Anna Karenina (TV Mini Series 1977) Poster

(1977)

User Reviews

Review this title
12 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
9/10
The Definitive Version of "Anna"
timbasa779 February 2013
The limitations of a late 70's BBC budget are everywhere apparent in this nonetheless absolutely captivating production. One only wishes a proper film could have been made with this same cast and script, but of course that would have probably drained the production of what makes it so spectacular - its sheer expansiveness. In its nearly 10-hour runtime, it covers practically all of the novel's myriad episodes, and the dizzying complexities of its timeless characters - Anna's at once near schizophrenia and almost magical charm and poise, Vronsky's extreme selfishness and rakish abandon, yet unquestionable honor and devotion, and Karenin's cruel, detached vindictiveness tempered by his capacity for forgiveness and tenderness. The script is so heavily in the spirit of Tolstoy's writings that quotations from the original novel do not stick out like a sore thumb, as they do in Tom Stoppard's shockingly amateurish script for the Keira Knightley adaptation, but are rather an organic fabric of this labyrinthine and captivating piece. Perhaps hindsight drives this perception given Ms. Pagett's unfortunate mental breakdown subsequent to this production, but she is so effortlessly a living, breathing, enchanting creature suffering from truly intractable emotional and existential distress that it makes the knowledge of her end, which rather intentionally pervades the novel even without its cultural resonance, lend an intense poignance to the film. She is also every bit as beautiful as Anna should be. Supporting characters, from Oblonsky to Betsy (in particular the flippant Countess, whose true, though tested, devotion to Anna is richly filled in here) are handled spectacularly well. But the production in many ways belongs to Stuart Wilson's Vronsky, who manages to convey precisely what makes Vronsky uniquely appealing to a woman of depth - he is a melancholic, inspired, fiery, Byronic hero, and not just a preening pretty face with all of his hair (Aaron Taylor-Johnson, I sadly look at you). Those who were impatient with the Levin twin-plot in the novel will be distressed to see it nearly intact in this version, but Levin is refreshingly well-played and spirited, so that his scenes have a life to them typically denied the almost perfunctory inclusion of the character in most adaptations that do him the service of not cutting him. Kitty is also incredibly beautiful, age appropriate, and charming, so her scenes, while never quite living up to Anna's, prove a welcome distraction.
7 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
I love this adaptation
constancebryce27 July 2022
Both of the leads, Nicola Paget and Stuart Wilson, are nearly perfect in their roles. Wilson especially is a fully developed character and one a woman might fling away her life for. Nicola Paget is beautiful, high strung, and portrays Anna as a woman on the edge...more or less forced into an early marriage with a stuffy, pompous and very dull statesman. Only the love for her young son prevents her from divorcing at any cost. Meanwhile the love of her life Vronsky suffers for her as she drives herself to distraction. Wilson is really excellent as Vronsky and I also loved him as Fernando Lopez in The Pallisers. He is an underrated dramatic actor. The supporting characters are mostly well-cast and well-acted. I have watched many versions of this story and this version ranks at the top for me.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Tolstoy adaptations don't get much better than this
TheLittleSongbird29 July 2015
While the best film versions are the 1967 Russian and 1935 Greta Garbo films, the best overall adaptation seen so far of Tolstoy's masterpiece Anna Karenina goes to this mini-series, the only adaptation personally seen so far that doesn't have any major debits.

Visually, it is a real beauty, with some breath taking scenery and sets, opulent costume design and elegant photography with lots of handsome colour. The period detail is not quite as evocative as it is in the 1967 and 1997 (with Sophie Marceau) films, but it is still remarkably authentic for a 70s made-for-TV mini-series. The music is appropriate and hauntingly beautiful, wisely keeping itself to the background in crucial scenes to let the dialogue really register, including a rare chance of hearing glimpses of Tchaikovsky's Manfred Symphony used for a mini-series. The mini-series also has a very thought-provoking, beautifully structured and literate script, that feels and sounds like Tolstoy's writing coming to life from the pages of the novel, covering all the major events and more and with the full emotional impact and more.

The story of Anna Karenina is very faithfully adapted here, one of the most faithful treatments of any adaptation of the novel in fact. In terms of detail, the major events, the subplots, the themes and the characters are all here, and not in Cliff Notes form, this is the real deal. The long length, with the 9 hour plus duration and 10 episodes, was more than appropriate and allowed richer characterisation, more of the story (this adaptation has the most well developed Levin by far for example) and all the material to be fully expanded upon (things that a 2-4 hour film couldn't do as effectively), as was the steady and very measured pacing to allow one to get fully immersed in the atmosphere and let the many nuances of the story and text come through. Anna Karenina (1977) is beautifully directed throughout, and the characters and their situations are always interesting.

Nicola Pagett is outstanding as a particularly passionately vulnerable Anna, which is played with pitch-perfect heartfelt pathos, and Stuart Wilson blows all the Vronskys in the film adaptations out of the water in a portrayal that is much more complex than any of the portrayals in any of the film versions, where half of the cinematic Vronskys make for problematic casting. The chemistry between the two of them is very believable with no sudden transitions and it doesn't feel rushed. Eric Porter's Karenin, a role played to a consistently high level in all the adaptations even in the weaker ones, is more conflicted than most, rather than being too sympathetic or too much of a reptile, more of a man caught in situations that more expose his weaknesses than his strengths, and he plays it magnificently. Robert Swann stands out in support as an ambivalent and multi-layered Levin, in a cast where everybody comes off strongly with few if any weak links.

All in all, a superb adaptation, adapted Tolstoy rarely gets much better than this. 10/10 Bethany Cox
12 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Excellent mini-series
emtj-112 November 2004
I just saw the mini-series and enjoyed it so much. Yes, it was filmed in the 70s so perhaps it might be dated in its production values, but in its performances and dialogue and sheer emotional highs and lows, it is far superior to any of the other Anna Kareninas I have seen. Nicola Paget was simply smashing - you might remember her as the actress who brought Elizabeth Bellamy so vividly to life in Upstairs, Downstairs. She will simply break your heart with her portrayal of Anna. And Count Vronsky is played by the dashing Stuart Wilson, who looks every bit the part of a man a woman would give up so much for. I fell in love with this actor when he played Fernando Lopez in The Pallisers, another marvelous 70s miniseries. The trio of superb performances includes Eric Porter as Anna's rigid and emotionally devastated husband, who is hiss-worthy in many scenes, yet manages to convey the emotions boiling inside of him, giving one pause to totally hate him. Eric Porter was the marvelous Soames Forsyte in the 1967 series The Forsyte Saga, simply one of the best mini-series ever presented on television. I gave this ten stars, because when I am watching a novel by Tolstoy adapted for television, I want to see the emotions of the novel brought to life, more than I care about the settings. The entire cast is excellent, with nary a badly cast role. I had rented the series, but now have ordered it so that I can watch it again, in its entirety, whenever I please.
21 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A stirring and authentic adaptation
DrCaliente26 December 2002
I have to admit that I saw this series only once (in 1978), and my memory of it has faded somewhat. Nevertheless, I still vividly recall its vibrant reproduction of Tolstoy's masterpiece, its authentic characterizations, and its remarkable set pieces, especially given the fact that this was a television production.

Standouts include Nicola Pagett's complicated portrayal of Anna, and Robert Swann as the ambivalent Levin. The intoxicating scene of Levin and his peasants bringing in the harvest, and Anna's tragic demise are worth viewing again.

Hope the powers that be resurrect this one in the near future!
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Stunningly Beautiful production
GregoriusInLA6 July 2003
I remember seeing this version of "Anna Karenina" on PBS when it was re- broadcast in the late 1980s. I actually taped the entire series on Beta video tape, but haven't checked at all recently to see if the tapes are still viable. I was deeply impressed with the production values of "Anna,' including the choice of filming locations, acting, costumes, and use of music. (I particularly remember the use of a lot of Tchaikovsky.)

I've always wondered why this magnificent production hasn't been re-issued on video or DVD. I for one would buy it in a heartbeat. Short of that, I should get my Betamax repaired and transfer the tapes to VHS, DVD, or VCD for my own use.

10/10
13 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
on a search for a clean copy of this film
MVKSF5 June 2004
I have a poor VHS copy of the series from when it was shown on PBS in 1984. I have searched for years to locate a clean copy. It is worth viewing over and over again--the acting is tremendous.

The costuming and sets are great, and the series is true to the text and atmosphere of the original novel.

I recommend it to anyone, but for some reason it has not been issued or reissued in the market. BBC has reissued most of its major series in VHS or DVD. I hope that this will be the case for this great series.

This is a timeless story that is absolutely fundamental to an understanding or consideration of what it is like to live our lives out even with all the pitfalls and joys.
10 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Conflicted viewer
catnapbc4 November 2022
Despite some truly excellent actors and performances, the overall production left me feeling like I have watched a very long and amateur stage show. The make-up for most of the female roles was modern and thus off-putting, the scenery overly opulent, and the dresses all looked like they were previously used as curtains. I did like the pace and character development and much of the dialogue was interesting, if not unrealistic. Although I find Nicola Pagett's portrayal a bit too cheeky and 'modern' for that time period, she carried off the complex emotions she struggles with and is, of course, eye candy to watch. This could have been much better and I haven't seen any other versions with which I can compare with this version, but it would be difficult to do justice to such a complicated and long story, even by the great BBC. The production values are high and the period details beautiful to look at, but it lacks depth and authenticity. An acceptable series if you need to fill lots of time and not have to strain your brain. The overpowering music and costumes and out-of-place make-up for the women just added to the irritants here. Some good actors present who later appeared in the series 'Tenko'. A much more empowering series for women even though it was also full of despair and brutality.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Disappointed
konky200031 July 2004
After recently reading and falling in love with the book, I started doing research into the filmed adaptations of the novel. I first watched the BBC adaptation from 2000, which impressed me, but I was somewhat disappointed by the amount of editing done to the story.

