Anna Karenina (1935)
6/10
Generally well made, though occasionally a tad sappy and heavy-handed
21 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I know that Greta Garbo had a great mystique surrounding her career. She is considered a great actress--almost legendary. Despite this, I can't help but think when I watch many of her films is that they are often sappy and over-acted. I'm not sure I can blame her, as the public loved her films and the studio forced her to often play the same type roles again and again (either the "super vamp" or the adulteress). Here, as in so many of her films, Garbo just doesn't seem real--more like an old fashioned stage actress who is over-emoting. Again and again, her acting consisted of a pained look and that's about it.

Now as for the story itself, I guess the problem for me is that I never particularly liked this Tolstoy story, as the title character was so selfish and unlikable. While her husband (Basil Rathbone) is a bit stuffy and conventional, he was NOT a bad man. Sure, when she chose to leave her family to run off with her lover (Frederic March) the husband chose to tell her young son that his mother had died--but this was perhaps a lot less cruel than telling the boy she chose to leave. I think the makers of this film try to make you care about Anna and her plight, but I just felt indifferent to her. And, at the end, I was longing for her to end it all.

Now despite all my complaints, I must admit that the film looks gorgeous--like a typical high-budget MGM film--all full of gloss. The direction is lovely, the sets are great and the music is lovely. Too bad I just didn't care! By the way, Garbo also made a silent version of Anna Karenina but oddly MGM chose to entitle it "LOVE".
13 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed