---
title: "Anna Karenina"
year: 2012
kind: "film"
canonical: "https://film.one/film/anna-karenina"
fi1m_id: "anna-karenina"
imdb_id: "tt1781769"
tmdb_id: 96724
wikidata_id: "Q80204"
fi1m_score: 64
critics_score: 54
critics_reviews: 23
published: "2026-10-01T21:54:36.110684+00:00"
updated: "2026-10-01T21:54:36.332991+00:00"
region: "FR"
licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL."
---

# Anna Karenina (2012)

Directed by Joe Wright · 2h 09m · CNC TP · Drama, Romance, History

## Identity

Anna Karenina

- **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/anna-karenina
- **Type:** Film
- **Fi1m ID:** anna-karenina
- **IMDb ID:** tt1781769
- **TMDB ID:** 96724
- **Wikidata ID:** Q80204
- **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1781769/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/96724, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q80204

**Fi1m score: 64** · Critics 54 from 23 reviews

*In a sentence:* The waltz makes a better case for Vronsky than Vronsky ever manages

> Joe Wright’s theatrical staging and Keira Knightley’s performance make this worth a look, but the romance is uneven. The weak link is Aaron Taylor-Johnson’s unpersuasive Vronsky.

## Synopsis

Anna Karenina (Keira Knightley) waltzes with Vronsky (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), bringing their attraction onto a ballroom floor where other people can see it. She wants him to stay, though this courtship offers little privacy. A fashionable ice rink provides another place for romantic encounters, while Levin (Domhnall Gleeson) and Kitty (Alicia Vikander) pursue a romance of their own. The action moves between theatrical settings and outdoor scenes, with clothes, dancing and the presence of other people shaping how these characters express their feelings.

## Review

Joe Wright’s *Anna Karenina* is worth seeing for its staging and Keira Knightley, though the central romance never quite earns the trouble taken over it. Adapting Leo Tolstoy’s novel from a screenplay by Tom Stoppard, Wright makes theatrical performance part of the characters’ daily lives. These people seem conscious of being watched, and the staging asks us to notice that consciousness as closely as the courtship. It is a workable idea, and for a while the pleasure of seeing a scene take shape is enough.

Sarah Greenwood’s production design makes the changes of scene a pleasure in themselves, letting one theatrical setting give way to another without disguising the artifice. Seamus McGarvey’s photography gives the ballroom enough clarity for us to follow Anna and Vronsky’s waltz without losing them in the surrounding display. We were swept up by that dance. Their movement together makes the attraction easy to believe, and the elaborate staging helps us feel it.

Melanie Oliver’s editing gives the transitions a rhythm, although it cannot make every switch between theatrical and conventional presentation feel necessary. The changes sometimes draw so much attention to themselves that we stop thinking about the people involved. Dario Marianelli’s music gives the ballroom a romantic urgency that the lovers struggle to sustain elsewhere. Once the dancing stops, Wright too often has to work up feeling again through another conspicuous piece of staging.

Knightley gives Anna enough uncertainty to survive all this attention to presentation. Her passion feels impatient and her distress less orderly than the staging around her, which is useful in a film so carefully arranged. Jacqueline Durran’s costumes support that performance by making Anna’s changing feelings part of how she presents herself; the clothes never seem irrelevant to the person wearing them. Knightley makes us care about what Anna wants even when we remain unconvinced by the man she wants it from.

Aaron Taylor-Johnson’s Vronsky is the serious limitation. There is too little in his delivery to explain the force of the attraction, and Knightley is left supplying much of the feeling between them. Jude Law gives Karenin a restraint that makes him more interesting to watch: he allows us to wonder what is being held back. Tom Stoppard’s adaptation needs the central relationship to carry considerable emotional weight, and the casting leaves it struggling to do so.

Domhnall Gleeson’s Levin and Alicia Vikander’s Kitty offer a welcome change of company. Their romance is touching, particularly outdoors, where the film gives us a rest from admiring the scenery and lets us concentrate on the people. Vikander brings a spontaneity that makes the surrounding formality easier to notice, without making Kitty seem to belong in a different film. These scenes suggest how much feeling Wright can find when the arrangement of a scene stops demanding quite so much of our attention.

As a costume romance, *Anna Karenina* takes an appealing risk in asking us to accept such conspicuous artifice. The ballroom shows precisely how well it can work, which makes the unevenness elsewhere more frustrating. We do not need every literary adaptation to behave respectfully, but a romance does need to convince us that these particular people want each other. Choose it for the staging and Knightley, provided an unconvincing Vronsky is not a disqualification.

