Showing posts with label Domhnall Gleeson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Domhnall Gleeson. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Calvary (2014) – Review

Review: Calvary is a strange yet effecting religious drama.

The film is about Father James, a good priest in a small Irish town. On an average Sunday, he is told that he will be murdered in one week by one of his parishioners because that parishioner was brutally raped as a boy by a priest. This man believes that killing a good priest will garner more attention than killing a bad one. Now, Father James has a week to put his affairs in order – but he also has a few choices. He knows who has threatened him. He could go to the police; he could flee; or, he could speak to this person and try and change their mind.

Unintentionally – let us call it a happy accident or fortunate coincidence – the last film I saw before seeing Calvary was The Passion of Joan of Arc (which I was revisiting, having not seen it in a few years). The two films make quite good companion pieces. The Passion of Joan of Arc is about Jeanne d’Arc’s trial, torture, and execution (burnt at the stake) at the hands of ecclesiastical jurists. Each film has a similar profound duality to it. In The Passion of Joan of Arc, Carl Theodor Dreyer’s direction presents the Catholic jurists in a very unflattering light. They do not know what to do with Jeanne, so they try to trick her and hurt her until she confesses to not being an instrument of God, but rather of Satan. They want to absolve themselves of responsibility (through historical context, we also know that they were under tremendous pressure by the English to find her guilty of heresy). The film does not take a kind view of the Catholic Church (if these are its learned representatives), but at the same time Jeanne is an incredibly pious and inspiring young woman (believed to be about nineteen at the time of her death). Her devotion to her faith is palpable and true. She is completely uncorrupt. She presents a vision of someone who has embraced God’s pure love, unshaken in her conviction even in the face of absolute cruelty and hate. The film exhibits the ugliness of religion and its beauty. So too does Calvary.

It is clear that writer-director John Michael McDonagh has a cynical view of the Catholic Church. The film is ripe with constant reminders of the Catholic Church’s crimes. The Church is to some extent only as good as the people who represent it. Here, Father James is a very good and understanding priest, but he has a dark side as well (his wife died young; his daughter feels abandoned by him; and he is an alcoholic). Father Leary (the other priest in the town) is fairly incompetent and probably should even not be a priest to begin with (it does not appear to really be his calling). As Father James makes his rounds around town, he is bombarded with the negative implications that his vocation seems to imply. He visits a cannibal in prison who asks him why God would make him the way he is. He is accosted by an angry father for walking near a young girl, not because he was behaving in any inappropriate way but because there is a stigma about priests and children. His friends like to remind him of the evils the Catholic Church has undertaken throughout time (and there are many). And yet, even though he is continually persecuted for his faith, he is still a good man, always willing to try and help his flock. McDonagh is unkind to the Catholic Church (which is not an unfair sentiment to have, given their history and current state), but even so he has made the film’s most authentically good person a priest. Like The Passion of Joan of Arc, Calvary has a duality. Despite all that is wrong and ugly, there is still goodness and beauty in faith. Both films, however, seem to put the emphasis on the individual as having the choice to be good or bad while the group (the Church) is by its own nature corrupt. The individual’s faith in God can be pure and beautiful, but that faith is corrupted by the institution of organized religion. Father James is aware of this but would rather look at the good in people than focus on the sins, much like McDonagh with his film. The sins (of man, the Church, society, and so on) are plainly present, but even so there is still something that can be beautiful about faith (and man). There can be goodness amongst all the rotten.

Calvary is structured in a very interesting manner by McDonagh. The film is very linear, counting down each day until the Sunday in which Father James is supposed to die. Calvary, as a title, implies that the film will detail a narrative of great suffering, maybe even one ending in crucifixion (literally or metaphorically); and thus, there is no happy ending for Father James from the start. McDonagh fills the film with Catholic symbolism. The film can be read as playing out the Stations of the Cross. Father James is condemned to death. He decides not to inform the police, instead carrying on with his work (thereby carrying his burden – his cross). He faces his failures: he tries to make amends with his daughter, he visits his former pupil who became a murderer in prison, and he succumbs to his drinking. He loses many of his most personal processions: his church is burnt down, his beloved dog is murdered, and his daughter leaves him to return to her home (although, they do find reconciliation). He tries to help Veronica Brennan, a loose woman in town who has been knocked around. He tries to help Teresa, a foreigner whose husband has just been killed by a drunk driver. He tries to help Michael Fitzgerald, a wealthy man who feels like life is meaningless and is emotionally detached (he was in finance, making millions off the losses of others, but not seeks some sort of redemption). He tries to help Father Leary realize that being a priest is not his true vocation. And finally, Father James is murdered.

