Anna Karenina (2012)

 

Director: Joe Wright

I first met Anna Karenina about two years ago when I watched film by Bernard Rose with Sophie Marceau and Sean Bean in the leading roles. I fell in love with the story from the first sight. It was something romantically daring but, at the same time, sad and sentimental. Since then I have reached for the Leo Tolstoy's book from time to time but have not reached it yet. I do not know what is holding me back but I cannot pull myself together and finally read it. Maybe that is the reason why I was looking forward to the new cinematographic adaptation of Anna Karenina. I had to relive the story once again.

In the course of time, the plot obviously has not changed but the way how it is presented does have. No royal castles, estates but just a stage in an old theatre which  transforms from a ballroom to a skating-rink in less than a minute. All the cream of society plays theatre because it is forbidden to reveal your true emotions. Anna did not obey this rule. She was fulfilled with passion, desire and happiness so much that she could not control herself. Anna finally had found a man who she loved and who loved her (but maybe it was just lust and desire?). Nothing could stop them except for the condemnation of the classies. That ruined everything Anna had ever believed in.

Frankly speaking, at the beginning of the film I was in complete perplexity because I could not understand why everything was happening in one place and therefore I was kinda bored but, as the story went by, I became more and more interested (I finally understood that this Anna Karenina is full of surprises and there were much more of those to come). Apparently, Joe Wright (Director of Pride and Prejudice) wanted us,  spectators, to think outside the box, as there is a lot of subtext to comprehend. 

I have to admit that this film really is a masterpiece - the costumes, make-up and the way how Joe manages to capture sunlight, mist and wind. And he did not forget about the Russian culture as well (songs, words, traditional food). Keira Knightley is fascinating, although I do not like that sometimes when she smiles, her eyes are almost closed but that is the matter of inheritance, not her acting skills. Let's not forget Jude Law as well. His character is not as notable as the one Aaron Taylor-Johnson (still not sure about him) portrays but the manner how Law plays his little scenes is outstanding. He does not do much but how he does... 

Overall, I must say that at first I was not pleasantly surprised and did not think that "Anna Karenina" was something I would watch again and again or the film that deserves Oscars but... As I am thinking over and over again, Joe Wright's adaptation was not as bad as I considered initially. (I just was not well prepared but you are now.) Actually it is pretty sensational ( which else of the nominated films was discussed so much by the critics). Who cares that sometimes there was too much of directness in cases of intimacy. This is one of those films that can be watched on St. Valentine's day. Well maybe not so much for the Anna and Vronsky's lust, as for the pure love of Kitty and Levin.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)

Director: Peter Jackson

I remember reading "Hobbit: There and back again" by J.R.R. Tolkien when I was not more than 7 years old. Well, frankly speaking, my dad read it before sleep every night and I just listened patiently, with a great interest and enthusiasm. Back then it was one of my favourite books and I could not be more happy when I found out that there would be a cinematographic adaptation, especially because the one who took up the reins was no other but Peter Jackson. The man who brought "The lord of the rings" to life.

As I had seen "LOTR" triology before, I had high expectations for this film as well. And you know what? It did pay off, seeing the high frame rate in motion was fascinating. First of all, I want to mention that Peter Jackson did an amazing job in selecting the actors. Previously I would never imagine even-tempered Dr. Watson aka Martin Freeman running like a teenager and going on dangerous adventures. But now I have changed my mind. Bilbo was actually an audacious hobbit. And what about dwarfs? Make-up artists had done a great job as well. Few days after watching the film I decided to check out how these actors look in the real life and I was pleasently surprised because if I saw at least one of them in a different kind of film I would never recognize him. That is how the oscars are earned.

Talking about the plot itself, I have to admit that LOTR did leave a better impression than the Hobbit. Nonetheless, I would not say that it was boring or uninspiring. It was not. This film was full of sudden events, interesting moments and of course jokes. (J.R.R. Tolkien was a merrymaker, was not he?) One more thing I have to mark out is the special effects. I am amazed how a set of computer programs can create a completely different world that cannot be seen anywhere else. Though, they could work a little bit more on the orc leader. This one seemed too artificial, comparing to others.

Now let's turn to the main reason why I am writing this review. I have been talking about lots of different things but still have not mentioned what is the story about. Well, in short, it is about a friendly hobbit who one day is surprised by an unexpected visit of Gendalf and thirteen dwarfs. They encourage him to set out on an adventure in order to help to reclaim the Lonely Mountain (the once powerful and prosperous kingdom of dwarfs) from Smaug the dragon. At first insecure and faithless, in the course of time both dwarfs and the hobbit become close and reliable friends but there will always be someone who would love to split them. We all know that this journey is not going to be easy but it is going to be worth it. If you love LOTR or any other fantasy adventure film, then you will love "The Hobbit: An unexpected journey" either.

Agnes Grey (1847)

Author: Anne Brontë

Once upon a time I read a book "Jane Eyre" by Charlotte Bronte, later I found out that there was another Bronte - Emily and I just could not resist reading her most famous work - "Wuthering heights" (although I did not finish it - not my type). It was at the end of 2012 when I was at the local library looking for another "victim" and I suddenly stumbled upon Anna Bronte's "Agnes Grey". Three years ago I did not know Charlotte had any sister but now she had even two of them. I was surprised and intrigued. I had to read this book maybe because it carried my name on its cover, but mostly because I wanted to compare skills of all three sisters.

All in all, I must say that I was amazed how flowing and rather simple but emotional the language of "Agnes Grey" was. It was nothing superhuman but did bring the right mood. Before reading the book, I had acquainted myself with other reviews and they were saying that this work was far behind the sisters' novels. It did not frighten me away, on the contrary, I was even more interested in reading the up to now undervalued.

The story is told from the eyes of innocent and sensitive Agnes Grey who by seeing her family slowly going bankrupt, decides to face a challenge and becomes a governess. Her job is a hard nut to crack.  Agnes does not know what lies ahead and that eventually she will go through a series of emotional storms just to be happy and to get what Agnes truly deserves.

With that being said, the truth is "Agnes Grey" is not the novel of the lifetime, nor the best work I have ever read or that has ever been written. But... After finishing such a serious and heavy novel as "Les Miserables" by Victor Hugo, "Agnes Grey" does seem as a piece of cake and the right work to continue with. Something light, simple, where there is nothing to worry about, just to enjoy the wonderful process of reading.