I, therefore, picked up this version with great anticipation, because it is much longer (10 hours) and I was hoping would therefore be a more fully realized version of the story.

Unfortunately, I barely made it through the first hour before turning it off and giving up on it.

The whole production felt too staged and unnatural for my taste. The actors looked like English 'thespians' dressed up in stock period costumes rather than Russian aristocrats. And they all more or less spoke in the same loud and clear stage voice making the conversations feel less intimate than I would have liked.

Camera-work and directing was mostly just like that of a noontime soap opera.

I'm sure that in 1977 this was perfectly acceptable, but nowadays, it is just not good enough to spend time watching. It certainly does no justice to what is often considered one of the greatest novels ever written.

If you are looking for a filmed adaptation of this story, stick with the more recent version from 2000. While it is a somewhat edited down version of the story, it is a much superior product that does a far better job of fully capturing the richness of Tolstoy's novel.
14 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An excellent dramatization
didi-57 January 2010
This version of 'Anna Karenina' by Tolstoy presents the story in ten parts of around 50 minutes each. Starring Nicola Pagett, best known as Elizabeth Bellamy in 'Upstairs, Downstairs', as Anna; with Stuart Wilson as Vronsky and Eric Porter as Karenin.

This is a leisurely version, with time to develop the minor characters and subplots, while keeping true to the book in the story of Anna's affair with Count Vronsky, and its tragic conclusion. It starts with the infidelity of her brother and in doing so, shows the difference between men and women where divorce and adultery are concerned.

As Anna, Pagett is excellent, veering from thoughtless frivolity to total despair; while Eric Porter is perfect as Karenin, strong, tormented, and complicated. Stuart Wilson is charming as Vronsky, looks the part and is an appealing character. In support the rest of the cast are excellent too, especially Sheila Gish as Betsy and Mary Morris as Countess Vronsky.

This mini series is well worth your time and doesn't have a dated feel at all - the space given to the story means this version has more weight than those with Garbo or Vivien Leigh.
12 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
inexcusably, infuriatingly bad
jm107014 March 2016
Whether this is better than other dramatizations of the book is irrelevant. If it's bad, it's bad--and this is bad. The fact that this version covers far more of the book--including Kostya Levin's story, which I think is more interesting than Anna's--just makes its atrocities even more unbearable.

What bothered me much more than its distortions of the book's characters and deviations from its plot is its dragging THE WHOLE BOOK down to the level of a soap opera. From the very first scene with Countess Vronskaya and Anna on the train, and in every single following scene, all the way through to the end, I felt like I was watching As The Word Turns--all 13,858 episodes. It made me sick.

To me, one of Tolstoy's most astonishing achievements in this book is that it NEVER--not for one scene or one paragraph or one word--falls into melodrama. Every character is alive and real, everything they do is believable and organic. Nothing is overblown or contrived.

This production is the exact opposite. EVERYTHING is overblown, EVERYTHING feels contrived and phony and stupid. It takes a very great book and turns it into cheap melodrama. What a disgrace.
4 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Yawn
aramis-112-80488031 March 2023
Warning: Spoilers
ANNA KARENINA is basically a written soap opera about a wife straying from a husband she finds boring to an exciting new man who is unworthy of her and then throws herself in front of a train. Ouch. I've seen the same story told many times on "The Love Boat" with happier endings.

As with most daytime soap operas not much happens until they throw in an occasional climax on Friday that won't be resolved until Monday. This yarn stretches on and on with the occasional kick. So be aware of what you're getting. Caveat Emptor.

Several actors from other British TV shows and miniseries raise their heads to be counted, some quite good.

Nicola Pagett and Stuart Wilson were perfectly chosen for Anna and her lover. Eric Porter does a good job as the wronged and disgraced husband. However good some of the others are in other things they are merely adequate here. Though I like to seeing Caroline Langrishe (Kitty) and Gordon Gostelow in anything.

I have never read the novel (I have read the far more interesting if still soap operish WAR AND PEACE) but I've seen other versions starring some of the most beautiful women in film, including by Vivian Leigh, Jacqueline Bisset and Sophie Marceau. I had high hopes for this miniseries as I have an affectionate weakness for these old-style British multi-part, videotaped literary adaptations; and because I intend never to read the book, and wanted as full a dramatization as possible. Unfortunately, the word for this show is somnolent.

The problem, I'm sure, rests with Tolstoy. It's a slender plot for a big book. I love Dostoyevski's BROTHERS KARAMAZOV and have read it several times in different translations, but in all honesty Agatha Christie could have knocked that story off in 180 pages. This extremely long tale could have been tied up by Barbara Cartland in fewer.

In every version of this novel I've seen the anti-heroine, Anna, is acceptable only if one believes love is the most important thing in life. I don't. I prefer duty. Give me BEAU GRSTE. So I'm hardly simpatico from the get-go.

If you can stand this seemingly endless tale about three dislikeable people in a love triangle, go for it. If I get in the mood for an afternoon nap I'll switch on daytime TV.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed