This movie is told from Anna's perspective, but she is actually a villain, cheated on her husband and abandoned her children for a younger man. Anna and his lover couldn't with the consequences and Anna committed suicide because she couldn't bear the consequences of her actions. Anna went crazy for love, literally.
Tolstoy’s books were all about the outrageous disparity between men and women’s moral judgement by society at that time. A man could have as many affairs as they wished. With Married women or seducing young virgins, , it didn’t matter. A woman though? The slightest indiscretion was Unforgivable.
Exactly, the comments of today are still missing the mark, sadly. Can we really blame young women for falling in love with men their age when they never got to power to choose? Their husbands were often twice their age, and got their pick for "love."
Well almost. The taboo was not in her having an affair, as her blonde friend often did, and gossiped about doing so. It's because she actually wanted to divorce her husband and the father of her child to be with the man she truly loved, and THAT'S what was a big no-no. At that time, in that social class, marriage was not about love and was about station and wealth. You married according to the social conventions and did what you actually desired discreetly, though even in this, yes women were judged WAY more harshly for it. But what actually made her an outcast was wanting a divorce, when her husband had remained loyal and wanted to be with someone solely for her feelings toward him.
I described it well. I hate masculinity and ambivalence between women and men. I do not believe that it exists to this day. Even in your advanced societies you suffer from this ambivalence, let alone our conservative Arab societies. It is the pinnacle of ambivalence and segregation.
Its not double standards that women lost everything for being unfaithful but men didn't, its called simple logic. If a man gets a Lover pregnant, he can deny the child as there was no paternity tests back then, or if the lover was poor he could send her away so she'd never be seen again, if a noblewoman who was unmarried or didn't spend time with her husband got pregnant what could she do? Nothing, she couldn't get rid of the child inside her. There is no such thing as sexism, never was, never is, and never will be, everything comes together if you just start to look by logic.
He was a man. It was to be expected, even cherished in a male. In women, it was the opposite. And in many places in the world, it´s STILL like this, either as a societal rule, or at least it´s in the minds of the people.
From Spiritual pov when you aren't with your true love you cheated, no matter if someone is your wife or husband here on Earth. When you betrayed yourself, your true feelings, you cheated.
@@irodaikromxonova9556 It means confirm with your actions to everyone else what is happening. also fiasco is like saying “ordeal” or the whole crazy affair.
fiasco is basically drama that is stirred by bad decisions. Rescueing her would mean he would give the "seal of approval" regarding the rumors about their affair.
This is a fantasy, and what Anna feels is happening. She is not a reliable narrator. Im certain plenty of women were mistresses in this time period and got away with it just fine. You need more discretion.
@@iambetakaroten It not even about a narrator. Anna literally never existed. She was invented by Tolstoy. Vronsky never existed. Kitty never existed. This is just Tolstoy's opinion.
@@cheycheyfriend247 Men and women have different obligations in that time period. Not one being greater or better then the other, but different. In any case, Anna is shallow as a kiddie pool, so there is that.
I haven't seen this movie yet but in the book there were times I rooted more for her husband than I did for her! Well half joke aside yes I think Anna is a tragic figure in the original story but not because her suffering came from things she never did. She made plenty of mistakes in the book. In her book I think the purpose was not to show her as a victim that suffers like a martyr but that every single character in the book is a victim to Russian society. All the characters suffer in the book for their own reasons and among them I find her husband Alexey Alexandrovich being one of the really tragic figures in the book. But he just like Anna made many mistakes.
She was naive and arrogant. They went about the whole thing in the most teribble way. Anna was too teen girl like, she really lacked any wisdom or experience in dealing with the situation. She wanted to stay married, retain full parental rights, live with her lover, flaunt around with him in public (with no care for her husband's feels and position) and everyone should applaud her for it. ??
@@guest_5992 I have to admit that what you say has plenty of truth in it. At times in the book one can see that she is reluctant of getting the divorce but not only because of her personal shame but also she didn't want to lose certain traits of a married wife. At certain points she seemed like wanting to keep them both in her life (her husband and her lover) and she even seemed to judge Vronsky for wishing the divorce so that be could give her child his name and have also a legacy behind and stop hiding and yes she absolutely didn't even think of her husband's position in many parts of the book. On one hand this is what makes the book so iconic; that all characters make mistakes and act realistically One doesn't need to agree on their actions to recognize that they do act like many of us would in similar situations.
I find it very interesting how some things in the past seem odd or just ridiculous! Yes it's terrible that she had an affair, but to publicly shame her, and act like they've never done anything wrong in their own lives, is just very odd! But then again, it's what it was like back then.
True but I would argue that people are still like that today. Maybe they aren’t as bold as this crazy bird, but people like to have a scapegoat because it makes them feel morally superior. They know deep down that they are also flawed but they do all of this for societal approval. That’s the whole idea behind the theater concept, it’s all a show! It’s funny because a truly good person would never do what these people did.
And what about the men’s indiscretions? Totally okay and totally forgivable. This is what Tolstoy was showing in his novels. The double standard at the time.
Why does Vronsky remind me of Gene Wilder in "Young Frankenstein"? Anna's husband was willing to give her a divorce until one of his pious female friends explained that giving his wife a divorce would put her soul in jeopardy. In upper-class European society, adultery was handled discreetly with couples staying married but conducting separate private lives. This version of "Anna Karenina" shows the fate of Anna's illegitimate daughter. Although he is a prig, Karenin does the decent thing by bringing the child up as his own.
It’s painful to see that even here in comments people say that because she’s married, she needs to stay married to her husband. This fundamentalist christian view of life.
Yeah...you can't be walking around with your boyfriend when you're literally married to someone else. I don't care what time period. While there's no reason to be cruel, we should always be honest.
In that period it was arranged marriage so I don't blame anyone if they weren't happy in that time with that social views. You can't even divorce someone if you live in that period that the problem of the whole stories. Poor souls, who knows how many other people suffered back in time because of this views
@@importantstuf8870 Because she cheated. In that essence she is at fault. She has made her position much harder by performing adultery. Yes one can understand why she cheated or even feel sorry for her and understand her position but still in that essence she cheated jot her husband. Her husband wasn't mistreating her either. He was just not the man she could love. But still even nowadays the position of a partner worsens in a divorce case if he or she is the one to commit adultery. In that essence her husband was innocent. Also why should Karenin choose between her happiness and his while he felt he was the one treated unfairly? He even admitted that because of the position she put him in he felt nothing for his son anymore because he reminded him of her and her infidelity. Ironically Anna does the same to her daughter by not showing her as much love as she did towards her son because she reminded her of the toughness of her position. Anyway the point is that she knew what she was signing up for when she cheated Oh and Karenin was going to give her her son if I recall correctly, when he agreed to divorce. She though suddenly felt ashamed and bad and she refused to take it so again her behavior is rather questionable but one can understand her given the circumstances. But she did abandon her son and then she missed him dearly and realized what she gave up for.
@@guest_5992 And ironically Karenin was ready to give her her son too when he agreed to the divorce if I remember correctly But he became hard again when she abandoned everyone and refused the divorce. He too got crushed by that
That always annoys me too, when films set in non-Anglophonic Europe are filmed using British English like we're all too dumb to know that Europe isn't just a giant United Kingdom. If it's going to be filmed in English, the actors can at least adopt a Russian accent. If they can adopt American accents, Russian should be doable as well.
Same reason they didn't have Russian accents in Chernobyl I imagine, better to not bother than have people try and possibly do the accent poorly or be harder for the audience to follow. I'm not an expert, but I imagine that a Russian accent is harder to do authentically due to it being meant for a different language, rather than say an English to American accent or vice versa, since they both speak English.
Is a Russian accent any more genuine than a British accent if they're speaking English anyway? Does it do anything for the story to force the actors to put on an accent?
Почему у них должен быть русский акцент? Герои книги говорят на своём языке без какого-либо акцента. И, раз героев играют англичане на своём языке, то у них тоже не должно быть акцентов. Когда книги Толстого печатают в переводе, шрифтам же не добавляют славянскую стилистику, чтобы подчеркнуть, что речь о русских?
This movie is masterpiece from the beginning to end, its the theater in a movie, it's wonderful, marvelous, everything from photography and everything else, Leo Tolstoy would be very pleased
It's interesting seeing all the people staring at her throughout the room. At 0:28 other than Moaniny Myrtul going right back to gawking, you can see the Countess Vronskaya staring directly at Anna.
Levin was an insert for Leo Tolstoy himself so... yeah. I don't think she was a villain, she was an anti-hero on a destruction arc. She serves as warning to anyone who will be ruled by lust, but it's also a commentary on Russian aristocratic society.
A solid film, you could hang clips of some older movies from the 40s. We have been following you since the beginning of your work and we are immensely grateful to you for the motivation you have given us, which is to open a youtube channel and release as many movies as possible. Thank you from the bottom of our hearts Movieclips Greetings from the PanchoTV team!
What a beautiful man! I hope he comes back 2 acting a little more, because I'm greedy 4 him but Arron Taylor Johnson is a beautiful find that should b found! Angus, Thongs and Perfect Snogging! Sweet, funny film n I love Angus! Kiera Knightly, amazing young woman! What power 2 play such heart breaking roles n not become them! Love u!
Well to be fair she did cheat on her husband (although one can understand that getting a divorce was not as easy as it is nowadays especially since her husband was religious) However I disagreed with her behavior a lot in the book. She first demanded a divorce but begged to keep her son and then when she gave birth her husband felt her struggle and gave her the divorce but she did not accept it and she ran off with Vronsky for Europe and she didn't take her son with her either. In the book I believe we do not want to portray Anna as a poor woman who suffers despite what she does but rather that she suffers because of her decisions later on and the real villain in the story was not her husband but Russian society that puts the pressure on all characters. I personally felt for her husband a great deal in the book and not only for her. In fact I found her husband a very tragic figure
@@katerinaaqu Let's not forget that in those days, women were married ( by their parents) at very small ages with men who could be their fathers( love was out of question), and the girl's feelings didn't matter at all. Anyway, nobody asked them if they wanted or not. I only believe Anna was born in a wrong century..........
@@ioanadumbravean6771 And let's not forget that men's feelings didn't matter either. Those men who were married by agreement to these younger girls that could be their daughters were often arranged by third parties that saw as convenient for economical reasons or political career. Karenin had no saying to the marriage either. He saw the benefits of it due to Anna's family background but he didn't choose to marry her. And again that doesn't justify Anna's behavior although it is understandable and someone can absolutely sympathize with her we still see the mistakes she made. Likewise with Karenin. He's a deeply tragic character and yet we see the mistakes he made as well. Karenin was even blamed by others that he was "too kind" with her and "too altruistic" and that "he crushed her with his big heart". He was actually ready to give her the divorce and make the sacrifice at the same time and society till judged him for it. In this novel Anna is not the only one who suffers and is misplaced by society. Literally everyone is.
@@katerinaaqu " KARENIN SAW THE BENEFITS" . well, for Anna there were no benefits, only exploatation............Well, she made mistakes of course, who wouldn't made. as a prisoner in a sold life?
And yes, the society, encouraged him and blamed her , because this happened in those times( and not only ) : the man was allowed to do all that he wanted, the woman was just a marionette judged by all (mainly by women).................
To be fair...Anna was an insult to decency. She did break the rules and her and Vronsky were far to careless. 2) It wasn't like this in the books and the movie goes way over the top. She was shunned but they weren't using the S word 😅
Vronsky in this movie literally looks like the guy Im in a situationship with… Like at this point It hurts when I watch this movie. They’re just identical. The voice, face and the way he looks at Anna. Im both unlucky and lucky at the same time.
Her breaking of the rules was not that she had an affair - as so many of her friends and family have done, including those that shun her now - but that she left her husband publicly to live with her lover.
Many years ago the Russians made a tv series about Sherlock Holmes and are still very proud of it. The movie is how the Russians see the Victorian era. Same here. It is a view of the modern English on Tolstoy's era. Anna Karenina looks like a neurotic girl from the 21st century. By the way, the French film Anna Karenina was not better. The only good thing is maybe these films will inspire some spectators to read the novel. So be it.
This movie portrays a society chat is more "English" than "Russian"style. Where is the eccentricity and theatrical personalities of the russian society that I perceived in the book?
is it jus me, or do i feel like vronsky's cousin is more like a reflection of him. Like they look similar but the way their conversations are, it's as if he's talking to himself. Kind like those cartoons where there's a person on the character's shoulder, and they're telling them what to do and not to do, like advising them. Does that make sense?
1 Timothy 6:9-10 9 But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. 10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. Proverbs 28:22 22 He that hasteth to be rich hath an evil eye, and considereth not that poverty shall come upon him. James 1:11 11 For the sun is no sooner risen with a burning heat, but it withereth the grass, and the flower thereof falleth, and the grace of the fashion of it perisheth: so also shall the rich man fade away in his ways. Matthew 22:34-40 34 But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together. 35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, 36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law? 37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. Matthew 18:19-22 19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. 20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the midst of them. 21 Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? 22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven. James 2:14-17 14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he have faith, and have not works? can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, 16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? 17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. 1 John 3:14-18 14 We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. 15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him. 16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. 17 But whoso hath this world’s good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? 18 My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
To Live, or Not to Live, That Is the Question “To be, or not to be, that is the question,” mused Prince Hamlet in the so-called “nunnery scene” of William Shakespeare’s play Hamlet. Every year, around the world, some 800,000 people answer this question negatively and take their own lives. Even worse, suicide is one of the leading causes of death among young people. Why do people, especially young ones, take their own lives? Is it possible to strengthen their desire to live? The authors of the Talmud wrote, “For two and a half years, the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel disputed. One side said, ‘It is better for man not to be born than to be born,’ and the other side said, ‘It is better for man to be born than not to be born.’ They concluded, ‘It is better for man not to be born than to be born, but now that he is born, let him look into his actions’” (Eruvin 13b). Indeed, if an alien were to land on Earth and look at us, it would probably say, “The pathetic humans bump into each other, ridicule and humiliate one another, and do everything they can to ruin each other’s lives. No wonder they are so depressed. Why did nature create such miserable beings?” Suicide is the extreme consequence of a series of problems that afflict people to the point where they decide to end it all. But even before these problems become too much to handle, they make us ask about the meaning of life. After all, if life is only about survival through ordeals, then it is indeed better not to be born than to be born. The thing is that when we begin to ask questions about life, or as the sages wrote, “look into our actions,” we begin to grow. Pain leads to spiritual development that lifts us to realms we would not have dreamed existed, and we would not have searched for them were we not forced by pain. The key to these new realms lies in fostering positive connections among people, in emerging from the mindset of alienation and narcissism we have so devoutly nurtured until now, to find that when we sympathize with others, we gain rather than lose. We win new perspectives and new ideas, new wisdom and knowledge, and new friends. By changing our attitude to others, we change our world. Moreover, by choosing who we bond with, we shape and reshape our world with every new acquaintance. In this way, no world is too harsh to live in, since we can always change the people we connect to, and in so doing, change our world. Also, there is no end to the insights and knowledge we can gain since there are always more connections to make than we can establish in our lifetime. And best of all, when we connect with other people, we attune ourselves to our surrounding reality, which is already connected and would have worked in perfect harmony if we, humans, did not disrupt it. The more we develop positive connections, which aim to support and nurture rather than depress and oppress one another, the more we expand our perception of reality. We find that the reality we have known until now was only a “corridor” to a deeper and more expansive perception. If we want people not to take their own lives, we must give them a reason to live. When people understand what life is for, they will have a purpose to go through life’s trials and tribulations. As Nietzsche wrote, “He who has a why to live for can bear almost any how.” Therefore, our task today is to reshape our connections in order to reshape our world. The world reflects our attitude toward others. If we jointly transform our attitude toward others from abusive and aggressive to considerate and caring, the lives of all of us will change, as well, from a losing battle to a smooth and pleasant ride. It is really up to us.
Anna's brother's betrayal of his wife is (in the book) seen by most other characters as a mere triffle and the ensuing crisis with his wife as her fault and a silly little scene de ménage, a mere inconvenience. Reportedly Tolstoy initially wanted to write a book condemning adultery, but ended up creating a much more nuanced portrayal, both morally and emotionally.
I think she didn’t want to divorce. She wants everything, a rich husband, a son, a handsome lover, and of course a position in high society. People who want everything will lose something
Breaking someone's heart can be forgiven, by the person whose heart was broken. But breaking a sacred vow you made makes you lousy and spineless. That's an entirely different crime. Excuse me, but I can't find any sympathy for Anna.
Разве можно сравнивать нашего Вронского в исполнении В. Ланового и эрзац в другом исполнении. В нашей версии, Вронский аристократ,благородный человек с безупречным манера и, необыкновенный красавец, от которого можно потерять голову. А второй - просто бледная тень Вронского и очень напоминает купчика или приказчика в лавке или полового в трактире. Иногда своеобразное виденье режессера в постановке картины, приводит к печальным результатам.
@@ИннаКазанцева-в9ъ Прямо поражает небрежное отношение иностранных режиссёров к постановке русской классики, в отличие от наших, которые глубоко вникали и учитывали мельчайших нюансы, когда ставили зарубежную классику. Даже зарубежные критики писали о том, что наши очень близко к материалу ставили фильмы о зарубежной жизни. Действительно, бедный Толстой, не подозревал он, что из его великого произведения сделают дешёвую мелодраму.
@@ИринаЦепалова-ф2д У иностранцев отношение к русской классике с точки зрения рейтинга. Делают так, чтобы рейтинг фильма был высок. И прежде всего это молодая аудитория. отсюда и точность воспроизведения замысла автора. .
Специально пересмотрела советскую версию: они там такие возрастные, деревянные. Не идут ни в какое сравнение с теми эмоциями, которые нам показывает Кейра и ее партнёр Вронский. Ну как обычно совку с голливудом не тягаться
@@varvaran7274совсем не сторонник совка и советского искусства (что не исключает перлов), но сравнивать фильмы, между которыми десятки лет и, самое главное, сексуальная революция - имхо не стоит. У меня написано - по Толстому. Ну, а кто/что "накропал по мотивам", тк своей соображалки не хватило на полноценную историю, которая захватит людей - то такэ...
The entire conceit of the film is that it is supposed to be highly theatrical and Brechtian. The majority of the film is shot in a dilapidated theatre. The costumes, which the director and designer decided to be more 50s Dior rather than late 1800s, are just another aspect of what the film was going for.
*Thank GOD for the Southern Bellas* Because This mindset deeply rooted a cursed mindset in historical societies and tarnished the basic essence of beauty in woman.
Most people agree that this double standard was, and is,(yes of course it still is the case today!) completely unfair and hypocritical. So why does it continue today??!!! And if many people agreed it was unfair back then, in the 19th century, why did it continue back then as well??!!! .....Because we perpetuate it! Because women are mean to other women! Because men benefit from this double standard! Because because because...aaaarrrgh!!! So frustrating!!!! I've heard my high school son's friends continue this double standard of being much harsher about women than men for the same behaviour,and it's the 21st century!!!ok so I will continue to rant privately about that one for awhile while I ask another question: the marriage thing. Why didn't Vronsky want to marry Anna to legitimize their relationship??? That's another one that remains a problem today. Let's face it, people are pretty judgemental about that marriage label, and if you know that to be the case, why not do everything in your power to help the situation???Yes I know this is a work of fiction, but it's another issue that continues to this day!! Some people, sorry guys most of the people in question are indeed male, continue to be with a woman yet refuse to marry her, even if she feels a bit hurt by that. Now what is that really saying, everyone?? If both people truly agree they don't want marriage, fine, but we all know that is rarely the case, and if one person wants, and one person doesn't, what does that mean???Not a good sign. Idk. Opinions? Oh, Vronsky is gorgeous, so's Kiera; gorgeous heartbreaking infuriating story, beautifully crafted and cast film.
What about me i think Anna was stupid she's too times making wrong choices..Vronsky was beautiful and seems like they are understand each other ,but what if these in her head all drama? fall in love with someone you've got crush on while you married its such an adrenaline! And if her husband treated her right and wasn't religious everything is going to be okay
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 87 วันนี้!! คู่เอก "ก้องชัย vs โชคปรีชา"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YN6e7HVnekw/mqdefault.jpg)
This movie is a master at displaying the feeling public scrutiny can give you. On multiple occasions I feel the discomfort Anna is feeling.
Lots of double standards and hypocrisy in the story but as far as I’m concerned Anna got everything she deserved.
@@thomasjacks4287 No. She just wanted a breakup and live a normal life. That’s it. She didn’t deserve anything that happened to her.
@@LilacSreya uh yes she did
This movie is told from Anna's perspective, but she is actually a villain, cheated on her husband and abandoned her children for a younger man.
Anna and his lover couldn't with the consequences and Anna committed suicide because she couldn't bear the consequences of her actions.
Anna went crazy for love, literally.
@@inputlunasano723 Agreed. And it's entirely her fault.
Tolstoy’s books were all about the outrageous disparity between men and women’s moral judgement by society at that time. A man could have as many affairs as they wished. With Married women or seducing young virgins, , it didn’t matter. A woman though? The slightest indiscretion was Unforgivable.
True that
Exactly, the comments of today are still missing the mark, sadly. Can we really blame young women for falling in love with men their age when they never got to power to choose? Their husbands were often twice their age, and got their pick for "love."
Yet Tolstoy himself treated his wife very badly indeed. Hypocrite.
Well almost. The taboo was not in her having an affair, as her blonde friend often did, and gossiped about doing so. It's because she actually wanted to divorce her husband and the father of her child to be with the man she truly loved, and THAT'S what was a big no-no. At that time, in that social class, marriage was not about love and was about station and wealth. You married according to the social conventions and did what you actually desired discreetly, though even in this, yes women were judged WAY more harshly for it. But what actually made her an outcast was wanting a divorce, when her husband had remained loyal and wanted to be with someone solely for her feelings toward him.
I described it well. I hate masculinity and ambivalence between women and men. I do not believe that it exists to this day. Even in your advanced societies you suffer from this ambivalence, let alone our conservative Arab societies. It is the pinnacle of ambivalence and segregation.
Anna's own brother cheated on his wife constantly and publicly, but he never lost any of his privileges.
Its not double standards that women lost everything for being unfaithful but men didn't, its called simple logic. If a man gets a Lover pregnant, he can deny the child as there was no paternity tests back then, or if the lover was poor he could send her away so she'd never be seen again, if a noblewoman who was unmarried or didn't spend time with her husband got pregnant what could she do? Nothing, she couldn't get rid of the child inside her. There is no such thing as sexism, never was, never is, and never will be, everything comes together if you just start to look by logic.
He was a man. It was to be expected, even cherished in a male. In women, it was the opposite. And in many places in the world, it´s STILL like this, either as a societal rule, or at least it´s in the minds of the people.
@@Calucifer13 Doesn't mean it's fair.
@@НиколайРоманов-л6ю You're so unfathomably unread, it's almost funny.
From Spiritual pov when you aren't with your true love you cheated, no matter if someone is your wife or husband here on Earth. When you betrayed yourself, your true feelings, you cheated.
"Rescue her and put your seal on the fiasco"
What a line!
What does it mean actually
@@irodaikromxonova9556 It means confirm with your actions to everyone else what is happening. also fiasco is like saying “ordeal” or the whole crazy affair.
fiasco is basically drama that is stirred by bad decisions. Rescueing her would mean he would give the "seal of approval" regarding the rumors about their affair.
And he should have as he intends to marry her.
Whoever threw that spotlight on her is new level of petty.🤣
No because like what was the reason💀💀💀
@@ojogunleye2209LMAO
Its not a real spotlight. Its how Anna pictures it.
It's metaphorical..
Exactly. Like what did that do for you? 😂😂😂😂
just now realized that the disgruntled wife beside Anna is moaning myrtle LOL
Omg I didn't even see that!
I mean from her voice alone, it's clear it's her! 😅
And lady Mary
Nope, moaning myrtle was played by someone else
You’re a Harry Potter fan
I love the presentation of the scenes of this film. Very creative and it shows u direct behavior and attitude shown towards a particular incident.
Teacher: Can someone give me an example of double standards?
Me: Watch this scene.
This is a fantasy, and what Anna feels is happening. She is not a reliable narrator. Im certain plenty of women were mistresses in this time period and got away with it just fine. You need more discretion.
@@martineshamzin7535 men having mistresses was not really an issue though.: that’s what they’re saying
@@martineshamzin7535 Anna isn’t a narrator in this scene
@@iambetakaroten It not even about a narrator. Anna literally never existed. She was invented by Tolstoy. Vronsky never existed. Kitty never existed. This is just Tolstoy's opinion.