*Fi1m score 64, published 1 October 2026.*

## What the critics say

The consensus on Joe Wright’s Anna Karenina is mixed, with praise clustering around its visual invention and reservations around its emotional distance. The reviews repeatedly admire the production design, costumes, choreography and playful transitions, even when they find the theatrical setting distracting. Keira Knightley’s performance draws support across the divide: several critics credit her with giving Anna humanity and emotional force despite the elaborate staging competing for attention.

The spread is wide, and the central disagreement concerns whether that staging helps the drama or gets in its way. Empire finds the approach bold and imaginative, while acknowledging that the romance becomes less involving. At the other extreme, The New Yorker finds the adaptation shallow and impersonal, singling out Alicia Vikander for praise. Between those positions, the recurring complaint is that Wright’s formal flourishes keep the lovers at a distance, leaving their passion less convincing than the world around them.

## Straight answers

**Is Anna Karenina worth watching?**

*Anna Karenina* is worth a look for admirers of theatrical staging and Keira Knightley, though its uneven romance keeps our score at 64. We find the ballroom waltz persuasive and the supporting romance touching, but Aaron Taylor-Johnson’s Vronsky gives us too little reason to believe in Anna’s attraction.

**How long is Anna Karenina, and what is it rated?**

*Anna Karenina* runs 2h 09m and is rated TP by the CNC in France. It is a drama and romance film.

**Where can I watch Anna Karenina in France?**

*Anna Karenina* is available to rent from Amazon Prime Video and Apple TV from €2.99. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.

**How violent or frightening is Anna Karenina, and is it suitable for children?**

*Anna Karenina* has a UK 12A certificate, which allows children under 12 to attend a cinema screening only with an accompanying adult. That classification calls for parental judgement rather than treating it as suitable for all children; it does not, by itself, establish how violent or frightening particular scenes are.

**How does Anna Karenina compare to The Age of Innocence?**

*Anna Karenina* is more conspicuously theatrical than [*The Age of Innocence*](https://film.one/film/the-age-of-innocence), but we recommend the latter for a more persuasive romance shaped by social rules. Wright’s staging and Knightley provide considerable interest, while Scorsese’s film gives its finery more human weight, even if it sometimes spends too long explaining the manners.

**Is Anna Karenina based on a true story or a book?**

*Anna Karenina* is adapted from Leo Tolstoy’s novel, with a screenplay by Tom Stoppard, rather than presented as a true story. Wright uses theatrical settings to emphasise the characters’ awareness of being watched. Our recommendation rests on Knightley and the staging rather than familiarity with the book, and we make no claim for the adaptation’s fidelity.

**What should I watch after Anna Karenina?**

After *Anna Karenina*, try [*The Age of Innocence*](https://film.one/film/the-age-of-innocence) (1993, Fi1m 86): A more controlled account of desire constrained by social rules and immaculate manners. Then [*The Earrings of Madame de...*](https://film.one/film/the-earrings-of-madame-de) (1953, Fi1m 87): Ballroom elegance and romantic misjudgement, with feeling that survives the elaborate staging; and [*The Red Shoes*](https://film.one/film/the-red-shoes) (1948, Fi1m 92): For theatrical invention that makes romantic feeling stronger rather than harder to reach.

