Reviewer: Genevieve Hinton
Email: armygurl4ever@hotmail.com
Rating: 10
More war storys, please. No matter what anyone says this movie was awesome! Those people are wrong, watch the movie! Possibly the best out of all the anne movies. I love the classic's . There the best. More romance please. Gils hot!
(01/13/2002)
Reviewer: Tonja Greer
Email: cgreer72@home.com
Rating: 3
The acting was good, I thought, and I was glad to see Gilbert and Anne finally tie the knot...but I was rather dissappointed in the story line...I think staying closer to the book would have made a sweet movie that would have been cherished in the same mannor as it's predecessors !
(01/12/2002)
Reviewer: Katrina
Rating: 1
The first two captured teh charm adn gentleness of LM Montgomery's books. The third did not and was too far removed from the story in teh book - this si NOT waht happens to Anne and Gilbert.
(01/11/2002)
Reviewer: Anne & Gilbert
Rating: 5
I could not control my tears in the scene where Anne is standing singing with the American actresses, Gil hears and recognises her voice, she senses him and they make the first eye contact they have had in years....The emotion this evoked was unbelieveable.
(01/11/2002)
Reviewer: Phoebe
Email: phoebeblue@hotmail.com
When I first heard that Sullivan and co were making a third Anne movie I was surprised and excited. Surprised – because, to me, (unlike apparently the reactions of a number of fans according to the official website) I hadn’t felt the story was incomplete and I hadn’t expected another sequel to be made, particularly over ten years later. Sure Gil and Anne were left standing on the bridge, but it seemed clear that it was only a matter of time before they married etc, now that Anne had discovered her real feelings for Gil. I was excited because since seeing Anne1 and 2 back when they first were shown, and I was aged 10-11 they had introduced me to the wonderful world of Anne. And since then I’ve read the books and watched the first two parts a number of times.
So being a fan of the previous films and of the books I eagerly awaited my chance to see Anne3, which happened this week in Australia. Luckily I was prepared in part for what Anne3 would be like- I had read that it bore no resemblance to the books and that it was set during World War 1, so with this knowledge I wasn’t expecting the film to be particularly true to the books. I’m grateful I was prepared.
So my reaction? Anne3 has to be taken on face value- it doesn’t continue the story of Anne of the books, but then Sullivan has not set out to do this, but has re imagined Anne’s future, and in particular what Anne would do if thrust into WW1. So even though it is not as many would have imagined it, and completely subverts the chronology of the books, for itself I enjoyed it. It is not in the same league as Anne1 and Anne2 though- it lacks the humour and the poignancy of those films. However given that it was made 12 years? later and that the actors have all aged in that time and Colleen Dewhurst had died it would have been impossible to return to where Anne2 left off- the youthful Anne we all love has gone, and been replaced by an adult with adult concerns and responsibilities. And in many ways the third film is more targeted at adults too.
Okay now for some quibbles: too many unanswered questions- I had the feeling that some parts of the film were needlessly rushed leaving me pondering a number of issues- and wondering if the TV version I watched had scenes missing or if scenes had been dropped. I’ve since learned that some scenes were dropped (but presumably from all versions). Including the wedding night scene- why was this? One moment our heroes were being married the next Anne was waving Gil off to war. How long did they have together as man and wife? Given the comment that they’d waited five years for this (the wedding) and didn’t want to be rushed- I’m sad to say it was rushed. After being engaged five years I expected to see a bit more passion! And the whole spy caper with Jack Garrett was never made clear- what exactly was he doing? Besides giving a bit too much credence to the theory that WW1 would have been lost without the Americans! Anyhow if you haven’t already, check out some missing scenes at the Sullivan website. I’d love to know how they fitted into the story.(In particular what’s that one with Anne in hospital about?)
