LouHomey From my favorite movies..

Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Lidia Draper Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

phd_travel This is one of the better versions of Anna Karenina. It's not too old or too new. It's hard to watch the slightly cheap BBC versions or the old black and white Hollywood versions. It is modern enough to have a fresh feel and great on location filming. It's also not too long. The score is wonderful - Tchaikovsky.Sophie Marceau looks beautiful and tragic. Her acting is good too although her accent isn't Russian. Supporting cast are all good including Alfred Molina.The main problem is Sean Bean was a strange choice. He doesn't look Russian and he isn't dashing enough. He's more the villain with his cruel look.It is interesting to compare this with the Jacqueline Bisset and Christopher Reeve version. I think this one is better overall.

Benoît A. Racine (benoit-3) To think this story has been filmed probably most often of all the Russian novels and that all the preceding versions managed to preserve their dignity while never quite getting to the point of the original novel... And then, this little bit of fluff had to come along. I caught this on Canadian Bravo tonight and what a disappointment. It strictly adheres to the European school of literary-adaptations-as-a-series-of-medical-emergencies-and-body fluids-melodrama. Sophie Marceau is no Greta Garbo or Russian grande bourgeoise, Lord knows. But would it be too much to ask for her to keep her facial features from contorting into a very anachronistic crack addict's at the slightest hint of "drama"? And the scene of her violent vaginal hemorrhage is definitely not in the novel but must have seemed de rigueur for the producers' sensibilities: childbirth was such an ordeal in those barbaric times, don't you know - we just had to show it... The music is by Tchaikowsky, Sean Bean is the sexiest man alive even when forced to wear clothes, the sets and costumes are by God, but the script is strictly Extreme Harlequin. As my late mother wisely used to say about most modern pap of this type: "Ils font exprès pour nous écoeurer!"

Nessa This was surprisingly good. I'm not that much a fan of the Romance genre, if truth be told, but I'll make an exception for this one. The film is carefully crafted. Every emotion, every dialogue enhanced the overall tone of the film, slowly but surely escalating in its momentum up to its tragic climax.Sophie Marceau was brilliant. As was Sean Bean. I wasn't quite sure if they would be able to possess the kind of chemistry needed to pull this off, if truth be told, considering how they (in my opinion) seem to be of different temperament artistically (Sophie being more sensitive as seen in Braveheart and Marquis, while Bean is more explosive). Nevertheless, it worked out fine although, ironically, their relationship seem to be more believable whenever they fell out of odds with each other. :)

Robert John Bennett According to an earlier review, this movie is supposed to be "just plan awful." The writer probably meant "plain" instead of "plan," and that misspelling may be an indication of the quality of the review.There is much to be said for the viewpoint that this film version of Tolstoy's novel, starring Sophie Marceau, must certainly be one of the greatest versions ever produced.Tolstoy himself lived to see just the beginning of the era of the motion picture and was said to have been fascinated by the possibilities the new medium presented. If so, he would no doubt have been quite astonished at the beauty and the extraordinary quality of this rendition of his story about Anna Karenina. The production values are among the highest there could possibly be. The costumes, the cinematography, and the sets – unlike earlier versions, the film was shot on location in St. Petersburg and elsewhere in Russia – are at such a remarkable level that the action almost does appear to be really taking place in the Czarist period at the end of the nineteenth century.As for Sophie Marceau's mild French accent – which the above-mentioned reviewer found so irritating – it is quite likely that many upper-classes Russians of the period actually did speak with a French accent. It was not Russian but French that was the dominant language among the Russian nobility and aristocracy of the time – for some, French was in fact their native language, since many of them never learned to speak Russian at all, except perhaps a few words and phrases they could use to communicate with the servants.What is perhaps most remarkable of all in this film is the utterly believable way that the behavior of the of characters is presented. Their motives are suggested with great subtlety, not in the somewhat simplistic tones of the (nevertheless still magnificent) MGM version of the film that starred Greta Garbo seventy years ago. Anna's husband is not a monster, for example, in this new version, but a rather pathetic, right-wing government bureaucrat with obsessively strict moral values. Moreover, the portrayal of Anna's behavior throughout the film, and especially in the final scenes, is a masterpiece of sympathetic psychological insight and understanding.This film is a – for the time being, anyway – neglected classic.