@@cheycheyfriend247 Men and women have different obligations in that time period. Not one being greater or better then the other, but different. In any case, Anna is shallow as a kiddie pool, so there is that.
I like how she’s wearing white in this. Like she’s a bride and Alexi is her groom…but she’s already married.
When her friend held her hand to ease the judging glances. That’s a true friend 🥲😢💖🌸
The only true friend she had it seems.
I literally cried for Anna this movies so heartbreaking
I haven't seen this movie yet but in the book there were times I rooted more for her husband than I did for her!
Well half joke aside yes I think Anna is a tragic figure in the original story but not because her suffering came from things she never did. She made plenty of mistakes in the book. In her book I think the purpose was not to show her as a victim that suffers like a martyr but that every single character in the book is a victim to Russian society.
All the characters suffer in the book for their own reasons and among them I find her husband Alexey Alexandrovich being one of the really tragic figures in the book. But he just like Anna made many mistakes.
In general, arranged marriages, bonds only made for wealth and power
She was naive and arrogant. They went about the whole thing in the most teribble way. Anna was too teen girl like, she really lacked any wisdom or experience in dealing with the situation. She wanted to stay married, retain full parental rights, live with her lover, flaunt around with him in public (with no care for her husband's feels and position) and everyone should applaud her for it. ??
She abandoned her son. I would never cry for anyone who does that!
@@guest_5992 I have to admit that what you say has plenty of truth in it. At times in the book one can see that she is reluctant of getting the divorce but not only because of her personal shame but also she didn't want to lose certain traits of a married wife. At certain points she seemed like wanting to keep them both in her life (her husband and her lover) and she even seemed to judge Vronsky for wishing the divorce so that be could give her child his name and have also a legacy behind and stop hiding and yes she absolutely didn't even think of her husband's position in many parts of the book.
On one hand this is what makes the book so iconic; that all characters make mistakes and act realistically
One doesn't need to agree on their actions to recognize that they do act like many of us would in similar situations.
Welcome to the most British version of imperial Russia.
Hahahaha
Lmaaooo literally
Well it follows the book quite closely
I find it very interesting how some things in the past seem odd or just ridiculous! Yes it's terrible that she had an affair, but to publicly shame her, and act like they've never done anything wrong in their own lives, is just very odd! But then again, it's what it was like back then.
True but I would argue that people are still like that today. Maybe they aren’t as bold as this crazy bird, but people like to have a scapegoat because it makes them feel morally superior. They know deep down that they are also flawed but they do all of this for societal approval. That’s the whole idea behind the theater concept, it’s all a show! It’s funny because a truly good person would never do what these people did.
Still today
That's exactly what it's like now.
😂it’s still definitely like that in 2022 the world is full of hypocrites and people housed in glass houses 😂😂
I think it's an excellent system of societal self control
"I'm just a girl in love! I can't be held responsible for my actions!"
Anna Karenina, in summary.
I understood the reference
@@walqqr1 Crazy Ex Girlfriend
@@thevillainousqueenofhearts4976 yes!! Loved that show.
A crappy distillation, in summary.
And what about the men’s indiscretions? Totally okay and totally forgivable. This is what Tolstoy was showing in his novels. The double standard at the time.
When the light fell on her those diamonds shined very bright
I know😍😍😍
That necklace is worth a cool 5 mil. Keira Knightley said she was nervous wearing it
This is legit one of my all time favorite movies. I've watched it over a hundred times.
This depicts what goes on inside my head when I feel like everybody is scrutinizing me.
This Scene Is Borderline; Exquisite; Even Splendid; The Perspective Is Awesome; And So Are Its Proportions.
Why does Vronsky remind me of Gene Wilder in "Young Frankenstein"? Anna's husband was willing to give her a divorce until one of his pious female friends explained that giving his wife a divorce would put her soul in jeopardy. In upper-class European society, adultery was handled discreetly with couples staying married but conducting separate private lives. This version of "Anna Karenina" shows the fate of Anna's illegitimate daughter. Although he is a prig, Karenin does the decent thing by bringing the child up as his own.
I think it's the wavy blonde hair! Very Wilder-esque. He and Aaron Taylor Johnson both have very blue eyes as well.
It’s painful to see that even here in comments people say that because she’s married, she needs to stay married to her husband.
This fundamentalist christian view of life.
There's nothing decent in raising your spouse's side child.
Daaamn he's very attractive,
It’s hard to hear words when I see Vronsky he is just poetry in motion
Yeah...you can't be walking around with your boyfriend when you're literally married to someone else. I don't care what time period. While there's no reason to be cruel, we should always be honest.
In that period it was arranged marriage so I don't blame anyone if they weren't happy in that time with that social views. You can't even divorce someone if you live in that period that the problem of the whole stories. Poor souls, who knows how many other people suffered back in time because of this views
@@fullmoon5799 Actually she could divorce. She refused the divorce. She didn't want to lose her parental rights. Her choice.
@@guest_5992 why should she choose between her children and her happiness?
@@importantstuf8870 Because she cheated. In that essence she is at fault. She has made her position much harder by performing adultery. Yes one can understand why she cheated or even feel sorry for her and understand her position but still in that essence she cheated jot her husband. Her husband wasn't mistreating her either. He was just not the man she could love. But still even nowadays the position of a partner worsens in a divorce case if he or she is the one to commit adultery. In that essence her husband was innocent.
Also why should Karenin choose between her happiness and his while he felt he was the one treated unfairly?
He even admitted that because of the position she put him in he felt nothing for his son anymore because he reminded him of her and her infidelity. Ironically Anna does the same to her daughter by not showing her as much love as she did towards her son because she reminded her of the toughness of her position.
Anyway the point is that she knew what she was signing up for when she cheated
Oh and Karenin was going to give her her son if I recall correctly, when he agreed to divorce. She though suddenly felt ashamed and bad and she refused to take it so again her behavior is rather questionable but one can understand her given the circumstances. But she did abandon her son and then she missed him dearly and realized what she gave up for.
@@guest_5992 And ironically Karenin was ready to give her her son too when he agreed to the divorce if I remember correctly
But he became hard again when she abandoned everyone and refused the divorce. He too got crushed by that
I got my wires seriously crossed when I saw the actress playing Anna's friend.
