Wonderfully offbeat film!

Very well executed

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Two things stand out for me in watching this fine film: Garbo's acting and the way in which the novel was transferred to the screen.Many American viewers are impervious to Garbo's acting even as they acknowledge her beauty. To the end of her life, despite more than 50 years of residence in this country, Garbo never became Americanized. She remained an anti-social foreigner who appealed mainly to Europeans. Since this approach does not work in the American melting pot, she retired after World War II had deprived her of her European audience.However, for many intellectuals and artists, whenever she appears on the screen it is as though an inner door has opened to all of European culture: its literature, painting and sculpture, drama, poetry, music, philosophy, architecture – everything. Though certainly no intellectual, Garbo had a profound instinct for the real thing that continues to inspire artists and creative thinkers in this global age of mass media.The script for this movie is an admirable adaptation of Tolstoy's long, panoramic novel of life among the upper crust in 19th century Russia. There are well-mounted scenes from an officers' banquet, a full-dress ball, a croquet party, a horse race, an Orthodox wedding and a Russian opera. Together with a searching musical score by Herbert Stothart, this sumptuous filmfare communicates volumes in itself.Foremost among the themes of the novel was the double standard, whereby married men can be openly promiscuous while married women must keep their hanky-panky a secret. Anna attempts to buck this trend through open adultery and loses everything. The inertial forces of society are symbolized in the novel and in the film by the train. The train scenes are very important to the unity of the story and are superbly photographed and abetted by sound effects and musical commentary.I could go on and on, but for reasons of space limitations must end here by declaring this film to be the best adaptation yet of one of Europe's finest novels. See it!

I recorded a broadcast of this movie off of TCM and finally got around to watching it last night. The cast has many of the big names you associate with films from this era of Hollywood and while a technically proficient movie it left a lot to be desired. Garbo doesn't do much for me and casting her in the role of Anna is a bit of a stretch as I find it hard to believe she could win the attention of a dashing member of the Royal Guards. March isn't much better as her lover, as he looks very bloated. He's a lot more dashing in Anthony Adverse. Basil Rathbone gives a very strong performance as Anna's husband and comes across as both a good father, but a distant and unsympathetic husband. While I understand this movie is based on a famous novel, it surprises me that MGM would make such a depressing movie considering what was going on in the world at this time, Hollywood was definitely more upbeat during the 1930's. At the end of this movie, I couldn't help but think I was watching one of the many anti-hero movies which came out in the late 60's and 70's. I also found it disturbing that Fredric March's character got off so easy. At the very least he could have been a broken man, but instead he's lounging around with his buddy and having a few drinks.

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

Not a bad constringed version of Tolstoy's novel, given a grand Hollywood treatment. Garbo is Anna Karenina, married to an orgulous husband (Rathbone) and devoted to her young boy (Bartholemew). Everything in her rather orthodox life goes askew when she meets the Army officer Count Vronsky (March) and they fecklessly fall in love. She makes a public spectacle of her adoration of the sexy, dashing March, and when her affair becomes obvious to Rathbone it imperils his honor, his career, and the future of their son, so he throws her out to wander the world.March is in hot water too. Warned to cut out the adultery business, he resigns and joins Garbo in Venice for a lengthy and thoroughly disrespectable honeymoon.Garbo doesn't mind leaving her husband but the guilt over her willing separation from her son gnaws at her. She begins to snap at March. She accuses him of wanting to get back into the Guards and fight in the Turkish-Serbian War, which in fact he DOES want, but not if it means leaving her. In the end, sufficiently provoked, he joins his friends in the regiment and takes off for the war, intending to return.This leaves Garbo alone in Petersberg. She broods, becomes depressed, and throws herself under a train.Garbo is okay. I never found her as beguiling as the paparazzi did. And March is always a competent actor but I never thought of him as having much in the way of dash. (He'd have made a better Karenin.) Freddy Bartholemew does a fine impression of the stiff, cold, slightly cadaverous, but honorable Basil Rathbone character.It's Rathbone himself who gives the most memorable performance. We've seen him as many villains -- crossing swords with Errol Flynn, as Mr. Murdstone whipping Freddie Bartholemew, the kind of stern autocrat who brings pleasure whenever he goes. We've also seen him as at least a few heroes -- most notably Sherlock Holmes -- but here his character is complex, as complex as his Commanding Officer in "Dawn Patrol", and he carries it off nicely.