Joe Wright, director of this version of the Tolstoy classic, has chosen to emphasize the theatrical nature of the period by setting most of the locations in a theatre: on stage, backstage and in the house. This sometimes creates a flowing, dancelike style that harkens to Luhrmann and Fellini. It also gets in the way of creating a cohesive and moving experience. Some of the scenery and all of the costumes are stunning. The performers do nicely, but the fervor that should drive the drama is uneven.… Expand

Stunning! I might have preferred a more conventional period piece similar to Wright's other works (Atonement, P&P) that used actual shooting locations, but the aesthetic choices made for this film are incredible. The production design, costume design, and cinematography are absolutely gorgeous and really make the film one of the most beautiful you'll ever see. The performances are all solid and Knightley gives one of her best and most mature performances to date. The film is a bit emotionally cold at times due to the horrendous casting of Aaron Taylor-Johnson as Count Vronsky, but overall Anna Karenina is a good period piece.… Expand

It doesn't have the same feel as many of the other Joe Wright films, which is really disappointing. It follows the messy path of an imperfect adaptation focusing more on visuals than a smooth moving plot. Compared to must or all of Wright's films, Anna Karenina is a mess.

If you want Tolstoy as arty fiction first and tragedy a distant second then you might like this. If you want a story told straight you won't. By focusing on staging the story as a play inside a play, rather than telling the tale as a novel the result was to pull me away from all the characters. I even yearned for Anna to go to the station much more quickly than she did. The choice for Vronsky was a poor one, all blond mustache and little macho, and Knightley's straying upper lip always distracts me. If I'd wanted to see the bloody thing on stage I'd have gone to a theatre, not a cinema.… Expand

The costumes by Jacqueline Durran are sumptuous , the production design by Sarah Greenwood head spinning and the original music by Dario Marianelli is at times as frantic as the editing is and at other times very operatic. The camera loves Keira Knightley, as Anna Karenina, just as much as Keira Knightley loves the camera. Jude Law, as her cuckolded husband, gives the best performance in the film and 20 years ago would have played her lover, Vronsky, bringing more fire, looks and chemistry to the role than does Aaron Taylor-Johnson.

Whether it is the concept of the screenplay by the world famous playwright Tom Stoppard and/or the director Joe Wright, based on the even more famous novel by Leo Tolstoy, the novelty of staging it as a play, using every nook and cranny of a theatre, very quickly falls flat and takes you out of the story just as Wright goes outside the theatre too many times. At times it seems like an opera, operetta or musical theatre without songs being sung. At times you find yourself counting the costume changes by Anna and Vronsky trying to see who accomplishes the most and there are a lot. In some scenes costume changes are stylistic which is intriguing at first but then, sadly, like the movie, becomes boring.

There are many roles in the film but the more prominent are Matthew Macfadyen as Anna… Collapse

Visually sumptious - The production design and costumes are truly beautiful and the film does look a million dollars - this version of Tolstoy's Anna Karenina is a triumph. Imaginitively and boldly directed within a theatre setting, Joe Wright elicits a good performance from Keira Knightley (who always seems to walk a tightrope between good and bad in her films) and a scene stealing performance from Jude Law as her betrayed husband. Beautiful and underrated the film rewards an audience prepared to wait for the gradual unfolding. Knightley certainly gets better the longer she inhabits the character. Another plus is the lush music score by Dario Marianelli which quitely adds volumes to the atmosphere of what is taking place on screen.… Expand

Joe Wright is a master of puzzle-like construction and supplies an excellently balanced script. This movie may have a chance of winning a oscar for Best Actress, Best Production Design, Best Cinematography.

Anna Karenina is one of the most famous tales of infidelity, but too bad the film couldn't illicit the passion our heroine, Anna, and her lover supposedly felt. Most of the performances were as icy as the environs of Russia. Keira Knightly and cast (Jude Law being the only exception) stifled what could have been an emotionally rich and outlandish film, and Joe Wright