McDonagh also explores the five stages of grief in the film (denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance). Certain characters seem to be personifications of these stages. As Father James makes his rounds around town, interacting with these characters, he seems to be witnessing people in different stages of grief in terms of their reaction to being letdown by the promise of life (and maybe even the promise of God or the promise of the Church). Life (God and the Church) promises to be a beautiful and wondrous thing that will bring you happiness and satisfaction, but then the reality sets in that life is really just a meaningless, tedious march towards death, with moments of happiness only existing as fleeting distractions – and they are hardly ever pure. The world is ugly and hard, just as God appears uncaring and cruel and the Church corrupt and greedy. Yet, Father James exemplifies that despite this darkness there can still be good and that meaning can be derived from our interactions with each other.

Father James too must come to terms with his own grief – be it over the loss of his wife, the pain his daughter lives with, or his own impending death. He decides to face his death because he has accepted that he must die to provide healing, both for the man who was wronged by the Church and to the Church itself. Maybe with his death, the Church will try to reform instead of constantly side stepping difficult truths. This is all interpretation, however, as Father James never explicitly informs the audience of why he decides to face his killer on the beach. Even though it does seem like Father James has accepted his fate, there is still a hint of hope that the man can be consoled and can forgive the Church.

In addition to all this heavy symbolism and drama, Calvary also has a wickedly black sense of humor and strangeness to it. The film is often very funny, but in an off sort of way. The characters that occupy McDonagh’s world are almost all odd ducks. The small Irish town is in a sense almost a surreal place, as its only inhabitants seem to be these bizarre people, who all seem to drift towards the fringes of society. Only Teresa, a foreigner, seems like a normal decent person. Fiona, Father James’s daughter too seems normal, except she has recently just attempted suicide and is clearly a damaged person. Father James, in this way, thusly seems to reside over a flock of broken people. He cannot run away because they need him.

The film is also aesthetically quite striking, with brilliant photography, design, writing, acting, and music. Tonally, everything works well together. The only slight flaw is the film’s pacing. McDonagh seems to deliberately pace the film to be very slow, giving a sense of weight to each day that passes. He also wants to make time for each of his wonderful scenes (usually an interaction between Father James and one of the other characters – speaking about some matter that really veils something completely different). The pacing works for the most part, especially when the film is considered as a whole, but in the moment there are parts that do seem to drag. The quirky nature and seemingly cynical approach to the Catholic Church will also put some viewers off.

McDonagh does a good job creating his characters. The supporting characters are odd, as stated above, yet have a certain depth to them. Initially, they seem like caricatures, exaggerated for effect, but as the film plays out a deeper side is revealed and they feel much more fleshed out. Father James is a great character. He is troubled, yet strives to be good and just. His darkness, however, makes him more relatable, because we too are imperfect, just trying to do our best.

Calvary is not a film for everyone – far from it – but for those with a dark sense of humor and an appetite for complex and thought-provoking drama and emotions, it is well worth seeing. It is in many ways a brilliant piece.


Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: John Michael McDonagh has two strong features to his name now with Calvary and The Guard. He has a great talent for black comedy, garnering strong performances, and writing fantastic dialog. I look forward to his next film.

Composer Patrick Cassidy’s score plays on the more tonally heavy nature of the film – the emotional toll of facing one’s own death as well as sounding influenced by music played during church services. It also features local Irish singing. Larry Smith’s cinematography is very good. He works in mostly darker tones, and the film features many beautiful landscape shots. There is not much color in the film’s palette, but when some does sneak in (like the church fire) it is quite striking by contrast. It is excellent work. Mark Geraghty’s production design is very simple and quiet in the film. His sets feel very naturalistic, which works well in allowing these eccentric characters to still feel grounded by their surroundings.

The cast is excellent in Calvary. David Wilmot, Marie-Josee Croze, M. Emmet Walsh, Isaach De Bankole, Pat Shortt, Killian Scott, and Orla O’Rourke are all very good in small supporting roles. Domhnall Gleeson gives a standout performance (though it is short) as cannibal Freddie Joyce. His energy is so electric and creepy. Dylan Moran plays an arrogant twit fantastically, yet there is such an inner sadness to him as well. Aiden Gillen too is fantastic at playing a complete bastard; though with his character, there does not seem to be remorse or sadness. He seems to be the way he is just to get a rise out of people (and maybe a little anger in there too). Kelly Reilly is very good at playing damaged characters. Here, she plays Fiona with equal measures of sadness and hope for the future; though she attempted suicide, she is nonetheless one of the stronger people in Father James’s life. Chris O’Dowd is wonderful in the film, giving probably his best performance to date. There is such anger and sadness and frustration behind his seemingly friendly and playful nature. It is very good work from him. Brendan Gleeson too gives a marvelous performance as Father James. He plays the man almost as if he were from a different genre, as though he were a no-nonsense sheriff in a western, but along with his gruff demeanor there is a true heart wanting to help. It is among the best work I have seen this year.


Summary & score: Calvary mixes its fiendish sense of humor and strangeness with its intensely emotional and provocative drama. The result is a film that is utterly compelling and challenging on multiple levels. 8/10

Monday, June 23, 2014

Movie of the Week – About Time

This week’s movie: About Time (2013)

On his 21st birthday, Tim discovers that he can travel in time (a family tradition passed down from father to son), thereby changing the events in his life. At first it seems like a gift and Tim uses it like any young man would to get the girl of his dreams. Time travel is a tricky thing, however, and Tim soon realizes that if he meddles too much, everything he knows can be undone forever.

The film is written and directed by Richard Curtis, who also wrote other romantic comedy favorites Notting Hill and Bridget Jones’s Diary (as well as writing the great Mr. Bean series). About Time is his third feature that he wrote and directed, his first two were Love Actually (everyone’s favorite) and Pirate Radio; he also wrote the dramas Girl in the Café and War Horse. On About Time, he worked with composer Nick Laird-Clowes, cinematographer John Guleserian, and production designer John Paul Kelly.


About Time is a very charming romantic comedy. It also has a strong emotional dramatic undertone, giving the overall narrative a bit more weight than the average rom-com. The film is very funny as well. It is my favorite romantic comedy of 2013 and among my favorite twenty-five films of the year. It is a must-see for fans of rom-coms and Richard Curtis’s work.


Trailer: Here
Available on: Blu-ray and Video On-Demand

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Stars to Watch: Part 13 – Movies Spotlight – November 2013


What He Has Been In:

Domhnall Gleeson, 30, is the son of Irish actor Brendan Gleeson. He went to the Dublin Institute of Technology where he studied Media Arts. After graduating, Gleeson began taking roles in shorts, small British films, and TV series. His first big film came with a small role in the sci-fi drama Never Let Me Go.

His next big break came in the Harry Potter Series, winning the role of Bill Weasley (his father plays Mad-Eye Moody in the series as well). Gleeson appears briefly in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part I and has a slightly bigger role in Part II (but still rather small overall). He also has a great, but small role in True Grit playing one of the bandits caught in the crosshairs.

Other British films of note that Gleeson has appeared in include the fantastic comic-book action film Dredd, in which he appears as a criminal, and the IRA drama/thriller Shadow Dancer.

Breakthrough:

Gleeson’s breakthrough, if you even want to call it that, as the film was not widely seen and he plays the third or fourth lead, came with 2012’s Anna Karenina (directed by Joe Wright), giving him his largest role to date in a major motion picture. The film stars Keira Knightley in the lead, while Gleeson plays Levin, a wealthy farmer looking to court the lovely Kitty (played by Alicia Vikander). Gleeson is quietly very good as Levin, and has great chemistry with Vikander. The film is utterly stunning and a must-see for those looking for a film that is as much art as narrative.


November Film:

In November, Gleeson stars opposite Rachel McAdams and Bill Nighy in the time-travel romance About Time. The film, written and directed by Richard Curtis, is about Tim, a young man who is told by his father that he has genetically inherited the ability to travel through time. Tim then uses this gift to try and win the heart of Mary. The film mark’s his first true leading role in a big film. Trailer: Here.

Upcoming:

Gleeson has five upcoming projects slated for 2014. First, he is set to star with his father, Chris O’Dowd, and Kelly Reilly in John Michael McDonagh’s Calvary. Next, he stars opposite Michael Fassbender and Maggie Gyllenhaal in the strange dramedy Frank. Then he stars with Oscar Isaac and Alicia Vikander in writer Alex Garland’s feature directorial debut Ex Machina. Gleeson then stars in Angelina Jolie’s next film as a director Unbroken about an Olympic runner who is taken prisoner by the Japanese during WWII. The screenplay is by the Coen Brothers. Finally, he is set to star opposite Saoirse Ronan in the film Brooklyn about Irish immigrants in New York during the 1950s. He certainly has a fantastic slate upcoming.


Career Highlights:

1)      Never Let Me Go (2010)* – cameo (Blu-ray, Video On-Demand, Trailer)
2)      Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010)* – cameo (Blu-ray, Video On-Demand, Trailer)
3)      True Grit (2010)* – supporting (Blu-ray, Video On-Demand, Trailer)
4)      Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)* – supporting (Blu-ray, Video On-Demand, Trailer)
5)      Dredd (2012) – supporting (Blu-ray, Video On-Demand, Trailer)
6)      Anna Karenina (2012)* – lead (Blu-ray, Trailer)
*Editor’s picks


What He Has Been In:

Tom Hiddleston, 32, started his career, as many British actors do, on television, appearing in such things as, Conspiracy, The Gathering Storm, and Cranford. After graduating from the Royal Academy of Dramatic Arts, he began to get more roles and bigger roles in Brittan, including a sizable one on the BBC (remake) detective drama Wallander.

After appearing in Thor, Hiddleston began booking even bigger films (including some outside England), including: a great supporting role as F. Scott Fitzgerald in Midnight in Paris, taking a leading role in the drama The Deep Blue Sea, and a supporting role in Steven Spielberg’s War Horse.

Breakthrough:

Hiddleston’s breakthrough came as the character Loki, appearing first in 2011’s Thor. The film was a success, but not overly so, yet it got his name and face out there as he was one of the best parts of the film – his performance being equal parts villainous, slimy, and charming.

However it is Joss Whedon’s The Avengers that really has made him a star, and a favorite among the fans of Marvel’s cinematic universe. The film was a massive hit, and Hiddleston clearly enjoyed his role as its central villain – basking in his own glory. Maybe more so than any other actor in the film, Hiddleston emerged as a new talent to regard.


November Film:

Turning in his third performance as Loki, Hiddleston is back with this month’s Thor: The Dark World (directed by Alan Taylor). This time, however, Loki is not the central bad guy, rather Thor must battle Dark Elves set on returning the Nine Realms to darkness. But, that does not mean Loki cannot have his fun as well. The film is highly entertaining, and among the better films to come from Marvel Studios so far. Trailer: Here.

Upcoming:

Hiddleston has a few upcoming projects. First he is set to feature in a supporting (possibly cameo) role in 2014’s Muppets Most Wanted, starring Ricky Gervais and Tina Fey. The sequel sees James Bobin returning in the director’s chair, helming a European jewel-heist Muppets caper. Next he stars in the animation fantasy The Pirate Fairy, and finally he stars opposite Charlie Hunnam and Jessica Chastain in Guillermo del Toro’s new horror film Crimson Peak (slated for 2015). In all likeliness (and hopefully) he will also appear in the inevitable Thor 3 (though, sadly, he is not scheduled to be in The Avengers: Age of Ultron – at least as far as we know at present).


Career Highlights:

1)      Thor (2011) – lead (Blu-ray, Video On-Demand, Trailer)
2)      Midnight in Paris (2011)* – supporting (Blu-ray, Video On-Demand, Trailer)
3)      The Deep Blue Sea (2011) – lead (Blu-ray, Video On-Demand, Trailer)
4)      War Horse (2011) – supporting (Blu-ray, Video On-Demand, Trailer)
5)      The Avengers (2012)* – lead (Blu-ray, Video On-Demand, Trailer)
*Editor’s picks


What She Has Been In:

Elizabeth Olsen, 24, got her start appearing in a number of her twin-big-sisters’ projects. However, it was somewhat tough for her early on, always in their (notorious, some might say) shadow. Finally, in 2011, she was able to make a career for herself on her own name.

She has since appeared in the horror film Silent House, the mystery thriller Red Lights, the romantic drama Liberal Arts, and the indie drama Kill Your Darlings.

Breakthrough:

Olsen’s breakthrough, however, came in Sean Durkin’s Martha Marcy May Marlene. Not only did she take the lead role in the film, but she also gave one of 2011’s most intriguing and brilliant performances. It is really a challenging character, requiring Olsen to exhibit a vast emotional range, and yet she beautifully (and tragically) captures each beat.


November Film:

In what may potentially be cool or completely ill-conceived, Olsen stars in Oldboy coming Thanksgiving weekend opposite Josh Brolin and Sharlto Copley. The film is a remake of the wonderful 2003 Korean film by Chan-wook Park (and both are adaptations of the manga comic). The film, directed by Spike Lee, is about a man who is trapped in a room for twenty years and then set free. The man then dedicates everything he is to figuring out: A) who trapped him and B) why.

Upcoming:

Olsen has some big projects upcoming. In 2014, she is set to star opposite Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Bryan Cranston in Gareth Edwards’s remake of Godzilla (hoping to undo all the ill will that 1998’s Godzilla has brought about). Edwards is a perfect fit – see Monsters. Then, in 2015, she stars as Scarlet Witch (Wanda Maximoff) in The Avengers: Age of Ultron. In addition to Olsen, Aaron Taylor-Johnson and James Spader join the franchise. Although she has primarily done indie films to date, her future looks to make her a big name.


Career Highlights:

1)      Martha Marcy May Marlene (2011)* – lead (Blu-ray, Video On-Demand, Trailer)
*Editor’s picks


What She Has Been In:

Hailee Steinfeld, 16, has been acting since the age of eight, but is relatively unknown. She has primarily lent herself out for short films. While her breakthrough came in 2010, she then took a break until 2013, filling her schedule. Her first film to come out this year was Romeo and Juliet.

Breakthrough:

Auditioning among 15,000 other girls, the Coen Brothers chose Steinfeld to play Mattie Ross in their remake of True Grit. She is fantastic in the role playing opposite Jeff Bridges and Matt Damon, in many ways stealing the film despite the very good work from all involved. She gives such a strong performance that she essentially became a star overnight, which makes it all the more surprising that she then took two years off. It is the best western of this decade so far.


November Film:

In November, Steinfeld features in a supporting role in Ender’s Game, which stars Asa Butterfield and Harrison Ford (and is written and directed by Gavin Hood). She plays Petra, a friend and potential romantic interest to Ender. The film is about a future version of Earth that has narrowly survived an alien invasion. In an effort to counterstrike any future attack, the military has turned to training children to be heartless killers due to their gift for strategy and susceptibility to brainwashing – Ender is their most promising candidate to lead their fleet of warships. Trailer: Here.

Upcoming:

Steinfeld has been very busy since returning to Hollywood. Coming in 2014 she has a supporting role in the music dramedy Can a Song Save Your Life? starring Keira Knightley and Mark Ruffalo. It is John Carney’s follow-up to his brilliant and terribly under-seen musical Once. Next, she features in support in Tommy Lee Jones’s second feature film The Homesman, which Jones also stars in opposite Hilary Swank. Then, for a change of pace, she stars in McG’s Hollywood action film Three Days to Kill with Amber Heard and Kevin Costner. Keeping with the variety of projects, Steinfeld will also star in the Civil War drama The Keeping Room opposite Sam Worthington and Brit Marling. Kyle Newamn, who also directed Fanboys, is back with a new comedy Barely Lethal, in which Steinfeld plays a 16-year-old assassin who just wants a normal life (it is like the American, watered-down version of Hanna). And finally, Steinfeld is set to star opposite Sam Worthington in the action thriller For the Dogs (also centering on an assassin character, making it three upcoming projects to do so with Three Days to Kill and Barely Lethal). All six of these films are slated for 2014, but likely a few will be pushed back.


Career Highlights:

1)      True Grit (2010)* – lead (Blu-ray, Video On-Demand, Trailer)

*Editor’s picks

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Anna Karenina (2012) – Review


Review: Anna Karenina is highly ambitious, lush and phenomenal – a completely insane adaptation of a literary masterpiece. The film is about Anna, a Russian aristocrat in the late 19th century who throws away everything to engage in an affair with Count Vronsky.

Most literary adaptations are fairly straightforward – some rigorously follow their source material, while others take liberties. With Anna Karenina, Leo Tolstoy’s novel is immensely dense with rich detail and tons of characters. It is not just about Anna and her story; it is about Tolstoy’s Russia at that time and place, every nuance and intricate facet of daily life. Deciding that trying to make a completely faithful adaptation of such an extensive work would probably lead to a dull film (and still not quite do it justice). Instead, director Joe Wright has made something entirely different and brave.

Anna Karenina seems a prime candidate to be just a straightforward period drama/costume drama (and Wright has done well making films like that in the past), but his adaptation is dangerously ambitious (much like say The Clash’s Sandinista! or the Wachowskis and Tom Tykwer’s Cloud Atlas from earlier this year) and highly stylized. Taking such a bold risk leaves the film exposed to be very polarizing (something some will find brilliant and others very frustrating). Fans of the book that want a very faithful adaptation (who seem to fail to understand that film is a different medium than that of a novel and thus stories should be told in different ways) will likely not like the film.

Wright sets the film really in two areas – for Moscow and St. Petersburg, the scenes take place inside a theatre with actors moving between changing sets, backdrops and artifices. Characters play their roles within society and government, as scripted by the social conventions of the time. While all the time, in view of an audience (the other members of the society) constantly watching their every move. Everything is a tempered act put on for the benefit of others. The poorer people of the cities occupy the rigging and catwalks, while the grand ballrooms and government halls take center stage. The theatre is used as a metaphor by Wright to express the restraint and superficiality of Anna’s world – nothing is real. Wright’s camera is also an active part of these scenes, vigorously gliding through the sets and around characters (almost in a whirlwind). At first, this whole concept is strange and even unsettling, but as the film progresses and the audience becomes accustom to the world of the film it becomes common and not as noticeable (making the final shot of the film more staggering – almost as if the audience has forgotten that all the action in the cities has been confined to a theatre with nothing but fake backdrops).

The second area that Wright uses is a much more naturalistic space, which accompanies Levin when he returns to his country home and works in his fields (they are actual fields). Wright does this to both juxtapose the differences in city and country life and to illustrate the difference between Levin (a romantic) and those wrapped up in the high society life of the cities (where everything seems just a show put on, void of deeper emotion). Visually, Wright makes sure to give the countryside a very sweeping natural beauty (as opposed to the subterfuge of the changing theatre sets).

Wright’s film is also very much about love. He focuses on two stories: Anna’s affair with Vronsky and Levin’s love of Kitty. Anna begins the film naïve to love. She is happy because she does not really know what it is, that is until she meets Vronsky and feels something so strongly that she risks her place in society (a society completely constructed and ruled by men) to be with him, seemingly to forget or not care that she is but a player on the stage, and that everyone is watching her. Vronsky is very charming, but never feels completely trustworthy as a hero (someone that will not break Anna’s heart, like say Levin is to Kitty). This feeling that the audience has translates to Anna’s perception of Vronsky as well. She never completely trusts him, which sends her into fits of jealousy and self-destructive behavior, and yet she loves him above all else leading to her losing everything to be with him. In the construct of Wright’s narrative (the cities being staged in a theatre), Anna goes off book. She does not say the lines she is given and hit the marks laid out for her. She disrupts the order of things and thus stands out amongst the others and becomes an outcast. There are scenes as well with her husband Karenin who seems out of step in his own realm (in the government meetings) when he faces the truth about Anna’s affair. Wright’s narrative and visual structure for the film visually illustrates just how disruptive Anna is in such a rigid society of social rules.

Levin seems lost in the society in the city, constantly calling on Oblonsky (Anna’s brother, a man who constantly cheats on his wife and yet is still accepted among his peers) for help to fit in. His love is Kitty, a young woman just debuting in society. Kitty is fascinated and lured in by the colors and spectacle of it all. She does not see that it is all superficial, and rejects Levin initially. But, she comes to see the flaws of her beloved high society and is hurt and jaded by the lack of true emotional connection. Thus, when Levin realizes that she is his true love and tries to win her heart a second time, she accepts. When Kitty moves with Levin away from the fixed structure of the city and into the naturalism of the country, she throws off the strict terms that governed her conduct, allowing her true self to shine (a person with a kind heart). While Anna and Vronsky’s story ends in tragedy, condemned by the aristocracy, Levin and Kitty strive. This again can be taken as juxtaposition between the intransigent and shallow society of the city and the warmth and community of the country (also expressed by Levin working the fields with his serfs).

Visually, the film feels a bit frantic, as Wright’s camera is constantly moving at a brisk pace and the sets are constantly changing on the fly as characters move between spaces. However, the end result of all this kinetic energy is that Wright has formulated the film as an emotional ballet (of visual splendor). The production design also plays into this, as the colors and costumes very much represent the characters. Anna, in particular, has an array of beautiful outfits – their color scheme seemingly matching her mood, while Vronsky is primarily in white (saving her from a life without love) until he leaves her. Levin wears earthy tones and Kitty loses her refined garments once she takes on her life in the country. All of Wright’s visual choices support the narrative.

Now, with all this visual radiance and spectacle and Wright’s imposed narrative device, what about the characters? This film is not easy on the audience. First, they must adjust to Wright’s cinematic world (which takes a few scenes, because he does not ease the viewer into it – everything flies at the viewer all at once). Then, the audience is introduced to tons of characters, many of which play small but specific roles. However, Wrights does do a great job with his main characters, though at the same time Anna’s motivations may seem not spelled out enough for some viewers. She lives in a marriage somewhat void of real affection, attraction and love. Thus, when Vronsky (who also happens to be very handsome) courts her, she is taken in by him and feels things that she never has before, which drives her decisions. While the audience pities her, as she loses everything, she is not overly likable (like Kitty or Levin), which then makes it more difficult for the audience to strongly connect with her (which is why Wright gives a lot of screen time to Levin and Kitty as well). She is just someone who thinks she is above the rules and ultimately pays a heavy price.

Anna Karenina is a classic tragedy, adapted many times over, but maybe never as ambitiously and visually stimulatingly as this.


Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Joe Wright has always had a knack for using a very fluid camera, from the dancing/party scenes in Pride & Prejudice to the action scenes in Hanna, as well as his fantastic long takes in his films (notably in Atonement). In Anna Karenina, Wrights seems to have built off his work in Hanna (which was his most visually aggressive film before this). Much like the final scene in Black Swan in which the camera seems to dance with Nina, his camera here seems completely untethered, free to roam anywhere and everywhere, seamlessly transitioning between sets as characters move in and out and backdrops change. It is breathtaking. While most filmmaking, especially in Hollywood (but it is also true among indie films), seems to be becoming more conventional, it is relieving to see an auteur who is still willing to take big risks, and with this film they have paid off.

Dario Marianelli’s score has a wonderful Russian vibe to it (as it probably should). It is beautiful, as it anticipates and accompanies the emotional turmoil and triumphs of the characters. It feels both intimate and extravagant in different moments, much like the film itself (here is a suite). Seamus McGarvey’s cinematography is exquisite, elegant and magnificent, especially when the film takes on a more naturalistic look (where the use of light is angelic). Sarah Greenwood’s production design, however, steals the show (which is saying a lot as Marianelli and McGarvey both deliver some of the year’s best work). The array of colors is astounding. Each costume (designer by Jacqueline Durran) or set is wonderfully crafted to fit the tone of each character or scene (reminding me at times of David Lean’s Doctor Zhivago).

The cast is dazzling as well, with tons of great little bit parts and strong leads. Matthew Macfayden and Ruth Wilson (who is almost unrecognizable, at least she was for me – knowing her solely as the scene stealing Alice on Luther) stand out in small roles. Both Domhnall Gleeson and Alicia Vikander deliver breakthrough performances as Levin and Kitty, respectively. While most of the characters seem to be shallow and void of deeper emotion, Gleeson and Vikander exude a longing for true connection (which is why, ultimately they find each other). I expect they will both be receiving lots of acting gigs in the next few years. Jude Law has the difficult role of playing Karenin, a man who feels but actively tries to shut himself off from his emotions. His performance is understated and wonderful. Aaron Taylor-Johnson has all the charisma and bluster to make a great Vronsky. He also has a terrific mischievousness to his performance that work very well. Keira Knightley has found her niche in costume dramas. She is ravishing, magnificently gowned in a lush and elegant wardrobe throughout. But she does more than just look the part. Knightley captures the extreme fits of anguish and joyous highs of Anna’s affair with Vronsky, eliciting pity and in the end even heartbreak among the audience as Anna’s life comes to a tragic end. It is another excellent performance from her collaborating with Wright.


Summary & score: Anna Karenina is not going to work for everyone, as it is sure to garner opposing reactions among viewers. However, for those willing to take it in, it is an artistically rewarding and narratively grand experience. 8/10