kassidyrain
I simply love this movie. I first saw it with my mother when I was about 8 or 9, and we both fell in love. Kevin Sullivan takes such care into recreating Avonlea. He's created a whole majestic universe, and you feel like you are a member. When a character has done something good and people in the movie applaud, you feel like applauding with them. I have resisted many times the urge to cry, laugh, and cheer while watching this movie. The actors are fantastic. Megan Follows is brilliant, and she really embodies what Anne is all about. Jonathan Crombie as Gilbert is also amazing. I can watch this movie over and over again. I also like that it stays very true to the novel, with little differences here and there to make it more dramatic and make it flow easily, but it doesn't feel butchered. I would definitely recommend this movie to anyone.
Andy (film-critic)
"Anne of Green Gables" was one of those surprise random moments for me where I didn't know what to expect, but went through a barrage of emotion before arriving to this conclusion. In film, it may be cliché to say "size does matter", but with exploding budgets and timelines over 120 minutes, size is becoming a hot commodity in Hollywood. "Anne of Green Gables" is one of those low budget, little screen book adaptations that literally takes every page and puts it in cinematic lights. Carrying both positive and negative attributes, "Anne of Green Gables" takes three hours of your life, puts it in a made-for-TV blender, blends, and forces you to drink the resulting concoction. How does it taste going down? Don't worry – that is what I am here for."Anne of Green Gables" begins with Anne's life in an orphanage, living with uncaring foster parents, all the way through her lavish life with her new parents, Matthew and Marilla Cuthbert. She goes through the struggles of being an independent woman living in a prim and proper world. Leading us as Anne is Megan Follows, a young girl with a television filled resume, who provides us with the shell of Anne, but not quite the full-body development. Follows is my first experience with Anne, and since there is little to judge, I must admit she was follow-able, but not quite developed. The words that she engulfed were charismatic, she defined the role, but when she walked, cried, or ran – she didn't seem to be that same Anne again. Follows felt like a stage actress trapped in an invisible cinema box. Either she wasn't allowed the explore all the elements, or she just didn't have to. This film was your typical made-for-TV movie that didn't need actors escaping their shells because they had picturesque views and longevity on their side. They were telling a story, not winning awards – and with this film it was obvious. Don't yell – I did like what Follows did, I just didn't love her performance. Perhaps a stack rankings of all the others that portrayed Anne would allow Fellows' performance to stand out, but watching this film alone – something just felt missing. Richard Farnsworth's Matthew was another abandoned character, with no emotion and void of life. Every time he opened his mouth, nothing of excitement protruded. Colleen Dewhurst was the cliché angry woman, unwilling to change, yet something about Anne eventually brings her to a new understanding of life. These two were the leading figures around Anne, and working together they provided a good story – but poorly developed characters. There was minimal emotion surrounding them as they went from scene to scene. For these actors, it was obviously a job; they allowed the movie to tell the story.Having never read the story of Anne and her adventures at Green Gables, director Kevin Sullivan should be commended for bringing such a drab story to life. The adventures of the protagonist Anne includes minimal excitement, the cliché drunken friend, the death of a loved one, the adolescent blurts of English – all can be found in other films of this nature like "Little House on the Prairie" or any "After School Special", but Sullivan did bring some snippets of joy to this story. He made it long, which allowed us to sink into the environment, believe that it was forced, and yet one can find simple joys in the stagy-ness of it all. Sullivan's direction was impeccable; he took no risks, created nothing original, and played it by the book. He allowed the story to grow, but again, there wasn't much story to grow. Anne stays in one place, runs around everywhere, and grows an iconic challenge with a local boy who is equally as talented (and equally as drab). I am not a pre-teen girl, I am missing the "bosom" friend, and obviously this film wasn't targeted towards my demographic, but it should still entertain. Anyone who argues that they could sit through such lifeless characters must be first in line to the new Larry the Cable Guy film. While I am drawing random tangents, my point is the meat was missing from this adventure. The scenery was fantastic, the pacing was fluent, but our characters could not bring me to a second viewing. Where was the passion in this film? Why did Sullivan allow cardboard to grace his screen? Overall, "Anne of Green Gables" was a lengthy film, with cardboard characters, but a plethora of beautiful scenes. There wasn't much music to talk about, outside of the same three chords played over and over again. Richard Farnsworth proved yet again that his name filled his resume, while Megan Follows played her part while keeping within her self-proclaimed box. As a reviewer of films, I want to see progression, development; strong single elements that make each film stand out from the cattle of the rest. With this film it felt safe, it was a family film that took no risks, it felt like a Styrofoam box on the ocean – you really should take it out, but you worry about getting wet and sea creatures. "Anne of Green Gables" was an 80s film without the pizazz. If I had a daughter who wanted to watch this film, I could hope it would help her sleep. Coupled with the characters, the story is ironically bland, and even the director didn't push for risks. It was a film. I was happy when it was over, could never dream about watching it again, yet I can't fault it for anything dramatic. It wasn't the greatest made-for-TV film, but there is little to complain about.It was sterile. It was cardboard. It was copper.Grade: ** 1/2 out of *****
