Anna Karenina

Greta Garbo first tackled Anna Karenina in the film "Love," which she made with John Gilbert. That film, however, did not follow the novel totally.

Under Clarence Brown's direction, she now plays the role again opposite Frederic March as Vronsky and Basil Rathbone as Karenin.

Having seen the Vivien Leigh version as well, it's hard not to make comparisons. This version certainly moves along better than the Leigh version.

Here, the Levin-Kitty (Maureen O'Sullivan) romance is no longer really a subplot, but a very minor part of the film. The production values are tremendous, as they were also in the Leigh Anna Karenina.

What the Vivien Leigh version had that this does not is Ralph Richardson's portrayal of Karenin, which is magnificent. Though Basil Rathbone is very good, no one can hold a candle to Richardson in this role, in my opinion.

Rathbone is cold and authoritarian; Richardson is cold and authoritarian but pathetic, as a man who cannot love. He is also frightening.

The scene where Anna sneaks in to see her child and meets Karenin upon leaving had much more tension in the Leigh film because of Richardson's quiet menace. What Rathbone does with a clipped voice and cold expression, Richardson does internally.

Apparently, for some reason, casting an appropriate Vronsky missed in both films. This is a man for whom Anna gives up the most precious thing in her life, her child, and forgoes her reputation.

Frederic March, outgoing and charming, isn't quite right. Vronsky is a soldier, but he also has an element of passivity about him. Given Anna's controlling husband, she would be attracted to that.

I didn't pick that up with March, and in the Leigh film, Kieron Moore was TOO passive. Also, I think Vronsky should be drop-dead gorgeous. I mean, if you're going to dump your marriage, your child, your reputation, Vronsky really ought to be a dreamboat.

Since this is an MGM film, perhaps Robert Taylor would have been better: handsome, strong in voice and appearance, charming, romantic with just a touch of wimp.

The production values are magnificent, and Garbo is extremely effective in the role - beautiful, ethereal, and tragic. If she lacks anything, it is perhaps the vulnerability needed for Anna. Freddie Bartholemew is adorable as Anna's son.

I was much more involved with the characters in this Anna Karenina than in the Leigh, which was a very detached experience. This film was directed with more warmth. Very good.

Anna Karenina seems to have been tailor-made for Greta Garbo to play. Ms. Garbo was always cast in these types of role that demanded a great woman's presence. Leo Tolstoy's magnificent novel is adapted with the emphasis on Anna, because the massive book, it probably took a lot of skill to adapt it for the screen.

Clarence Brown, the director, was a man who was instrumental in guiding Ms. Garbo's American career in the movies. First, as a cinematographer, then as a director, Mr. Brown, obviously, got the respect and confidence of his star, as it's clearly shown in the film.

Technically, this was a film that was well crafted. In fact, after seventy years it still has a crisp look, as shown in the great DVD version of the film. The great cinematography by William Daniels shows why this genius behind the camera was one of the best in the business. The splendor of the sets and the art direction by Cedric Gibbons added a rich texture to what comes out on the screen.

As Anna, Ms. Garbo does excellent work. As a matter of fact, her style shows some restraint as she doesn't go into those large gestures to punctuate a situation on a scene. The only thing that detracts from the film is Frederic March's Vronsky. While he was one of the best actors of his time, in here he is not as effective as in the rest of his screen work. In fact, their romance could have played differently had another actor been cast as the man who conquers Anna's heart.

The other principal roles are well played by a wonderful company that MGM put together to support the star. Basil Rathbone is perfect as Karenin, the dark figure in the novel. Freddie Bartholomew, the child actor, has some lovely moments when he is seen playing opposite Ms. Garbo. In fact, those scenes show well Anna's tender side, something that is in sharp contrast with what she ends up doing, abandoning this lovely child. Reginald Owen, one of the best character actors of the era is seen as Stiva with great charm. Maureen O'Sullivan is Kitty.

"Anna Karenina" is a film that will live forever because the combination of Greta Garbo's appeal and the great director Clarence Brown that understood her so well.

For a film that tries to pack a 900 page novel into 95 minutes, Clarence Brown's rendition of Tolstoy's masterpiece is quite impressive. Naturally, there are aspects of the story that are forced aside- too little time is spent on the relationship between Kitty and Levin (who was a self-portrait of Tolstoy)- but Brown manages to portray the affair between Anna and Vronsky with plenty of depth and emotion.

Greta Garbo, one of the greatest actresses of the 30's, is stunning in the lead. Frederic March is a little flat as Vronsky, dressed in his military uniform in almost every scene, but manages to do well with the character nonetheless. Basil Rathbone's usual grimness suits Karenin perfectly. The production design is spectacular. Brown directs his cast so that they always stand out from the scenery, clearly visible amidst the decadence and imperial settings. The ballroom scenes, where characters dance gracefully while exchanging crucial dialogue, particularly impressed me.

A delight for Garbo fans, as well as anyone who likes costume pieces or literary adaptations.

I absolutely love the novel Anna Karenina, but I am extremely displeased to find out that none of the movies really focus at all on the Levin/Kitty plot. There have been numerous arguments between scholars over whether or not Tolstoy had two protagonists--Anna, and Levin. To simply gloss over such a large part of Tolstoy's novel doesn't do justice to his work. And as I don't particularly like Anna or Vronsky, I definitely won't be investing my time in watching a movie entirely about them. It's a shame that people who see the many movies made about Anna Karenina won't be getting a better view of what the novel really is like.

In Imperial Russia, the aristocratic Anna Karenina (Greta Garbo) travels from Saint Petersburg to Moscow to visit her brother Stiva (Reginald Owen) and she meets the cavalry officer Vronsky (Fredric March), who came with Stiva to the train station to welcome his mother.

After a family reunion where Anna Karenina has a conversation with her sister-in-law Dolly (Phoebe Foster) to help to save Stiva's marriage, Anna is invited to stay for the ball. Anna Karenina is courted by Vronsky, but she decides to return to Saint Petersburg to her loveless marriage because of her beloved son Sergei (Freddie Bartholomew).

However Vronsky follows her and she introduces him to her husband Karenin (Basil Rathbone) at the train station. Vronsky woos her and soon they have a doomed love affair that will lead Anna Karenina to a tragic fate.

"Anna Karenina" (1935) is the first and the unforgettable version of Tolstoy's classic romance. Greta Garbor is perfect in the role of Anna Karenina, a beautiful and aristocratic married woman that falls in love with a man in a society repressive with the women's rights and feelings. The scene where her face appears in a cloud of steam is one of the most beautiful of the cinema history.

The grandiosity and the camera work of the initial scene showing the officer's table and the ball are still very impressive. The heartbreak conclusion of a woman destroyed by her love is very sad. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "Anna Karenina"