 dakikaya s??d?rmaya çal???nca, film kitab?n k?sa bir özeti gibi olmu?. Yine de fena de?il.

    Oyuncu seçimleri Tolstoy'un eseriyle genelde uyumlu. Ama bu kadar uzun bir eseri 108 dakikaya s??d?rmaya çal???nca, film kitab?n k?sa bir özeti gibi olmu?. Yine de fena de?il.

  • Aug 20, 2012

    meehhhh...hope the 2012 remake is a better one

    meehhhh...hope the 2012 remake is a better one

  • Jun 25, 2012

    Sophie Marceau is stunning as Anna Karenina; I found her enchanting from the start.

    Sophie Marceau is stunning as Anna Karenina; I found her enchanting from the start.