4 stars are given to screenwriters who have adapted a famous novel into a half-stage play and half-movie. Through the stage play, deliberate exaggeration is used to cover up the artificiality of the characters in the movie traveling through different time and space. Life is like a play, play is like life. Don't think that you are living your own life. In fact, you are on the stage all the time, and every little action you make will be recorded and talked about.
4 stars for the beautiful long shots and close-ups that Joe Wright is good at. At the dance, Anna and her new love kept spinning and dancing. At this time, they were the center of the world, the time and space around them stood still, and that love became the protagonist. Anna's haggard face, who was seriously ill, and the curls that seemed intentionally but naturally scattered on the pillow combined into a poignant and sad picture. There is also the scene of Anna learning that she is pregnant and standing in the wheat field with an umbrella waiting for her lover. The director used the essence of Impressionism in painting, and used the camera to dynamically shoot, vividly depicting Monet's famous painting "Woman with a Parasol". I think Joe Wright is like the Monet of the movie world, always making the most inadvertent moments pop off the screen. At the same time, he can also use a special camera to photograph the shriveled Keira Knightley with a touch of beauty. Knightley can't control this beautiful aristocratic social circle in the original novel. She is not Anna Karenina!
4 stars also give the noble life of the Russian Empire full of British flavor, the scenery and costumes, and the ugly under the skin of the beautiful. Every dance scene is so gorgeous and noble, but everyone who participates in the dance under the glamorous appearance is a puppet pulling a string, a puppet pulling a string of this flashy but dark so-called "high society", Perhaps the director used a lot of time and space to shoot to express such a theme. Particularly impressive is what one of Anna's friends said after she had gone through so much betrayal: "I'd call on her if she'd only broken the law. But she broke the rules." (If she just broke the law. Breaking the law, I'll visit her. But she's immoral.) What the hell is RULES? In the film, the so-called moral standards and the true feelings of the characters are always contradictory. If people blindly follow the morals in social values, they will naturally lose themselves. Although their anger at Anna's cheating is true, the reason is numbness and drift; on the contrary, if people go against the way, they will be like Anna. The same, ended up with a tragic ending of suicide by lying on the rails. I think that what the original author Tolstoy wanted to attack was not only the ugly society that was guided by public opinion, took the so-called morality as its evaluation standard, and controlled people's minds; A foolish woman who ignores the feelings of others, loses her head for love, and goes retrograde with the whole social system. She thought she could break through this shackle, she thought that as long as it was true love, she could be understood by others, she was wrong, what she needed to learn was how to adapt to the society in the right way, and how to protect herself in a corrupt environment.
In short, the film still has connotations because of its original work; aesthetics because of its director; and novelty because of its screenwriting. The only flaw is a Keira Knightley who is not suitable for the role of Anna Karenina. . . . . .
View more about Anna Karenina reviews
