Incannerax What a waste of my time!!!

Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.

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

Python Hyena Anna Karenina (1935): Dir: Clarence Brown / Cast: Greta Garbo, Fredric March, Basil Rathbone, Maureen O'Sullivan, Freddie Bartholomew: Classic tale of forbidden love that seems current with modern bad decisions with regards to relationships. Anna Karenina is married to a Czarist official and has a son but the marriage seems only as an image to his political agenda. She becomes entangled in a relationship with a military officer and when this becomes public her husband gives her a stern choice. She can either end the relationship or lose her marriage and her son. This is where the film becomes a tad problematic. Can someone really place a price on their own child? Of course, even today these relationships are rushed into and romance becomes but a myth or empty promise. This is a sad conclusion for anyone seeking romantic entertainment. Greta Garbo as Karenina is torn between a rock and a hard place. Frederic March as the military officer is led on by his own delusions of romance and his eventual yearning for military action. Basil Rathbone is terrific as Karenina's husband whose dominant position is tested until he retaliates. Maureen O'Sullivan steals scenes as Kitty who was originally smitten with March until her attention is turned. Freddie Bartholomew plays her son whom she is isolated from. Well made classic about the scars of bad relationships. Score: 8 / 10

gavin6942 The married Anna Karenina (Greta Garbo) falls in love with Count Vronsky (Fredric March) despite her husband's refusal to grant a divorce, and both must contend with the social repercussions.Some have called this the perfect Garbo vehicle. I can see that. She is a star whose name and reputation exceed the films she is known for. (Ask someone if they have heard of Greta Garbo, and you will get "yes". Ask them to name a single film she was in and it might be quiet.) Here she is strong, as she should be. Garbo was never a damsel in distress.It does not hurt that she is surrounded with a good support network. Fredric March is, of course, wonderful. And one should never underestimate Basil Rathbone, though I think people often do.

museumofdave There are many good reasons to watch this version of Anna; close fidelity to Tolstoy's masterpiece is not one of them, as in it's day, long adaptations were not the norm, and one cannot expect most of Anna Karenini in 95 minutes. There are numerous other versions out there in Movieland much more complete and detailed--but they lack the main ingredient.I would have paid full price to see this version for two main reasons: One, for the first ten minutes, a spectacular studio-recreation of a never-was military banquet with a dazzling tracking shot that seems to go on forever, studio forces marshaled to produce an extravagant opulence only from MGM! And then there's Garbo! One of the people watching this film with me was hushed and amazed later commenting that she had heard Garbo was beautiful but had no idea she was so incredibly ravishing--and she is, a perfect Anna in so many ways, with her largely blank, gorgeous features allowing other characters and the viewer to project their own fantasies onto her character. No one comes close.Beware the deadly tot actor Bartholomew, who was effective under Cukor's direction in David Copperfield, but here with Clarence Brown is unctuously sticky, a sweet kid Rathbone would have fried for breakfast; the latter is dryly caustic as Anna's inflexible mate, and Fredric March is serviceable as Vronsky. This version is all about Garbo.

writers_reign While Garbo was inspired casting as the doomed Romantic that of Frederic March as Vronsky was idiotic. What was needed was a William Powell, a Melvyn Douglas (who played opposite Garbo in Ninotchka), even a Tyrone Power, Douglas Fairbanks, David Niven, anyone, in fact, with an ounce of VITALITY, a scintilla of CHARM, a hint of PASSION, rather than the inanimate Giant Redwood that is March. Apart from this Clarence Brown gives us some nice visuals and interesting Camera angles beginning, of course, with our first magical glimpse of Garbo, emerging, fully-formed, out of the steam like Venus out of the sea. Basil Rathbone brings his usual reliability to the thankless role of dull husband but Maureen O'Sullivan is woefully short of gravitas as Kitty. It remains a great vehicle for a great actress and that's what we take away from it, a face in the misty light, a Laura ahead of her time.