Lizzy and Lady Mary, love it
Anytime I’m reminded of this movie, I’m confused on why everyone is British. Did the director just let’s forget about a Russian accent oooooooor lol
That always annoys me too, when films set in non-Anglophonic Europe are filmed using British English like we're all too dumb to know that Europe isn't just a giant United Kingdom. If it's going to be filmed in English, the actors can at least adopt a Russian accent. If they can adopt American accents, Russian should be doable as well.
Same reason they didn't have Russian accents in Chernobyl I imagine, better to not bother than have people try and possibly do the accent poorly or be harder for the audience to follow. I'm not an expert, but I imagine that a Russian accent is harder to do authentically due to it being meant for a different language, rather than say an English to American accent or vice versa, since they both speak English.
Is a Russian accent any more genuine than a British accent if they're speaking English anyway? Does it do anything for the story to force the actors to put on an accent?
I read somewhere that regardless of where the film is set, if it's outside the US, movies commonly use British accent simply because it's foreign.
Почему у них должен быть русский акцент? Герои книги говорят на своём языке без какого-либо акцента. И, раз героев играют англичане на своём языке, то у них тоже не должно быть акцентов. Когда книги Толстого печатают в переводе, шрифтам же не добавляют славянскую стилистику, чтобы подчеркнуть, что речь о русских?
"She broke the rules." That says it all, in polite society.
This movie is masterpiece from the beginning to end, its the theater in a movie, it's wonderful, marvelous, everything from photography and everything else, Leo Tolstoy would be very pleased
Incredible scene.
It's interesting seeing all the people staring at her throughout the room. At 0:28 other than Moaniny Myrtul going right back to gawking, you can see the Countess Vronskaya staring directly at Anna.
Tbh I really wanted him to go after her when he got up to but was stopped 😭
Is it me or does anyone else think that after reading the book, Levin was the real protagonist of the story and Anna is the real villain? 😅
Levin was an insert for Leo Tolstoy himself so... yeah. I don't think she was a villain, she was an anti-hero on a destruction arc. She serves as warning to anyone who will be ruled by lust, but it's also a commentary on Russian aristocratic society.
A solid film, you could hang clips of some older movies from the 40s. We have been following you since the beginning of your work and we are immensely grateful to you for the motivation you have given us, which is to open a youtube channel and release as many movies as possible. Thank you from the bottom of our hearts Movieclips
Greetings from the PanchoTV team!
He’s so perfect 😍
Just like high-school all over again
Keira ...so impressive 👏 🥇❤💙
Браво, Кира!
Moaning Myrtle finally left Hogwarts I see....
What a beautiful man! I hope he comes back 2 acting a little more, because I'm greedy 4 him but Arron Taylor Johnson is a beautiful find that should b found! Angus, Thongs and Perfect Snogging! Sweet, funny film n I love Angus! Kiera Knightly, amazing young woman! What power 2 play such heart breaking roles n not become them! Love u!
If you haven't seen the movie Savages, you definitely should!! Aaron is super hot 🔥 in that movie!!
1:40-2:00 this man is the best person in this scene. ❤👏
I think he’s wishing to be in an illicit affair with Anna too as how he looks at her (0:21)
You didn't get it
Uh...
He looked at her as if she were open for business!
being an inlove woman in those times wasn't easy
Well to be fair she did cheat on her husband (although one can understand that getting a divorce was not as easy as it is nowadays especially since her husband was religious)
However I disagreed with her behavior a lot in the book. She first demanded a divorce but begged to keep her son and then when she gave birth her husband felt her struggle and gave her the divorce but she did not accept it and she ran off with Vronsky for Europe and she didn't take her son with her either.
In the book I believe we do not want to portray Anna as a poor woman who suffers despite what she does but rather that she suffers because of her decisions later on and the real villain in the story was not her husband but Russian society that puts the pressure on all characters. I personally felt for her husband a great deal in the book and not only for her. In fact I found her husband a very tragic figure
@@katerinaaqu Let's not forget that in those days, women were married ( by their parents) at very small ages with men who could be their fathers( love was out of question), and the girl's feelings didn't matter at all. Anyway, nobody asked them if they wanted or not. I only believe Anna was born in a wrong century..........
@@ioanadumbravean6771
And let's not forget that men's feelings didn't matter either. Those men who were married by agreement to these younger girls that could be their daughters were often arranged by third parties that saw as convenient for economical reasons or political career.
Karenin had no saying to the marriage either. He saw the benefits of it due to Anna's family background but he didn't choose to marry her.
And again that doesn't justify Anna's behavior although it is understandable and someone can absolutely sympathize with her we still see the mistakes she made.
Likewise with Karenin. He's a deeply tragic character and yet we see the mistakes he made as well.
Karenin was even blamed by others that he was "too kind" with her and "too altruistic" and that "he crushed her with his big heart". He was actually ready to give her the divorce and make the sacrifice at the same time and society till judged him for it. In this novel Anna is not the only one who suffers and is misplaced by society. Literally everyone is.
@@katerinaaqu " KARENIN SAW THE BENEFITS" . well, for Anna there were no benefits, only exploatation............Well, she made mistakes of course, who wouldn't made. as a prisoner in a sold life?
And yes, the society, encouraged him and blamed her , because this happened in those times( and not only ) : the man was allowed to do all that he wanted, the woman was just a marionette judged by all (mainly by women).................
Is that moaning Myrtle?😁
I guess she is ))
Who???
@@sugab3160 you can see her at 2:14
yes!
How did myrtle leave the toilet?
🤣
Lizzy. And lady Mary!!
To be fair...Anna was an insult to decency. She did break the rules and her and Vronsky were far to careless.
2) It wasn't like this in the books and the movie goes way over the top. She was shunned but they weren't using the S word 😅
Vronsky in this movie literally looks like the guy Im in a situationship with…
Like at this point It hurts when I watch this movie.
They’re just identical. The voice, face and the way he looks at Anna.
Im both unlucky and lucky at the same time.
Mary from Downton Abbey!
Her breaking of the rules was not that she had an affair - as so many of her friends and family have done, including those that shun her now - but that she left her husband publicly to live with her lover.