### Reviews we read (23)

- **Empire**, Ian Freer (85/100, inferred): Freer finds the adaptation bold, imaginative and intoxicating, despite its central romance becoming less involving. He especially praises Wright’s theatrical staging, singling out the lavish ballroom sequence as stunning. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/anna-karenina-3-review/)
- **IndieWire**, David Gritten (78/100, inferred): Gritten finds the adaptation ambitious, romantic, and ultimately triumphant, though it occasionally falters. He especially praises Wright’s dazzling visual inventiveness and the film’s vivid sound design. [Read](https://www.indiewire.com/criticism/culture/anna-karenina-early-review-visually-splendid-audacious-swoony-epic-romance-heads-for-oscars-202095/)
- **Screen Daily**, Mark Adams (64/100, inferred): The accessible page does not reveal the critic’s verdict. It also provides no readable detail about what the review praises or criticizes. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/anna-karenina/5045978.article)
- **The New York Times** (64/100, inferred): The page appears to be a review of Joe Wright’s 2012 film, but its contents are inaccessible. Its verdict and any specific praise or complaint cannot be determined from the available text. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/16/movies/anna-karenina-from-by-joe-wright-with-keira-knightley.html)
- **RogerEbert.com**, Christy Lemire (2.5/4): Lemire finds the adaptation visually inventive but emotionally distant. She singles out its theatrical staging as striking, while noting that the film’s formal flourishes can keep viewers at a remove. [Read](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/anna-karenina)
- **Slant Magazine**, Andrew Schenker (2.5/4): Schenker finds the film engrossing and literate despite its overbearing visual ambitions. He praises Keira Knightley’s portrayal of Anna’s passion and despair, while criticizing the theatrical staging as a distracting gimmick. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/anna-karenina-6674/)
- **The Guardian**, Peter Bradshaw (60/100, inferred): Bradshaw finds the adaptation bold and creative but not wholly successful, saying its theatrical style sometimes feels uneven. He praises Keira Knightley’s subtle performance and the film’s moving flower-filled meadow tableau. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2012/sep/05/anna-karenina-review-keira-knightley)
- **Time Out**, Guy Lodge (3/5): The critic's verdict cannot be established from the accessible page. No specific praise or complaint is available because the review text is missing. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/anna-karenina-3)
- **Variety**, Leslie Felperin (60/100, inferred): Felperin finds the film formally inspired and technically glorious, though its chilly tone and less sympathetic lovers blunt its emotional impact. She especially praises the richly detailed production design and costumes. [Read](https://variety.com/2012/film/markets-festivals/anna-karenina-1117948172/)
- **Radio Times**, Stella Papamichael (2/5): The review finds Knightley commendable but says the director’s conspicuous style upstages her. It singles out Wright’s attention-seeking direction as the film’s main weakness. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-6xoedo/anna-karenina/)
- **Total Film**, Neil Smith (2/5): Smith finds the film ponderously artificial and self-regarding, with its theatrical concept keeping the story at arm’s length. He criticizes the distracting stagecraft and the abrupt shifts between theatrical and conventional presentation. [Read](https://www.gamesradar.com/anna-karenina-1-review/)
- **Los Angeles Times**, Betsy Sharkey (35/100, inferred): Sharkey finds the film visually stunning and beautifully acted, but ultimately difficult to enjoy. She particularly praises the production design, costumes and choreography, while faulting their artifice for competing with the actors’ emotional performances. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-xpm-2012-nov-15-la-et-mn-anna-karenina-review-20121116-story.html)
- **Evening Standard** (20/100, inferred): The critic calls the adaptation a failed experiment, arguing that its theatrical staging makes Tolstoy’s realist novel feel artificial. They praise parts of the casting and find Levin and Kitty’s romance touching, especially in the scenes outdoors. [Read](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/anna-karenina-review-8104347.html)
- **Vulture**, David Edelstein (20/100, inferred): Edelstein calls the film a boldly original miscalculation, arguing its theatrical style distances viewers from the story’s emotions. He singles out Jude Law’s restrained performance as a welcome respite amid the overstated acting and staging. [Read](https://www.vulture.com/2012/11/movie-review-anna-karenina.html)
- **The New Yorker**, Richard Brody (10/100, inferred): Brody pans Joe Wright’s adaptation as a shallow, impersonal rendering that misses Tolstoy’s depth. He singles out Alicia Vikander’s spontaneous performance as the film’s one genuine strength. [Read](https://www.newyorker.com/culture/richard-brody/an-anna-karenina-that-forgets-tolstoy)
- **Paste**, Annlee Ellingson (8.2/10): Ellingson finds Wright’s adaptation challenging and rapturous once its theatrical approach clicks. She praises its kinetic, fluid production design and visually inventive transitions. [Read](https://www.pastemagazine.com/movies/anna-karenina)
- **HeyUGuys**, Lisa Giles-Keddie (4/5): The critic finds Joe Wright’s adaptation a gripping, emotionally forceful and visually bold reimagining, though its theatrical style may divide viewers. She praises Keira Knightley’s performance and notes Aaron Taylor-Johnson’s comparatively stale delivery as a weakness. [Read](https://www.heyuguys.com/anna-karenina-review/)
- **The Playlist** (75/100, inferred): The headline presents the film as a mostly thrilling, inventive reimagining. It singles out its bold approach to the classic as a strength. [Read](https://theplaylist.net/review-anna-karenina-is-a-bold-reimagining-of-a-classic-thats-mostly-thrilling-inventive-20120902/)
- **Den of Geek**, David Crow (C+): Crow finds the film visually inventive and its performances strong, but says its theatrical design keeps the story emotionally distant. He especially praises Keira Knightley’s focused portrayal of Anna. [Read](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/anna-karenina-review/)
- **Eye for Film**, Amber Wilkinson (60/100, inferred): Wilkinson finds the film beautiful and brave, but says it fails to realise its potential. She praises Jacqueline Durran’s costumes for reflecting Anna’s emotional state and helping Keira Knightley’s performance blossom. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/anna-karenina-2012-film-review-by-amber-wilkinson)
- **Collider**, Matt Goldberg (7.5 out of 10): Goldberg finds the film visually mesmerizing but emotionally cold, saying Wright’s direction overwhelms the story. He praises the theater-based staging and its playful transitions, while faulting the central romance for lacking convincing emotional weight. [Read](https://collider.com/anna-karenina-review/)
- **Digital Spy**, Stella Papamichael (2/5): Papamichael finds the adaptation visually striking but exasperating and dull, with its theatrical flourishes getting in the way of Tolstoy’s emotional force. She praises Knightley for finding humanity in Anna’s difficult, emotionally led character. [Read](https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a400838/anna-karenina-review-digital-spy-verdict/)
- **The Wrap** (35/100, inferred): The critic finds Wright’s theatrical staging emotionally distancing and ultimately unsuccessful. Knightley and Law are praised for their performances, while Taylor-Johnson is singled out as the weak link. [Read](https://www.thewrap.com/anna-karenina-review-lavish-film-gets-lost-old-decaying-staging-65261/)

