just another costume drama; it attacks the heavyweight concerns of Russian literature (hypocrisy, jealousy, faith, fidelity, the pastoral vs. the urban, huge mustaches) with wit and verve; most exciting of all, it is filmmaking of the highest order, channeling every other art form from painting to ballet to puppetry while remaining completely cinematic”. He lauded the entire cast for their work yet concluded that “this is really its director’s movie”.

In The Observer, Jason Solomons also called Knightley “superb”, and declared that the film “works beautifully…[it is] elegant and exciting [and] …incredibly cinematic”. Leslie Felperin of Variety was more reserved in her praise for the film, observing that although Wright “knows how to get the best from Knightley” and noting that the film was technically “glorious”, it was also “unmistakably chilly” in the storytelling. The Daily Mirror singled out Knightley as “excellent” and lauded Wright for “offering a fresh vision of the Tolstoy classic”, concluding the picture to be “with its beautiful cinematography and costumes… a real success”.

Others were less impressed with the film and Wright’s take on such a classic text. The Hertfordshire Mercury conceded that “costumes and art direction are ravishing, and Seamus McGarvey’s cinematography shimmers with rich colour”, but ultimately found there to be “no obvious method behind this production design madness”. Stella Papamichael of Digital Spy also awarded the picture only two stars out of five, commenting that “the third time isn’t such a charm for director Joe Wright and muse Keira Knightley”.

Although she found the actress “luminous in the role” she criticised Wright for “outshining” his star and affecting the narrative momentum by “favouring a glossy look over probing insights into a complicated character”. Neil Smith of Total Film also awarded the film two out of five stars, lamenting the fact that Wright’s elaborate stage design “pulls the attention away from where it should be… and keeps [us] at arm’s length, forever highlighting the smoke, mirrors and meticulous stage management that have been pressed into service to make his big idea a reality”.

He also dismissed Knightley’s performance as “less involving” than her “similar” turn in The Duchess. Richard Brody of The New Yorker criticized Wright for diverging from Tolstoy, without adding anything beyond superficialities in return: “Wright, with flat and flavorless images of an utterly impersonal banality, takes Tolstoy’s plot and translates it into a cinematic language that’s the equivalent of, say, Danielle Steel, simultaneously simplistic and overdone.”