Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

'Anna Karenina' Through the Film Ages

Thompson on Hollywood By Beth Hanna | Thompson on Hollywood August 20, 2012 at 6:39AM

Joe Wright's "Anna Karenina" (November 16) looks to be a highly original take on the Leo Tolstoy classic, but it's certainly not the first time (or even the 10th) that the Russian romance has been adapted for the big screen. Below, a compare-and-contrast of six film versions.
5
Keira Knightley (left) and Greta Garbo (right) as Anna Karenina
Keira Knightley (left) and Greta Garbo (right) as Anna Karenina

Joe Wright's "Anna Karenina" (November 16) looks to be a highly original take on the Leo Tolstoy classic, but it's certainly not the first time (or even the 10th) that the Russian romance has been adapted for the big screen. Below, a compare-and-contrast of six film versions.

"Anna Karenina," 1935: Greta Garbo stars in the title role, with Fredric March as Vronsky. Clarence Brown ("National Velvet" and another Garbo vehicle, "Anna Christie") directs. This was Garbo's second outing as Anna K., with her first go-around in 1927's "Love" (see below). The film's budget is estimated at just north of $1 million, with the domestic take at $865K. The film is 100% Fresh, and Emmanuel Levy writes:

"In her 23rd film, Garbo's luminous performance, as the adulterous protag of Tolstoy's novel, is way above the mediocre level of the narrative and direction; the film is a remake of 'Love,' in which Garbo starred opposite her then lover John Gilbert.Other critics opined that, after years of being miscast, Garbo found 'her own particular province of glamour and heartbreak.'"

"Anna Karenina," 1948: Brilliant French director Julien Duvivier ("Panique," "Pepe le Moko") went to the UK to direct this Vivien Leigh-starrer. Kieron Moore plays Vronsky, with Ralph Richardson as cuckold husband Alexei Karenin. The film has a tepid if decent 6.5 on IMDb, but notoriously grouchy NY Times film critic Bosley Crowther wrote of the film upon its release:

"With all due respect for an actress who would willingly undertake a role that has twice been rendered immortal by Greta Garbo within the past twenty years, it must be confessed by this observer that the 'Anna Karenina' of Vivien Leigh is a pretty sad disappointment, by comparison or not. At the same time, it must be admitted that Miss Leigh is not wholly to blame. It's a pretty sad chunk of motion-picture... Miss Leigh [does] slowly disintegrate into a whining, maudlin, vain, self-pitying dame."

"Anna Karenina," 1997: This Warner Bros. production stars Parisian-born actress Sophie Marceau ("Braveheart," "The World is Not Enough") in the title role, with Bernard Rose directing (check out our TOH interview with him about his third Tolstoy adaptation "Boxing Day," playing Venice). Sean Bean plays Vronsky. The film flopped painfully, with a $35 million budget, and not even an $800K domestic take. More ouch: A 26% Rotten. (With a 6.2 on IMDb, viewers seem to regard it more positively.) Check out Roger Ebert's review of the film, with this segment basically summing up the critical consensus:

"It's not the story but the style and the ideas that make Tolstoy's 'Anna Karenina'' a great novel and not a soap opera. There's no shortage of stories about bored rich women who leave their older husbands and take up with playboys. This new screen version of the novel makes that clear by focusing on the story, which without Tolstoy's wisdom, is a grim and melodramatic affair. Here is a woman of intoxicating beauty and deep passion, and she becomes so morose and tiresome that by the end, we'd just as soon she throw herself under a train, and are not much cheered when she obliges."

"Love," 1927: 21-year-old Greta Garbo stars as Anna for her first time in this silent version. Her real-life lover John Gilbert co-stars as Vronsky, which was a big selling point upon the film's release: Marquees screamed "Gilbert and Garbo in Love!" and the original poster read "John Gilbert in Love with Greta Garbo." The film was also released with two endings, and exhibitors decided which one would screen in which towns. The tragic ending courtesy of Tolstoy played mostly in urban communities, while the sugar-coated ending screened basically everywhere else in the country. The film's budget is estimated just shy of $500K, and made back twice that amount domestically, with a $731K international haul. A juggernaut hit.

"Anna Karenina," 1967: This Soviet version stars Russian superstar Tatyana Samojlova in the title role, with Aleksandr Zharki helming. An epic at 145 minutes, the film demanded two years (!) of shooting in full color 70mm widescreen. The film has a respectable 7.1 on IMDB. Bolshoi ballet star Maia Plisetskaya plays the seemingly kind Princess who at first helps Anna, and then turns her back on her.

"Anna Karenina," 2012: Keira Knightley re-teams with director Joe Wright -- a stylish helmer she fares well with -- for this unusual adaptation. Based on the trailer and an early 6-minute clip, the film has a stage setting, with the actors taking on a manner of theatricality, and waltzing between what appear to be gilded amphitheatres and actual locations. Aaron Johnson co-stars as Vronsky, with Jude Law as cuckold husband Karenin. The film has a November 16 release date (with some European cities getting an earlier release date), and will premiere at Toronto in September, with its Oscar prospects unspooling then.

This article is related to: Classics, Anna Karenina, Keira Knightley, Joe Wright


E-Mail Updates