Book Reviews | Gordon Campbell | News Flashes | Scoop Features | Scoop Video | Strange & Bizarre | Search

 


Removing Leo Tolstoy: Joe Wright’s Anna Karenina

Removing Leo Tolstoy: Joe Wright’s Anna Karenina

by Binoy Kampmark
February 12, 2013

Would you throw your self under a train for this? This curiously Downton Abbey styled adaptation of Leo Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina by Joe Wright suggests that this would be far fetched and needless in more ways than one. The man our heroine does it for seems wet behind the ears, and everything else. But here, the Bambi-eyed Count Vronsky (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), a bland, unconvincing prop of a man yearns to be with the married and dewy-eyed Anna (Keira Knightley). The Victorian stiffness is repaid in kind by a monastically disposed Alexei Karenin (Jude Law), who has other things on his mind. He becomes a wounded man of society – the great man of Russia – finding the moral coda he holds dear violated.

There in lies the challenge. One is already burdened by working a classic for an audience in terms of film location and delivery, and so alternative ways are sought to portray familiar themes. One thinks of Bernard Rose and his efforts in bringing, for instance, The Kreutzer Sonata to California or Master and Man to Colorado in Boxing Day. Here, Wright uses a Russian Theatre set in the 1870s. Within this highly stylised theatre setting, the tales of convention, morality and desire are told. It is a place where the seduction takes place, the wooing, and matters of state business conducted with cold precision. Then there are the side shots – the rejection of Levin (Domhnall Gleeson) by Kitty, and his escape to modest agrarian purity.

If there is praise to be found, it is the fact that Tom Stoppard’s versatile hand played a part. Extracting a workable screenplay from a massive tome of literature is no mean feat. So it is with little surprise that it is love, and more love, that is the focus of the film. It is either awkward and slightly constipated (Levin and Kitty), destructive and rule-breaking (Anna and Vronsky), stilted and societal (Karenin) or casually sexual (Oblonsky). Always, the brave if foolish woman must provide the blood insurance for the double standards a society demands. The horny chaps tend to be the first ones to be forgiven for their virile excesses.

Knightly is delectable, a sumptuous flower between scenes, and her Anna finds suitable psychological pitch. She loves, she grieves and she rages. That said, even between allusions to moving trains, tracks and impending death, she does not make a convincing case why she might have taken off with Vronsky, or improve upon her depiction of the progressive Duchess of Devonshire in Saul Dibb’s The Duchess (2008). Her death is immaculate and unconvincing – as is everything in terms of this romance. Vronsky is no hunk, though he makes some kind of stab at being a cad. Where on earth is the Slavic sense of doom, the gravy rich pondering over life’s inner sense of the tragic? This is a cinematic dish served cold, and for that reason, is excised of its Tolstoyan flavour.

In 1951, Lionel Trilling considered the weighty legacy of Anna Karenina and proposed that Tolstoy’s parading of objectivity was, in fact, a suggestion that we accept his world as real only in so far as we wanted it to be. “We so happily give our assent to what Tolstoy shows us and so willingly call it reality because we have something to gain from it being reality.” The performance seen here makes a valiant effort at gaining from this reality, but stumbles in forming its human characters. Complexity is sacrificed. This is Anna Karenina without Tolstoy and might well take its place amongst the latest Victorian-styled productions.

*************

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
 
 
Top Scoops Headlines

 

Open Source / Open Society: The Scoop Foundation - An Open Model For NZ Media

Access to accurate, relevant and timely information is a crucial aspect of an open and transparent society. However, in our digital society information is in a state of flux with every aspect of its creation, delivery and consumption undergoing profound redefinition... More>>

Keeping Out The Vote: Gordon Campbell On The US Elections

I’ll focus here on just two ways that dis-enfranchisement is currently occurring in the US: (a) by the rigging of the boundary lines for voter districts and (b) by demanding elaborate photo IDs before people are allowed to cast their vote. More>>

Ramzy Baroud: Being Black Palestinian - Solidarity As A Welcome Pathology

It should come as no surprise that the loudest international solidarity that accompanied the continued spate of the killing of Black Americans comes from Palestine; that books have already been written and published by Palestinians about the plight of their Black brethren. In fact, that solidarity is mutual. More>>

ALSO:

Max Rashbrooke: Why The New British Conservative PM Is Talking Inequality

In a major speech, May honed in on one key theme: an economy “that works for everyone”. It was strikingly like the language that the former British Labour leader, Ed Miliband, used in last year’s election campaign, as he put inequality front and centre of his – unsuccessful – political pitch. More>>

ALSO:

Gordon Campbell: On Tony Blair And The Chilcot Report

Alongside this litany of criticisms of Blair’s style of government and decision-making, Chilcot has also given Blair a remarkable amount of wiggle room. More>>

ALSO:

Werewolf: Flying Blind

Lets imagine an industry that prides itself on its modern technology. Yet its basic service is a chronic source of anxiety to many of its customers, partly because (very occasionally) this industry suffers catastrophic accidents that kill everyone who is using a particular instance of its service at the time. More>>

Get More From Scoop

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Top Scoops
Search Scoop  
 
 
Powered by Vodafone
NZ independent news