- Description
Keira Knightley on her film "Anna Karenina"
In order to download Charlie Rose podcasts to iTunes for transfer to an iPod, you must have iTunes installed. If you do, please click the following link to download the podcast for this interview:
itpc://www.charlierose.com/view/itunes/12659
Otherwise, close this window to continue viewing.
Close
Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 1
bibobum 11/21/2012 02:00 PM Report
Terrible comment at the end..."Don't you think beautiful people have an advantage?" It sounded as though he was saying that her success must be because of her beauty. Very insulting!
SharkswithfrikingLazers 11/20/2012 02:19 AM Report
"A very odd one and a jewel of a creature."
Well cast.
SharkswithfrikingLazers 11/20/2012 02:17 AM Report
Charlie, responsibility to yourself?
This sums up America now at a crossroads. Just read David Brooks.
Extreme personal freedom which is the direction America is headed or give up some of that freedom for God, country and family.
Mr. Brooks wants a return to marriage and children which makes you Charlie more like Anna. That is an Anna where your lover is work.
SharkswithfrikingLazers 11/20/2012 02:09 AM Report
Quite the lil' charmer at the end if I do say so.
SharkswithfrikingLazers 11/20/2012 02:08 AM Report
Charlie, you let her slide on her trip to the dark side.
"I've got a lot of experience with anorexia. It was in my family. My grandmother, and my great-grandmother suffered from it and I had a lot of friends at school who suffer from it so I don't think it's anything to be taken lightly."
Don't look at the photos: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/entertainment/2006-07/05/content_633451.htm
walterlouis 11/19/2012 11:13 PM Report
Why is the phrase "What choice did she/he have" becoming so popular in our intellectual conversations. I assume an intellect of any kind allows one to make choices and Tolstoy certainly was interested in the choices we make. That's why he wrote great novels like Anna Karenina. There is no better laboratory in which to explore the consequences of our actions than stage and screen particularly when inspired by a writer of the caliber of Tolstoy. If we believe the characters are powerless we might as well toddle off to a bit of cabaret and leave all the pain and suffering behind!
wl
REMant 11/19/2012 11:47 AM Report
Feminists, who would like to get rid of marriage, and probably men as well, seem to like Anna a lot. IMDb, in any case, lists no less than 27 film productions, including attempts by Greta Garbo and Vivien Leigh. But I think the highest rated remains the ten-hour-long 1977 TV presentation with Nicola Pagett, who, as I recall, actually looked somewhat the part. The latest has, in fact, been criticized for maintaining a distance that keeps the audience from getting involved - The Post writing merely about its costumes and staging - and it may be that the thing simply needs something like ten hours, or to be read instead. The basic story tho is fairly typically 18th-19th c, not confined to Russia, nor substantially different from Austen, and even reminds me of Showboat, but as with a lot of serialized fiction of the time, there's much too much material, and the idea of cutting some of it away is not a bad one, focusing on the irrationality of the affair, as was no doubt intended. The use of flashbacks might be necessary to keep the result, like Antigone, from resembling a court case. But I think when confined to 1 1/2 to 2 hours, unity of time, place and action is essential, especially to adaptations of 900-page novels. Incidentally, Edith Wharton's 1921 Pulitzer-winning The Age of Innocence, done up by Scorsese, is another illustration of the persistence of the theme. Since I'd guess most of the novels ever written deal with female morality, the feminists have a lot of revisionism ahead of them. I didn't get a chance to watch Thursday's discussion, thanks to the local PBS stations' overriding interest in fund-raising, and or some technical difficulty, and have no time now, so if I've repeated what was said then, sorry.