New review: Anna Karenina. History Vronsky 22.06.2017

In day of Russia, I and my friend decided not to go to celebrations, and to go to a movie that I really wanted to see, because, many foreigners associate Russia with Tolstoy and his great, in their view, the work of “Anna Karenina”. New production Shakhnazarov, based on the work of Tolstoy, “Anna Karenina” and is in theaters now..

It was very interesting to compare all those movies that were set to and, the current formulation of the famous Director. Besides, I was interested in the idea of the artist about the version of Vronsky.

From the beginning, watching the film, I had some false sense about the role of Anna. When Alexei, by contrast, kept the whole story is worthy and noble. But for the first time Shakhnazarov has tried to justify sin. Tolstoy, in my opinion, only underscores the hopelessness of the circumstances that have happened to our heroes. And yet, I believe that the author proceeded from the idea of “barefoot socialism”, which in real life led to the red terror, revolutions, wars, for which we still pay.

Yes, Tolstoy was the first “barefoot”… It’s him and others like him, the Soviet society was elevated to unseen heights, and made icons of Russian literature. The writer was trying to evoke pity, justifying thieves, terrorists and other criminals, which is very difficult to be in prison for murder and Bank robbery.

Why Karen Shakhnazarov, knowing this and understanding, trying to teach ours, and so not a mere society, immoral lifestyle??? During the film, the concept of God was raised only in those cases when talking about the family of Alexey Karenin. Shakhnazarov, as Americans, in his blunt, distorted versions, made from the tyrant Karenina, when Tolstoy specifically mentioned in your story that the husband of Anna was a statesman, worked hard, had merit, was a respected person in the society. Why the Americans did Alexei Karenina goodie, I understand, but why did not Shakhnazarov, who does not get out of “Patriotic show” Solovyov — the question remains.

The main idea of the artist to justify in this film, Vronsky and Anna, were unsuccessful, at least for those who are already in middle age could read this work and to draw conclusions about the immoral behaviour of lovers. For Vronsky, as a Russian officer — it low… For Anne, as for married women, it’s a shame and a sin… these things true patriot of Russia needed to focus, but not the evil hateful Karenina, who reverenced GOD, the Fatherland and the concept of the traditional family… Bad, apparently, Tolstoy was influenced by a trip to Europe… as in other matters, and now “it” affects our young generation by promoting rotten values, debauchery and sodomy…

Nasty, cheap, cynical movie but with good actors! In my personal opinion, Alex is the husband of Anna, was not a tyrant, he was well educated, a man of faith, able to forgive, and based on the situation that happened to him, trying with dignity to raise my son without the influence of a woman who was already considered in a dissolute society. The artist, in the role of Karenin deliberately chose an actor who always plays negative role..

I can’t talk about morality, but it seemed to me that a man like Shakhnazarov, understands the complexity of the moral state of our society today. It was necessary to show who is who, and, therefore, Anna was “warmer” and Alexey Vronsky was frivolous, arrogant, thick-headed Martinet. And the only person who behaved decently in this situation, was the husband of Anna.

I understand that the right of an artist to paint how he sees it. But the artist of today, who loves his country, should understand and know that it is the literature of Tolstoy and his “attacks” have raised hundreds of thousands of socialist-revolutionaries, socialists, anonistov and after the Communists, who, renouncing God, almost ruined Russia and its values. This is the generation of cattle, which destroyed all the noble that was in the country. Destroyed and burned the Church! Thousands drowned and shot the Church and the Ministers. Ruined the nobility — the light of Russia! Shot the Imperial family, where there were children. Sure Yarowsky — managing the execution of the Royal family, admired and was inspired by, certainly not Pushkin. Military, politicians, the nobility, and the whole environment of Nicholas II, including the Royal family and near relatives had betrayed the Emperor, and then flooded the earth with blood, but they also all considered themselves patriots of Russia. As, however, and now some “patriots” believe that replacing GDP, they will have a good job..)) both then and now, after sitting in crappy apartments and cheap pubs after a few Beers they come out with abusive posters on the field of Mars to the rallies…

Leo Tolstoy, apparently, considered himself a God of their own popularity and eventually was excommunicated from the Church during his life … Now he’s fried on “eternal fire”, screams in pain and wants to convey to all living on earth that the Lord is not what we want It to be, and what is written about Him by the Prophets and Apostles in Scripture.. But to return to earth with the revelation and writing of the new book he doesn’t…)

By the end of the film my friend asked the girl, who apparently had a difficult recovery after the death of Anna in the movie theater and asked to stop to nibble sunflower seeds. I was ready to intervene, but then slipped the idea that popcorn sitting next to people not irritating and has decided not to create a conflict situation.

The hall was full and only one third of all people were men, the rest women and, therefore, sin — Shahnazarova justified…

Terima R. N. (The

New review: Anna Karenina. History Vronsky 22.06.2017

Поделиться в соц. сетях

Share to Google Buzz
Share to Google Plus
Share to LiveJournal