Date March 9
I actually enjoyed the movie for what is was. I knew going into it that it the script was original so I was not expecting an LMM style movie like the first two. I admit that it was not perfect and I got the feeling that a lot of parts got cut out because of the limited time slot available on the TV station. However, I liked the story that Sullivan came up with.
Use your brains for a minute and think about how this story fits in with the first two movies and the Road to Avonlea series. There is no possible way that Sullivan could have followed the books because all the preceeding Avonlea shows were set AFTER the timeline of the orininal books. So yes, Anne and Gil's kids go to war in the books and not them, but the books were set 20 years before the original movies and shows. So if Sullivan had followed that timeline all you people would be complaining about that right now. So get over it!!!
Date March 9/2000
Even though this movie doesn't follow the books, it was still really good! I'm sure glad they kept all the old actors. If Anne hadn't of found Gil I probably would have cried!
Date March 9
Lucy Maud Montgomery wrote the Anne series. Kevin "Fraud" Sullivan should be ashamed of conning LMM fans by claiming to be bringing to them "The Continuing Story". Anne3 is not a continuation, it is a completely new fabricated storyline - and should have had a completely fabricated title - perhaps "Sullivan's Travel into Fantasy during WW1?"
I think most Anne fans were excited about the prospect of seeing Anne and Gilbert establish and grow in their relationship - this wish was denied. The wonderful wedding we were waiting for and which Anne and Gil deserved was woefully inadequate.
Even if Sullivan had chosen to rename the characters and present this film, it had far too many shortcomings to make it of merit. Plot?? - what plot. It was too convoluted and far too complicated to make any sense to anyone. Was this supposed to be a romance wrapped up in a thin drama dress, with intrique lace trimmings, and comedy overtones?. What nonsense.
As an aside, the editing was choppy (we never could understand how Anne got on that ship overseas quite so quickly or how Jack got her into Germany without apparent difficulty); by the way, who was that woman that befriended Anne and Fred at the hotel?; where did they find that totally inappropriate vehicle for Diana in PEI?; where and when did Anne learn how to convert a pot belly stove into a cannon?; and where oh where did they find that wonderfully white, completely contented and relaxed white horse on the battlefields of WW1?
By the end of Anne the Sequel, Gilbert has helped Anne learn that she is at her best when she writes about what she knows and loves, Avonlea and PEI. Perhaps there is a lesson for Mr. Sullivan should he choose to reread the Anne books and accept them for what they are - wonderful in their simplicity.
Date March, 9th/ 2000
When I found out that there would be an Anne 3 I was filled with joy. Ever since I was five I`ve loved the classic canadian story about the little redhead named Anne. I thought that the first two movies were well done. I waited for 10 months for the Continuing Story and I was sure that it would be just as good. When I did see it I felt differently. I think that in order to enjoy this movie you must block out the first two and understand that these children have grown up and are dealing with adult problems. I thought that Sullivan put too much fighting and war in this one. I mean enough already with the guns! He changed the characters a little because Anne would do and say things that she usually won`t have done. Like at some parts she just went stupid. It was a little wired that she went to war to find Gil, cause he wasn`t listed as missing until she left Canada. And what did she expect him to do when she got there. Just leave the war, and hope for the best? Someone would have to come and take his place and that would have bine hard. Also there were lots of new characters and barely any from the first two films. Rachel was only there for like 2 seconds, so I didn`t like that too much. In conclusion I would say that this was a good movie but nothing to brag about. I don`t think that we`ll ever get tired of seeing this story over and over, but then there`s always the books!
Date March 9, 2000
I absolutely LOVED Anne 3! I guess I'm one of the odd ones, since everyone seemed to hate it. I find it to be the best of all the Anne movies, although the others were wonderful. Here's why:
1) Anne & Gil are (finally) acting like they both love each other. Even in the sequel they weren't so sweet to one another.
2) Anne is so much more mature. She is impulsive, but in a nicer way. (She doesn't make a scene unless it's important).
3) There are no "boring" parts in this movie. (Like the Kingsport bit in the sequel).
4) It's not all this happy-go-lucky innocent thing. It's more realistic (although I agree, some things are too predictable ... but isn't that why it's a movie?) because we see Anne face real tragedies (Apart from Matthew's death and Gilbert's scarlet fever, there are no real tragedies in the other movies).
5) Jack dies. This might sound kind of mean, but don't get me wrong, I like Jack (as long as he stays away from Anne). But it's important that he dies because otherwise Anne doesn't get Dominic (that cutie ;) and Gil is left with a guy who loves his wife.
6) All the laughing, crying, kissing, hugging parts and the flashbacks, the part where Anne falls flat on her face on the beach, the reunion at the end, the scene when they adopt Dominic, etc, etc, etc ...
7)The actors did a spendid job, especially considering they had been out of their Anneish roles for ten years. I liked the fact that they changed Fred too and I usually HATE it when they change actors.
8) Most of you are going to think I'm twisted (I think all of you will, so please don't comment ;), but I liked the fact that it didn't follow the LMM books, although I liked the books very much. It changes the perspective of things and allows you to choose what you want from both the movies and the books and imagine the story the way you want it. Also, a movie about Anne's family would have cast Anne & Gil aside and would have been too sweet and happy to make much of a plot. Leaving LMM's anecdotes of the Blythe children in the books was a good idea.
Well, I must admit that the movie isn't PERFECT ... Diana's too snobby at the beginning, Anne & Jack are a little too "close" (even if it is entirely Jack's fault), There isn't enough of Anne & Gil (I don't think I'd be satisfied even if they were together throughout the entire movie), there isn't much of Green Gables & it's too short! But other than that, I think it was a success.
Date March 9, 2000
I pretty much have to agree with what Dawn said in her message writen on 3/8/00. It just was NOT "Anne" So many things that Anne did in Anne3 were SO un-Anne-like. I think the biggest example is when Jack stole the credit for her book. Oh my gosh, OUR little red-headed snippet would have NEVER let him get away with that without a bigger fight. She would have never carried on with Jack as she did later in the movie, and even Fred for that matter. Did anyone else notice that there was only one quick mention of Marilla and Matthew? I would have thought Kevin Sullivan would have at least written in a small segment on how Anne feelt about the death of Marilla. I, and I even shudder to say this, got the feeling that Anne had somehow become a colder more calculated person. As someone mentioned, she just sat back and did what other people told her too. She was ALWAYS her own person and so determined to do what she wanted without letting anyone or anything stop her. Yes, she portrayed this during her search for Gilbert, but that was the only time.
Other problems I had with the movie was that it was sort of poorly written. There were huge chunks left out. Too much of the time I was left with the feeling of "what just happened, I'm confused" "Now there back in PEI all of a sudden?" Oh boy, I was SO upset with the wedding. Need I even explain? I think we all felt the same way. Another major thing was that there was just no humor. Yes, it was set in WWI. Yes, WWI was awful and changed lives forever, but, these are the Anne movies afterall, there's always some crazy, silly, stunt that Anne pulls. It didn't need to be all dark and dramatic. I could say more, but most of all, I was so dissapointed with the ending. I too felt like "That was it?" I mean really!! I could have written a better ending!! That's not saying a whole lot. I feel like I want to call up Mr. Sullivan and beg him to give it another go. But, I know I can't and Anne 3 was his vision and his project and unfortunately it is not what a lot of us expected or wanted.
The ONLY things that was dear to me, as I watched the movie, were the passionate moments between Anne and Gil. It was wonderful being able to see the two of them so much in love. Someone mentioned that we were all craving that, having only seen that for about the last 5 minutes of "The Sequel". I did enjoy the love scenes between them, and the many original cast members that returned. I only wish that Rachels role was more than a 2 or 3 line cameo appearance. Afterall, Rachel became quite an important person to Anne after she moved in with Marilla at Green Gables. So, all-in-all, I WAS dissapointed, and I wish I could say I wasn't. I wish I could say that I understood that Mr. Sullivan need to do a totally new story and show the effects of war on people and a country. But, Anne of Green Gables is too dear to me and I am too much a fan of the "old" Anne to be able to have thoroughly enjoyed it.