Many years ago the Russians made a tv series about Sherlock Holmes and are still very proud of it. The movie is how the Russians see the Victorian era.
Same here. It is a view of the modern English on Tolstoy's era. Anna Karenina looks like a neurotic girl from the 21st century.
By the way, the French film Anna Karenina was not better.
The only good thing is maybe these films will inspire some spectators to read the novel. So be it.
The British considered the Russian adaptation of Sherlock Holmes as the best one, why wouldn't we be proud of it, I wonder
By golly, it’s Lady Mary 😍
Elizabeth Bennett and Jane Eyre!
Is that Cara delevingne in 2:10?
yes
And she’s fierce.
This movie portrays a society chat is more "English" than "Russian"style. Where is the eccentricity and theatrical personalities of the russian society that I perceived in the book?
He’s so handsome 😭
is it jus me, or do i feel like vronsky's cousin is more like a reflection of him. Like they look similar but the way their conversations are, it's as if he's talking to himself. Kind like those cartoons where there's a person on the character's shoulder, and they're telling them what to do and not to do, like advising them. Does that make sense?
Count Vronsky….oh my 🤤
Vronsky should have ignored princess Betsy and gone to Anna immediately.
And now was the time i noticed for the first time, that Bill Skarsgard was in the film! 😑
anyone spot young Cara Delevingne 👀
He loved her she loved him...so sad. It reminds me of my love
1 Timothy 6:9-10
9 But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.
10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
Proverbs 28:22
22 He that hasteth to be rich hath an evil eye, and considereth not that poverty shall come upon him.
James 1:11
11 For the sun is no sooner risen with a burning heat, but it withereth the grass, and the flower thereof falleth, and the grace of the fashion of it perisheth: so also shall the rich man fade away in his ways.
Matthew 22:34-40
34 But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together.
35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,
36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Matthew 18:19-22
19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.
20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the midst of them.
21 Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.
James 2:14-17
14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he have faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
1 John 3:14-18
14 We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.
15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.
16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.
17 But whoso hath this world’s good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?
18 My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
Thanks be to God.
Yeah hail satan
Hope you realize that's all made up
No one cares
Whom ever this actor is he is cute 🥰
Aaron Taylor-Johnson as Vronsky is absolutely stunning. He looks like a Greek god.
Hey, that’s Moaning Myrtle.
tan valiente que se atrevió a vivir su vida, una sociedad que siempre critica y criticara.
To Live, or Not to Live, That Is the Question
“To be, or not to be, that is the question,” mused Prince Hamlet in the so-called “nunnery scene” of William Shakespeare’s play Hamlet. Every year, around the world, some 800,000 people answer this question negatively and take their own lives. Even worse, suicide is one of the leading causes of death among young people. Why do people, especially young ones, take their own lives? Is it possible to strengthen their desire to live?
The authors of the Talmud wrote, “For two and a half years, the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel disputed. One side said, ‘It is better for man not to be born than to be born,’ and the other side said, ‘It is better for man to be born than not to be born.’ They concluded, ‘It is better for man not to be born than to be born, but now that he is born, let him look into his actions’” (Eruvin 13b). Indeed, if an alien were to land on Earth and look at us, it would probably say, “The pathetic humans bump into each other, ridicule and humiliate one another, and do everything they can to ruin each other’s lives. No wonder they are so depressed. Why did nature create such miserable beings?”
Suicide is the extreme consequence of a series of problems that afflict people to the point where they decide to end it all. But even before these problems become too much to handle, they make us ask about the meaning of life. After all, if life is only about survival through ordeals, then it is indeed better not to be born than to be born.
The thing is that when we begin to ask questions about life, or as the sages wrote, “look into our actions,” we begin to grow. Pain leads to spiritual development that lifts us to realms we would not have dreamed existed, and we would not have searched for them were we not forced by pain.
The key to these new realms lies in fostering positive connections among people, in emerging from the mindset of alienation and narcissism we have so devoutly nurtured until now, to find that when we sympathize with others, we gain rather than lose. We win new perspectives and new ideas, new wisdom and knowledge, and new friends. By changing our attitude to others, we change our world.
Moreover, by choosing who we bond with, we shape and reshape our world with every new acquaintance. In this way, no world is too harsh to live in, since we can always change the people we connect to, and in so doing, change our world. Also, there is no end to the insights and knowledge we can gain since there are always more connections to make than we can establish in our lifetime.
And best of all, when we connect with other people, we attune ourselves to our surrounding reality, which is already connected and would have worked in perfect harmony if we, humans, did not disrupt it. The more we develop positive connections, which aim to support and nurture rather than depress and oppress one another, the more we expand our perception of reality. We find that the reality we have known until now was only a “corridor” to a deeper and more expansive perception.
If we want people not to take their own lives, we must give them a reason to live. When people understand what life is for, they will have a purpose to go through life’s trials and tribulations. As Nietzsche wrote, “He who has a why to live for can bear almost any how.”
Therefore, our task today is to reshape our connections in order to reshape our world. The world reflects our attitude toward others. If we jointly transform our attitude toward others from abusive and aggressive to considerate and caring, the lives of all of us will change, as well, from a losing battle to a smooth and pleasant ride. It is really up to us.
wouldn't it be pretty if that were true. only the talmud knows less than you about why people kill themselves.
この映画のアーロンテイラージョンソン
色っぽくてカッコよかったですねっ❗
Anna's brother's betrayal of his wife is (in the book) seen by most other characters as a mere triffle and the ensuing crisis with his wife as her fault and a silly little scene de ménage, a mere inconvenience. Reportedly Tolstoy initially wanted to write a book condemning adultery, but ended up creating a much more nuanced portrayal, both morally and emotionally.
Keira Knightley is absolutely GORGEOUS. I wish to look as stunning as she is, but if I did it would be dangerous to me.
What does "Come in for a moment" mean? Like come chat or come sit?
EDIT: OMG I didn't realise Bill Skarsgard was in this!
Into their opera boxes. They have their own sections and people can invite others in or exit them
I love Cara Delevigne and She is the actress of her debut for movie in 2012. ❤️😍❤️
“IM MOANING MYRTLE!!”
Both of them should have been shunned. Not just Anna.
This Scene Seems To Be Most Russian of The Story; In What I Have Observed In Passing!!!!
Is that Mary from Downtown Abbey?
Oh geez, Vronsky is so annoying
I don’t understand why she did not wait patiently for the divorce and then marry him, just like it was planned and just like Betsy said….
I think she didn’t want to divorce. She wants everything, a rich husband, a son, a handsome lover, and of course a position in high society. People who want everything will lose something
Breaking someone's heart can be forgiven, by the person whose heart was broken. But breaking a sacred vow you made makes you lousy and spineless. That's an entirely different crime. Excuse me, but I can't find any sympathy for Anna.
Smaug? Hmmmm.
That's kind of the point if you read the book lol
You know it was imperialist russia and in high society it was arranged marriages
It's Moaning Myrtle. Damn I just admitted to watching Harry Potter. Will the police visit me?
Omg is it too good pick up !
you outted your self.
2:16 FUNNY hahhaha
Who was vronsky referring to when he said “as far as I’m concerned she’s my wife?”
남주 눈빛이 다했다.
russians with a posh english accent lol
2:10 Cara Delevingne on the right 😮
What a beautiful man
И это Вронский- да это карточный шулер, фат и не больше. Бедный Толстой, что они с ним сделали?
Разве можно сравнивать нашего Вронского в исполнении В. Ланового и эрзац в другом исполнении. В нашей версии, Вронский аристократ,благородный человек с безупречным манера и, необыкновенный красавец, от которого можно потерять голову. А второй - просто бледная тень Вронского и очень напоминает купчика или приказчика в лавке или полового в трактире. Иногда своеобразное виденье режессера в постановке картины, приводит к печальным результатам.
@@ИринаЦепалова-ф2д И карточного шулера. Жаль Толстого. Видел бы он.
@@ИннаКазанцева-в9ъ Прямо поражает небрежное отношение иностранных режиссёров к постановке русской классики, в отличие от наших, которые глубоко вникали и учитывали мельчайших нюансы, когда ставили зарубежную классику. Даже зарубежные критики писали о том, что наши очень близко к материалу ставили фильмы о зарубежной жизни. Действительно, бедный Толстой, не подозревал он, что из его великого произведения сделают дешёвую мелодраму.
@@ИринаЦепалова-ф2д У иностранцев отношение к русской классике с точки зрения рейтинга. Делают так, чтобы рейтинг фильма был высок. И прежде всего это молодая аудитория. отсюда и точность воспроизведения замысла автора. .
@@ИннаКазанцева-в9ъ 👍🌷
Is she the actress who played Moaning Myrtle?
Yes
@@charlottemunday7311 Thanks, she has a unique voice indeed
Лучшая Каренина - Самойлова, Вронский - Лановой, по Толстому
Специально пересмотрела советскую версию: они там такие возрастные, деревянные. Не идут ни в какое сравнение с теми эмоциями, которые нам показывает Кейра и ее партнёр Вронский. Ну как обычно совку с голливудом не тягаться
@@varvaran7274совсем не сторонник совка и советского искусства (что не исключает перлов), но сравнивать фильмы, между которыми десятки лет и, самое главное, сексуальная революция - имхо не стоит. У меня написано - по Толстому. Ну, а кто/что "накропал по мотивам", тк своей соображалки не хватило на полноценную историю, которая захватит людей - то такэ...
All the costumes are so completely inaccurate and a big mess, it's painful to watch.
They aren't going for accuracy they are going for theatrically and artifice ... or haven't you noticed the giant stage everything is on?
@@maggiemakgill Yeah, that's it. When you can't get something right, you say it was on purpose.
@@fan2jnrc Put some sugar in your life, you're awfully bitter
@@lyra5107 OOOH I'm definitely stealing that LOL
The entire conceit of the film is that it is supposed to be highly theatrical and Brechtian. The majority of the film is shot in a dilapidated theatre. The costumes, which the director and designer decided to be more 50s Dior rather than late 1800s, are just another aspect of what the film was going for.
*Thank GOD for the Southern Bellas*
Because This mindset deeply rooted a cursed mindset in historical societies and tarnished the basic essence of beauty in woman.
Aaron Taylor John's is a decent actor but he was SERIOUSLY miscasted here
Most people agree that this double standard was, and is,(yes of course it still is the case today!) completely unfair and hypocritical. So why does it continue today??!!! And if many people agreed it was unfair back then, in the 19th century, why did it continue back then as well??!!! .....Because we perpetuate it! Because women are mean to other women! Because men benefit from this double standard! Because because because...aaaarrrgh!!! So frustrating!!!! I've heard my high school son's friends continue this double standard of being much harsher about women than men for the same behaviour,and it's the 21st century!!!ok so I will continue to rant privately about that one for awhile while I ask another question: the marriage thing. Why didn't Vronsky want to marry Anna to legitimize their relationship??? That's another one that remains a problem today. Let's face it, people are pretty judgemental about that marriage label, and if you know that to be the case, why not do everything in your power to help the situation???Yes I know this is a work of fiction, but it's another issue that continues to this day!! Some people, sorry guys most of the people in question are indeed male, continue to be with a woman yet refuse to marry her, even if she feels a bit hurt by that. Now what is that really saying, everyone?? If both people truly agree they don't want marriage, fine, but we all know that is rarely the case, and if one person wants, and one person doesn't, what does that mean???Not a good sign. Idk. Opinions? Oh, Vronsky is gorgeous, so's Kiera; gorgeous heartbreaking infuriating story, beautifully crafted and cast film.
Lady Mary???
1 way or another adultery will NOT be tolerated
But it will be promulgated by Hollyweird.
So what happens next
bill?
Did anyone notice Cara Delevingne in the audience..?
You didn't divorce then
they are inverted !
What about me i think Anna was stupid she's too times making wrong choices..Vronsky was beautiful and seems like they are understand each other ,but what if these in her head all drama? fall in love with someone you've got crush on while you married its such an adrenaline!
And if her husband treated her right and wasn't religious everything is going to be okay
Кровь из глаз каждый раз, как вижу кривляния Киры. Фильм про Каренину, в котором нет Карениной.
Ну и что? Зато в остальных экранизациях нет книги, а здесь она есть
@@sailorv8067 Чего? Какой книги нет?
Oh, the vanity of it, the hypocrisy...
Nauseating
Girl no one there commit such sins like her, it is not hypocrisy at all!