## Details

- **Director:** Joe Wright
- **Director:** Joe Wright
- **Screenplay:** Tom Stoppard
- **Novel:** Leo Tolstoy
- **Cinematography:** Seamus McGarvey
- **Editor:** Melanie Oliver
- **Music:** Dario Marianelli
- **Production design:** Sarah Greenwood
- **Costume design:** Jacqueline Durran
- **Producer:** Paul Webster, Eric Fellner, Tim Bevan
- **Cast:** Keira Knightley as Anna Karenina; Jude Law as Karenin; Aaron Taylor-Johnson as Vronsky; Matthew Macfadyen as Oblonsky; Eric MacLennan as Matvey; Kelly Macdonald as Dolly; Alicia Vikander as Kitty; Domhnall Gleeson as Levin
- **Runtime:** 2h 09m
- **Certificate (CNC):** TP
- **Release (France):** 5 December 2012
- **Genres:** Drama, Romance, History
- **Budget:** $41 million
- **Box office:** $69 million
- **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxtsC_LZ9eI

## Where to watch in France

- Amazon Prime Video: rent €2.99, sd
- Apple TV: rent €3.99, hd
- Apple TV: buy €4.99, hd
- Amazon Prime Video: buy €4.99, hd

*Checked 2026-10-01.*

Also available in: AE, AR, AT, AU, BE, BG, BR, CA, CH, CL, CO, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HK, HR, HU, IE, IL, IN, IT, JP, LT, MX, NL, NO, NZ, PA, PH, PL, PT, RO, RS, SE, SG, SI, TH, TR, UA, US, VN, ZA. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country.

## Awards

- Academy Awards 2013: Best Cinematography (nominated); Best Original Score (nominated); Best Production Design (nominated); Best Costume Design (won)
- European Film Award for Best Actor 2013: European Film Award for Best Actor (nominated)
- European Film Award for Best Actress 2013: European Film Award for Best Actress (nominated)
- European Film Award for Best Production Designer 2013: European Film Award for Best Production Designer (won)
- European Film Award for Best Screenwriter 2013: European Film Award for Best Screenwriter (nominated)
- European Film Award – People's Choice Award for Best European Film 2013: European Film Award – People's Choice Award for Best European Film (nominated)
- Broadcast Film Critics Association Award for Best Art Direction 2012: Broadcast Film Critics Association Award for Best Art Direction (won)
- Broadcast Film Critics Association Award for Best Costume Design 2012: Broadcast Film Critics Association Award for Best Costume Design (won)

## If you liked this

- *The Age of Innocence* (1993), Fi1m 86: A more controlled account of desire constrained by social rules and immaculate manners. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-age-of-innocence.md)
- *The Earrings of Madame de...* (1953), Fi1m 87: Ballroom elegance and romantic misjudgement, with feeling that survives the elaborate staging. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-earrings-of-madame-de.md)
- *The Red Shoes* (1948), Fi1m 92: For theatrical invention that makes romantic feeling stronger rather than harder to reach. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-red-shoes.md)
- *In the Mood for Love* (2000), Fi1m 91: For restrained performances and clothes that say what the lovers cannot. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/in-the-mood-for-love.md)
- *A Royal Affair* (2012): Alicia Vikander faces another courtship in which private desire has public consequences.

---
© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/anna-karenina