Organnall Too much about the plot just didn't add up, the writing was bad, some of the scenes were cringey and awkward,

Nessieldwi Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

Huievest Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

Aedonerre I gave this film a 9 out of 10, because it was exactly what I expected it to be.

FountainPen Do not waste your time on this. The Tolstoy classic has been raped, savaged, and torn asunder by the producers and writers of this rubbish which comes across as a kind of costume Russian soap opera. Keira Knightley was so obviously miscast. Her extremely bony frame and face always remind me of concentration camp survivors, terrible. I suppose she did the best she could, but it was painful to watch her trying to make something out of this lamentable part in which she did NOT fit. The costumes were marvellous and some scenery was beautiful, but the movie was a terrible DUD. Count Vronsky was played as a kind of caricature, awful. Jude Law virtually unrecognisable, strove decently in his role. Overall, this was a MONUMENTAL FAILURE. Miss it. 2/10.

HotToastyRag I'm not sure if anyone was more excited than I was to see the newest remake of Anna Karenina, besides the families of the cast and crew. Sure, the story isn't that great, but Keira Knightley is my favorite actress, and the preview made it look like a moving art gallery rather than a film. Even though I didn't end up adding this one to my permanent collection, it was very entertaining.The reason the film didn't work was because of the casting. In the story, the title character is unhappily married to an older, pious man, and she has an affair with a handsome, virile, young man. Jude Law was cast as the husband, and Aaron Taylor-Johnson was cast as the lover, and this is why the film makes no sense. They tried to ugly Jude up and made sure he wore a perpetual scowl, but the audience is still very much aware he's still Jude Law! Why would she stray? And if she must, why wouldn't she choose someone so incredibly handsome, charming, and full of appeal that the audience understands and excuses her betraying "Alfie"? There wasn't a single moment of the film that I was rooting for Aaron, and the fact that Keira sacrificed everything for him made me not respect or like her character.That crucial criticism aside, the rest of the film is incredibly beautiful to watch. It truly is an experience, not just a film. Joe Wright, director of Pride and Prejudice and Atonement, knows how to capture Keira Knightley perfectly on camera. She's so incredibly gorgeous, it's almost stunning to believe she's real.The costumes, sets, and production values are some of the richest, most beautiful I've ever seen. The colors both blend and stand out among one another, and if you press pause during any given moment, you could easily imagine the frozen frame pained and mounted upon your wall. While the film took home a well-deserved Academy Award for Jacqueline Durran's costume design, it was grossly under-appreciated in its other technical aspects, and Keira was once again ignored for her incredible performance.Seamus McGarvey's cinematography, combined I'm sure with Joe Wright's direction and the way Tom Stoppard's script was crafted, is what separates Anna Karenina from ordinary historical films. The entire film is sewn together seamlessly, with scenes folding into one another in different creative ways. One scene may show the characters walking off a literal stage, and the camera follows them as they walk to a different setting. Another may show an indoor curtain parting, showing the audience the snow outside, and the film continues outdoors. If you're not expecting it, the style might feel jarring at first, but once you're aware of the fluid structure, it's glorious.Watch the preview to get a feel for the style and see if you think you might like it. Even if you're rooting against Keira because of her serious lack of judgement, it really is an engrossing film with many elements to appreciate, including a supporting cast with Kelly Macdonald, Matthew Macfadyen, Domhnall Gleeson, Alicia Vikander, Holliday Grainger, Ruth Wilson, Michelle Dockery, and Emily Watson.DLM warning: If you suffer from vertigo or dizzy spells, like my mom does, this movie might not be your friend. There are a couple of scenes where the camera spins in a circle, and it might make you sick. In other words, "Don't Look, Mom!"

avidmoviewatcher1221 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.

kathryn-org You would get this movie. I admit that I am biased because I have always loved the book. And I can't imagine what it might be like for someone who has no experience with the novel. Maybe they would like the story? But I found the change of scenes to really take away from the story line. It was overly artistic and inconveniently distracting. (This being an issue because I love the story so much.) I liked how free and open the outdoor scenes were. And I think the director actually did an honest job covering the story. I agree with the claustrophobic feeling and while I found myself suffering through it, I also wonder if the director wanted us to feel that way- to maybe connect ourselves to Anna's feelings? I hope it was on purpose. It was still horrible to suffer through though. I have to agree that the actor chosen as Vronsky was just a terrible choice. Yikes!! There didn't seem to be any real chemistry at all between them- oddly completely on his side. (Keira knightly seems to have really tried to add some feels- Whatever chemistry that was there was fully carried by her. (He honestly had more chemaitey with his horse. And with his male friends.) Keira knightly probably wasn't the perfect choice either. Although I love her when she is in the right roles for her. She can be wonderful on screen. And maybe if she had had chemistry with vronsky (his fault!) then.... Who knows. But girl to girl... No girl would like Vronsky anyway.. And she had to kiss that tweenager mustache so she is forgiven. For me, the story alone has enough drama to read and reread again and again throughout a persons life. . I wish the art of this movie had been in how well the story was told. And I wish it had been done in a more organic, simple manner. In summation: poorly cast and over worked. The writer and director did an honest job of attempting to keep the integrity of the story. Beautiful costumes. But I wish I had spent the evening steaming Downton Abbey instead of watching this.