Anna Karenina is a powerful story of marital duty and obligation versus lustful passion and the pursuit of personal, if not egomaniacal, happiness. It is a popular theme. Every time I went to the video store to rent it, every single copy was out, even though the allotted shelf space was that which is usually reserved for blockbusters. When I finally procured a copy that had just been returned one minute earlier, I told the clerk that I heard the film was produced as though it was a stage play. He replied, “Yes, but it has more energy than that, although it's a little loosey-goosey.” I didn't have time to ask him what “loosey-goosey” meant, but I later looked it up and it means “relaxed, not tense.” I'm not sure that term is applicable. The stagey pretensions seem to actually make this version of Tolstoy's story stiffer and more formal rather than relaxed, especially in scenes where actors are frozen in place or where actors walk to the edge of the stage to hit their mark. I think maybe the clerk thought that loosey-goosey meant something more like looney-gooney or daffy-waffy, because this Anna Karenina is a little crazy. Tolstoy's Anna Karenina was a serious, mature, and intelligent woman, who may have been emotionally distraught about her situation, but she wasn't crazy even though she did commit suicide, but that was a surprise ending. The theater stage backdrop is done par excellence but it is often distracting, and the film works better in the scenes where the theater backdrop is not visible. Just when you think the director dropped the ruse, the footlights, rafters, ladders, ropes and pulleys are back. The actors are almost perfect--Keira Knightley is an exquisite Anna Karenina; Jude Law is a stern and forbidding Karenin; Alicia Vikander is an angelic Kitty; Domhnall Gleeson is a suffering, brooding, and faithful Levin; and Matthew Macfadyen is a hard-working and perfectly bourgeois aristocrat, civil servant, and family man. And then we have Count Vronsky, whose seductive powers are the pivot upon which this story has to rotate, but unfortunately, the director took some liberties that are a little shocking. When the producers of the Bond franchise decided to bet on a blonde Bond, they won. But a blonde Vronsky? Tolstoy's Vronsky had dark hair--he was handsome, elegant, perhaps angry, pondering, and tormented. If he was a bon vivant, it was not that evident. His fickleness and his vices were not an obvious aspect of his demeanor. You had to get to know him to find out that he was an untrustworthy cad, a scoundrel, a louse, and a worm. On the surface, he was a gentleman. Aaron Taylor-Johnson is a good actor who played John Lennon a while back, but his rendering of Vronsky is a boyish, fun-loving rake, perhaps even a mama's boy, whose carefree attitude causes damage of which he is blissfully unaware. This Vronsky should not have turned the head of the virtuous, lofty, and married Anna Karenina. Also, the movie fails to portray the depth of the grief and despair that Vronsky caused Kitty when he visibly lost interest in her after one dance with Anna Karenina, nor does it do justice to Levin's inner torment when Kitty rejects him because she believes that Vronsky is about to propose to her. On the other hand, the portrayal of Anna's neurotic behavior may go a little too far in making her out to be mentally ill. I don't think Anna's behavior was meant to portray mental illness as much as it was meant to portray the consequences of Vronsky's amoral behavior (symbolized by him riding his beloved horse too hard and then having to shoot it), the inevitable outcome of an affair based mostly on physical attraction, and the destructive power of social ostracization. The stage-set theatricality is artistically pleasing, but it burdens the film, causing it to be drawn out in slow motion, making for a long and tedious decline of this noble and tragic literary heroine.… Expand