Jack Garrett: Probably what I liked about the character of Jack was that he was a complex character, and neither Anne (nor I would suggest the audience) could work out if he was on the level. Did he love her or was he merely a philanderer? Did he try and steal her book or was it a genuine mistake as he claimed? Was he trying to help her find Gilbert or not? I’ve read a lot of comments saying that people hated Jack- but perhaps that is because nobody but Gilbert is right for our Anne. I thought he was a useful device- the embodiment of Anne’s old ideal (far more so than Morgan Harris) being rich, handsome and a writer to boot! You know how Anne once wanted to marry a man who had the ability to be bad, but wasn’t? Jack was just that.
Was Anne tempted by Jack? I think she might have been! Why? Because at times Anne must have wondered if Gilbert was dead and her instincts were wrong to believe he was living- and Jack was an attractive man! And even Gilbert said the novel she wrote, edited by Jack, had been her best work- so he could help her with her writing. And importantly, It seemed the only way she would be able to keep Dominic was by being with Jack. But, despite the temptation, she didn’t give in to Jack- which shows the strength of character within Anne and her belief in Gilbert.
Dominic- a lot of people have said they hated the idea of Gil and Anne ending up with a child not their own. But to me, this seemed one of the best ideas of the movie. After all, lets look at the history- Anne as we all know was an orphan and lived a loveless existence until she was taken by Matthew and Marilla who effectively became her parents. Marilla (Anne’s mother) has died, leaving Anne effectively familyless apart from Gilbert. But then her family-(Gilbert) is missing at war, presumably dead. So there she is in London with Fred and Dominic- we know as Diana’s best friend there is no way Anne was going to steal Fred (-although at one time, it seemed a possibility with the comment about he and Dominic being her only family!). Dominic was a different matter- just look at how keen she was to send him back to Canada and thereby keep him. And, I would argue, due to the care she takes of the child and the dangers she faces doing so, that he was hers far more than he was Jack’s. After all Anne abandoned her search for Gilbert while she remained in London caring for Dominic, even though she had the option of leaving him behind at the front, denying any responsibility or turning him over to an orphanage. But was Anne, as an orphan herself, and having spent five years working at the Hopetoun orphanage (as I think she did according to a throwaway line) likely to abandon him? Definitely not, even though it meant postponing her search for her husband. Anne did not have to be biologically related to the child to love him, just as Matthew and Marilla loved her. Which brings me to one of the most effective scenes in Anne3 when Anne repeats the actions of Matthew so many years ago, peeping around the corner of the train station to see the orphan child sitting on the same bench she sat on 15 years ago. Gilbert’s calm acceptance of the child at the conclusion of the movie shows one of the reasons why Anne (and I!) love him- He understands Anne’s love of Dominic and doesn’t feel threatened by the fact that he is another man’s child. He is the ideal man for Anne (contrasting with Anne’s imagined romantic ideal Jack) as all along he has patiently waited for Anne, he understands her, he respects her, and he is her equal. He doesn’t give in to jealousy over Jack in New York or Germany, but trusts Anne implicitly, and has never lost the love he has felt for her since he was a boy.
If you can understand the bond Anne has made with Dominic, you can understand the scene in the train carriage before Jack dies. Effectively Anne is faced with a choice and I would argue that is not between Gilbert and Jack, but between Gilbert and Dominic. I can admit that perhaps Anne is attracted to Jack, due to the nature of the adventure they’ve been through together, and certainly I can imagine that she has thought of the prospect of being with Jack if she had found out that Gilbert was dead. But the real reason Anne is tempted is because of Dominic: she has come to love him as her child and if being with Jack means that Dominic is rightfully hers, then that is a situation she has to consider. But as we know, Gilbert wins for he is first and foremost the love of her life. Let’s look at the situation: Gilbert is just returned to her, but how does she know he is the same Gilbert he was? Looking at Fred after leaving the warfront we know that his war experience could have changed him beyond the Gil she knows and loves. And for us in the audience familiar with the genre of World War One and the realities of this war- what with shell shock etc, it is a possibility. How does she know, having just found him after 3 to 4 years, that he still loves her as he did? After all Anne can be pretty insecure at times and has always lacked confidence in herself. And here she is giving up the child she loves, for Gilbert and for the past they’ve shared. Of course he is the same old Gilbert and loves her with a passion undiminished by the trauma he’s experienced, which Anne quickly realizes.
