Powerful

I'll tell you why so serious

Expected more

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Someone made me view this picture on DVD. But the enclosure told that the screenplay was of Tom Stoppard. I acutely froze. I had seen his picture "Parades End". In this picture he lets a man who lives in a nearby hell choose for his "redemption" a fearless suffragette. My youth learned me that people who know no anguish or fear are a terror to themselves and the society thy live in. So, I watched the movie and the only emotion that came to me was disgust, very strong. I am afraid that Tom Stoppard ranks with Oliver Stone and (yes!) even with Harold Pinter. The DVD opens with a preview of "Les Miserables". It closes with the sentence "Live has destroyed my dream". That reminded me of another picture in which a man with a great bottle of whiskey in his hand says: "Live does this to us". I am afraid that live does not do this and people who give this utterance are moved by only one drive: blood thirst.Enjoy.

I watched Anna Karenina when it came out in the cinemas, and it was, in my opinion, a masterpiece: it follows the love affair between the rebellious Anna and the dashing Vronsky and the hypocrisy that ensues; it was told in such a creative way: it reflects that life for Russian aristocratic was, in a way, like being on a stage. As always, Keira Knightley shined; her performance as Anna Karenina stunned me, and it left me emotional. She seems to shine the brightest in historical settings; she was the perfect Elizabeth Bennet in Pride & Prejudice, and in Pirates of the Caribbean, she made Elizabeth Swan just as memorable.Overall, I love Anna Karenina; it surprised me, and it inspired me to read the book, which is, like, 800 or so pages long; I enjoyed that, too. I need to rewatch it at some point; it was a while that I saw it.

Overall, I was very disappointed. The script was painfully slow- moving, the story was foggy and vague, and the brilliant talents of Emily Watson, Olivia Williams, and Matthew MacFadyen were solely underused in a tragic romance where the miscasts took centre stage. Visually, however, the film was stunning. The costumes were gorgeous and the cinematography was beautiful. It was clear that the creators favoured appearance over substance. The secondary cast was very good, especially Domhnall Gleeson and Matthew MacFadyen. I'm a big fan of Alicia Vikander, but it's only towards the end that her character actually became watchable. Matthew MacFadyen was refreshing comic-relief, and I only wish we'd seen more of him. Out of the three leads, Jude Law was the only one to fit his role perfectly; he played his part subtly and brilliantly. His performance was flawless. Aaron Taylor Johnson was watchable, but the blonde hair just didn't work for me. Most of the time he looked out of place; with a watery performance that matched only Knightley's. I have never liked Kiera Knightley as an actress, but I was ready to put aside my bias and look for the positives in her performance. Unfortunately, I only found her acting more infuriating and shallow. Her smiles are forced, her emotions never reach her eyes, and she might as well still be acting for Pirates of the Caribbean. Her performance was very hard to watch, and – part the writer's fault, I'm sure – she never allows Anna's grief to come full circle. As a result, I struggled to feel sorry for the character, and Anna's emotional journey – as well as her external one concerning her society life – was never strong enough or powerful enough to deliver depth and evoke sympathy. Overall, the film was visually stunning, but it lacks heart and substance to carry the enormous weight of Tolstoy's profound story.

We did not expect to, but we loved that film. Actually, we were blown away by it. (Great balls of fire, so many reviewers -sadly- don't seem to get creativity and judge a film after the book. People, hellooo, they are different mediums! We have Tolstoy on one hand writing one heck of a great book, and then we have creative visual artists who have a different way to tell the story.) My take on this film is that it is an absolutely remarkable adaption of a remarkable novel. The creativity in the direction and set design is mind-blowing, and yet never distracts from the story. The story is adapted by Tom Stoppard, by the way, so no wonder this Anna Karenina stylized version manages to get to the heart of the novel's themes, as heavy as the source material might be. The characters absolutely come alive. Add gorgeous visuals, amazingly rich sets (and how they rotate seamlessly around one another: wow) a clever soundtrack, and excellent acting. Poetry in motion with intelligence. I agree that Vronsky is miscast: the actor in that part simply lacks the charisma needed for the viewer to understand Anna Karenina's fatal passion. But what a treat for the eyes and mind this film is, all of it.