Per mettere in scena l’ennesima versione del romanzo forse più conosciuto di Tolstoj, Joe Wright e il suo sceneggiatore Tom Stoppard seguono una via che, pur non originalissima in sé, si dimostra assai efficace nell’evitare il pericolo della banale rilettura. Tutto il film idealmente ambientato in un piccolo teatro di provincia, in cui va in scena la rappresentazione di una società ottoce ottocentesca basata sull’apparenza e sull’ipocrisia, tanto che solo a Levin (un bravo Domhnall Gleeson), l’unico che rifiuta la parte già scritta per lui dall’ambiente in cui vive, concesso di uscirne. Per farlo, utilizza la grande porta che si apre, con bella intuizione, sul fondale del teatro, mentre gli ingressi laterali consentono agli altri personaggi di accedere agli ambienti privati; la platea, invece, di volta in volta stazione ferroviaria, sala da ballo oppure ippodromo (e i treni in viaggio sono dei modellini come quelli con cui gioca il figlio di Anna, Serhoza). Malgrado qualche sbandamento (e mugugno) tra il pubblico, il marchingegno funziona, in special modo nela prima parte in cui l’unità di luogo mantenuta con più rigore: vi contribuiscono il ritmo regalato dal bel montaggio (Melanie Oliver) e ravvivato da un’attenta cura del colore e delle musiche (dell’italiano Dario Marianelli, candidato all’Oscar ma battuto da Mychael Danna per ‘Vita di Pi’). Un’operetta come dice con chiarezza Vronskij in cui spicca il vitalissimo ma amorale Oblonskij di Macfayden, infedele in amore e dispotico sul lavoro; quando esplode la passione tra Anna e Vronskij, la storia accentua invece il lato drammatico dirigendosi verso la fine che tutti ben conosciamo almeno quanto l’incipit che, però, non viene citato ma senza riuscire a sfuggire al minuetto sociale dominante. Anche qui prosegue il lavoro sul colore, che dai toni chiari dei primi, entusiasti amplessi si va sempre più scurendo con l’incupirsi della situazione: la crisi fra i due amanti culmina fra tappezzerie in blu elettrico e un’incapacità di fissarsi dritti in volto che lascia spazio solo a sguardi lanciati attraverso gli specchi. Una considerazione sulla coppia protagonista, quest’ultima, che ci porta alle dolenti note. Se appare inevitabile, e non particolarmente fastidioso, che molti aspetti del romanzo vengano semplificati capita quando si cerca di infilare un librone in poco più di centoventi minuti di film ciò che davvero funziona assai poco la chimica fra i due personaggi principali, che proprio non riesce a scattare: un passaggio a vuoto che danneggia una tematica importante come quella della passione nonostante le regole e la cui responsabilità ricade su di un’interpretazione che delude per più di un motivo: Nella sua divisa bianca, Aaron Taylor-Johnson un Vronskij più che altro decorativo in cui non si sa se siano più incongrui i capelli biondi o i baffetti posticci mentre Keira Knightley tende, come altre volte, ad andare sopra le righe in un ruolo già di suo abbastanza sovraccarico quando basterebbe lavorare sulla sua bellezza irregolare (dev’essere l’unica attrice di primo piano senza il sorriso ortodontico standard). Per fortuna che, accanto a loro, il resto del cast funzioni senza sbavature a partire dalla brillante prova di Jude Law che, dietro a barba e stempiatura, regala una bella intensità all’amarezza e ai dubbi di Karenin.… Expand

Storyline: This is a period drama set in 19th century Russia. Anna Karenina (Keira Knightley) starts an affair with Count Vronsky (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) while Anna's husband (Jude Law) starts to see the signs and hear rumours of it. The style and way this film has been made is a really good idea as it's a sort of movie/stage-play hybrid with sets being changed on screen but the effect is great to watch.

Acting: Keira Knightley appeared to be in her element playing Anna. Aaron Tylor-Johnson is a very versatile actor and looks as good playing a Russian count as he does a super hero. Matthew Macfadyen who is better known in the UK than the US seemed very comfortable in his role as Oblonsky. I really liked Jude Law as the long suffering husband and think he just gets better with each film. Kelly MacDonald as Dolly was also good, in fact there is a lot of well known talent in minor roles but everyone is performing as if it's the role of a lifetime.

Direction: Joe Wright has clearly put his stamp on this with creative long takes and plenty going on like the ballroom scene which was amazing to watch. The music was used to great effect to and together made this a true Joe Wright movie.

Production: The cinematography by Seamus McGarvey (Avengers & We Need To Talk About Kevin) was brilliant and the Oscar nomination is well deserved. The wardrobe and make-up are also particularly good as you would expect on a movie like this but they were above par I would say.

Conclusion: I don't normally watch this type of film but Kelly MacDonald in a Joe Wright flik made this a 'must see' for me and also nominated for an Oscar. I'm so glad I did. Recommended Score: 7.5/10… Expand

At the opening, I was thrilled with the visual complexity of the stage play conceit, but all that could not lift the tedium. Why were all the actors spouting their lines in a bizarrely rushed and completely passionless manner? Barely a sense of humanity in there, and no one to like. Just some overly self-conscious, blatantly modern styling without a grip of the material.

This adaptation of Tolstoy's novel is neither literal nor reverent--it is inspired. Using stage sets (the Maryinsky Theatre in Petersburg, I think) to represent the strictures of society and bureaucracy, the film allows its characters to break out only through passion (Anna and Vronsky) or dedication (Levin and Kitty). This method allows Stoppard (script) and Wright (direction) to serve Tolstoy's genius without suppressing their own. This could seem too schematic, but the actors bring it all to life. Beautiful, brilliant, unforgettable.… Expand

Walking out of this film, I wrote a single line at the end of my notes for my review:

I think this was a well done adaptation. It is very conceptual and as fantastical as this story could have been. Each scene transition took them back into a theatre as if we were watching a play, and then it would often transform into real life from a stage with backdrops. There's also many scenes where the characters are in a theatre audience, but are in a setting that wouldn't actually be in a theatre, eg the horse race scene. I think the point of this was to keep it interesting and intriguing, since this could have been a very boring movie. They did a good job keeping it from being boring. I loved looking at all the beautiful costumes, which is always the best part of a period movie. I would recommend the movie, just don't expect to come out of it in a cheery mood. It's far from a comedy.… Expand

Tolstoy must be "turning over in his grave" if he saw what has been done to his book. The acting is ok although Jude Law really did a fine job, but Knightly has really overplayed her role to the point of laughter at her emoting. But mostly Stoppard has turned a fine literary work into something laughable. The costuming is lovely, and the choreography is much overdone-it looks foppish. Vrovsky is portrayed often as a gay blade. If there is one film to be missed this season, this is it.… Expand

While the movie was completely different than I expected, I was pleasantly surprised. It was a work of art rather than just any other movie. It was a true film! Wright executed the story perfectly and incorporated the personality of the time period of Russia perfectly. His approach put a wonderful spin on the film. With every passing second I felt like I was the most fortunate human alive to be watching such a masterpiece.… Expand

I love Russian literature, read the book long time ago and was very much looking forward to see this movie. To set the story in a theater was a risk that I don't think paid of. It made the movie kind of busy in an unpleasant way. On the other hand the cast especially Vronsky was great. To me Aaron Johnson IS Vronsky.

We have already seen 'Anna Karenina' done straight at least a dozen times, so why not take a different approach? In this case, the filmmakers impose Brechtian distancing devices (e.g., the theatrical settings) to challenge the audience's expectations. Apparently, lots of people don't want to be challenged.

Also, I think Joe Wright is an underrated director whose work always surprises and astonishes me. This film, which is often breathtakingly, deliriously beautiful, is no exception. (Watch for the stunning, horrifying horse race scene.) Of special note are the film's exquisite costumes, music, art and production design, and cinematography. And superb acting; Keira Knightley makes a worthy and memorable Anna.… Expand

Really difficult to sit through. Plodding and wandering. Took awhile to figure out the supporting characters. Keira Knightly is lovely to look at but there is no chemistry or passion or anything to grab onto with her lover. The story is so convoluted that I was tempted to walk out after 30 min., but i stuck it out.

Keira Knightley, Aaron Johnson and Domhnall Gleeson give great performance and the costumes are beautiful but the film is not as good as Pride&Prejudice or Atonement. It's kind of claustrophobic because it is basically set in one location and this does not help the movie.

Keira Knightley and Jude Law are extraordinary. Wright's unique and beautifully conceived version of the film, using Tom Stoppard's intelligent adaptation, struck me as perfect for rendering the depth and complexity of the story. The "artifice" of the setting, design and art direction are brought forth with sensitivity and satisfying wholeness. Highly, highly recommended for adults who want to participate in the construction of a wonderful film and story.… Expand

Over stylized the story is lost in a vain directors journey into his own egotistical journey. Art for arts sake, Tolstoy would turn in his grave. There is no chemistry between the actors, Kiera knightly is much better than this movie.

A Beautiful Beast.

I'm referring to the film, not to its Anna. Knightly's portrayal isn't worthy of such strong descriptive words. Admittedly, she wan't bad...until she opened her mouth. In truth, the film would've been much richer had it been a silent one. Wright never fails visually. There is no doubting that this adaptation is ambitious and imaginative, but, in the physical world, one's ambitions are nearly always unmet. I found myself cringing during dialogue. Tom Stoppard is an extraordinary writer, but neither him nor Wright were good conductors of Tolstoy's ideas. The script seemed unaware of the vision, and the vision of the words. I felt as if I was listening to a high school literature teacher, finger on the fast-forward button, struggle to hit all the major plot points of a book-on-tape. The dialogue only served to make the story feel rushed and the viewer spoon-fed. Setting it in a theatre was brilliant, but the too-literalness of this literary classic was not.… Expand

Wonderful idea in the filming of this A.K. and I really enjoyed something new to give me pause to think for a few moments if I liked it. Result! I loved it. If your not into change then don't see it as it will turn you upside down.

I am russian. I read 'Anna Karenina'. And you know what this film left mixed impression. Everything is according to Tolstoy, the actors are brilliant, however the director afforded himself to add a thing of his own to the film every scene of the film was a scene in a theatre! That is nonsense, Tolstoy didn't write that... And only this director-made 'feature' made of the film almost a total bull***t. Whithout that 'feature' the film would be great.… Expand