Some unanswered questions: Why didn’t Anne inherit Green Gables on the death of Marilla? Was this ever explained? Why was it sold when in previous years she’d resisted selling?
Why was Rachel Lynde only in the film for two minutes? Didn’t the actress want to appear longer? Such a small cameo role seemed strange.
Speaking of Rachel, chairwoman of the Temperance League- I would love to hear what she would have had to say about Anne swigging whisky with the American performers on the train! If it hadn’t been for Anne’s comment, (sometimes I wonder who the devil I am- or words to that effect) this scene would have been very out of place- and confirmed my suspicions that Anne has changed for the worst since we last saw her five years ago.
And finally, what was left out of the film? I know a lot of people are calling for Anne4 despite hating Anne3, but what I want to see is a ‘Director’s Cut” of Anne3 including the cut scenes, which I feel probably expanded on the themes and answered some of the questions I have. Or even better, judging by comments Megan Follows made about the film in various articles I would love to see her version- where she shows Anne in the light she feels most comfortable with. Also, I know I wanted to see more of Gilbert and looking at the Sullivan website, there’s some Gilbert scenes that didn’t make it to the final product. So an expanded Gilbert version would be nice!
So that is what I have to say. Sorry it took me so many words to say it! By the way has anyone seen the DVD version of Anne3 which includes missing scenes? If so, could you email me and tell me what scenes they are? (01/10/2002)
Reviewer: Deborah
Email: i_am_nice_123@yahoo.com
Rating: 3 1/2
I'm in australia here and i just watched the last part of anne of green gables the continuing story on channel 7. I had watched the part before it aswell, but i really want to see the other movies before it. I have just began to read the series, on the fourth book, but i beleive anne3 has nothing at all to do with it and sort of wrecked it for me. :P
(01/09/2002)
Reviewer: Judith
Email: cboxall.ozemail.com.au
Rating: 1
In Australia this mini-series has just been shown on TV. My daughter and myself greatly enjoyed the first and second film. We felt disappointed and cheated from the beginning to end of this atrocious mini-series. As for saying in the credits that the film was based on those 4 books, we were unable to find any similiarity between said books and the film. There was little romance, the original music had been changed (why??), Diana and Fred's marriage and characters were changed for no reason that we can see, Marilla's character was sorely missed (Colleen Dewhurst probably refused to have any thing to do with it). What would have been so bad about adapting Anne's House Of Dreams for "The Continuing Story" ? There are many new characters in this to develop into a mini-series worthy of L.M. Montgomery's novel!!!! Try again please ???
(01/09/2002)
Reviewer: Melinda
Email: mel78plus1@yahoo.com
Rating: 1
As I am from Australia I have only finished watching the miniseries tonight. Yet again a brittle script and thin storyline has been offered up by Hollywood as a poor excuse for an 'Anne' sequel.After the first two brilliant movies,Kevin Sullivan offers us this 'Mills and Boon' rubbish.I have read the whole series of Anne books and enjoyed the first two movies a lot.Do they honestly think that we have become so brainwashed by reality TV and other mindnumbing drama's that we wouldn't see this for what it is-absolute rubbish.The only saving grace was that they managed to get the original actors back in their roles and didn't resort to finding dreadful B grade lookalikes.
(01/09/2002)
Reviewer: megan
Rating: 8
A big fan as a child I Love Megan Follows. She appears to have not changed that much. However the style of this mini series is not like the old. Din't Anne and Gil actually get married and have kids??????
(01/09/2002)
Reviewer: Courtney
Rating: 5
I am an Australian and i am in love the Anne movies. I was extremely excited when i channel 7 printed that they were going to air Anne 3, i watched the first part of Anne 3 last night and loved it. I am really looking forward to the conclusion tonight. It may be very different to the books, but what movie created from a book series is excately the same? I think that you all should just appreciate the movie for what it is.
(01/09/2002)