Reviewer Josie Kaufman
Date March 9, 2000
Yuck! I'm glad that Megan Follows and Jonathan Crombie were in this movie. But I'm sorry that Anne of Green Gables had to be reduced to meaningless blood and guts violence for the sake of ratings. Anne 3 doesn't have any of the charm or wit of the original Annes. I would have liked the original characters to be a part of this movie, not just make cameo appearances. And Green Gables was run down!
Anne Shirley ends World War I all by herself? Not likely. She's also not a spy, a murderer, an adulteress, a soldier, or part of the Andrews sisters singing troupe, as the movie would have us believe.
Bottom line: Anne Shirley could have written a better script. And the ending was lousy! That was it???
Please don't blame the U.S. for this horrible video. I'm one of your neighbours to the south and I along with most others in the US thought this movie stank to high heaven. My gut response is, gee this is almost as good as Mary Poppins goes to the Vietnam war. And it makes just about as much sense. What a horribly disappointing movie. LMM is spinning in her grave, I'm sure.
Date March 9th 2000
I must say that my expectations of the final Anne movie were sadly unreached.
The first half was enjoyable. It was humerous, as the first two movies were, and I enjoyed the scenes where Anne had her momories of her past. Most of the cast was original which was great to see, especially Megan Follows and Jonathan Crombie, but part two left me with a feeling of, "That was it?".
There was too much emphasis on the wretched 'conspiracy' going on as well as too much Jack Garrison and not enough Gilbert Blyth!
I would have thought also that after all these years they would have elaborated on Gil and Anne's wedding, but as it turned out it was rushed and uninteresting. They needed more intese moments between Anne and Gil, more romance and shared moments.
What I noticed in the movie that was shown on CBC was that there was a part cut out from a preview I have of it on the first 'Anne of Green Gables' video. On the priview it shows Jack kissing Anne when he tells her that they could go back to the USA with Dominick and be a family. I guess they decided that indeed it was a bad scene so they cut it from the version shown on Monday night. What was with Anne's flirtation with Jack anyway? Here she has a gorgeous, devoted husband yet she gets too swept up in another man. Boo to that!
The preview was also wrong when it said, "Coming in 1999".
I also thought there was too much focus on Dominick, especially near the end. I thought they should have showed more of Anne and Gil's life together after the war.
The end was rushed and left me rather unsatisfied. It appeared that they hurried to finish off the movie when it could have been stretched into another hour or so for a smooth, more appreciated ending.
The 'Anne of Green Gables' movies will always remain my favorites and I was glad to see the final Anne movie, but unfortunatley it left me saddened, disappointed and craving a different ending!
Care to try again Mr. Sullivan?
Rating a half
Date March 8,2000
Astonishing to see in a Canadian production featuring World War I, but in pandering to a North American (US) market, the Brits are, yawn, once again, the bad guys. London is portrayed as an occupied city in which the natives are totally unreliable - Mr. Keegan for some unspecified reason is against the ending of the War and only those with North American accents display any courage - even the poor hotel/boarding house owners are shown as craven, suspicious and untrustworthy. Thank heavens for plucky little Anne, singing Canadian folk songs in the bomb shelter and traipsing around No Man's Land with a hidden wardrobe up her sleeve, ready for a quick costume change whenever the situation requires. And what a good thing her American friend Jack was around to arrange the Armistice.
I'm a newcomer to the Anne saga, though I saw a repeat of the sequel recently and was intrigued, but I was mightily disappointed in this effort. Sorry, am I a bit dim or were there jewels in baby Dominic's diaper? If so, hadn't good old Jack deceived Anne yet again, not to mention endangered his child's life, or does she forgive everyone for everything? (she certainly got over his theft of her novel smartly enough).
Anne 3 was a slim plot in search of a good editor, and worse it espoused every weak-kneed cliche that would appeal to our neighbours to the south. Whatever would LM make of this melodramatic, contrived piece of work, I wonder? I guess she'd understand how desperate we are for the mighty US $...