Kris Regbot Although normally I get upset when movie-makers deviate from a well-known story I have read, I understand that for legal reasons and timing -- if the actors had gotten much older there would have been no point -- he needed a script. This one gave them an opportunity to pursue themes of the era and explore how Anne and Gilbert could have responded to them: a woman writer, the glass ceiling and other gender role situations, WWI with its patriotism, espionage and tragedy, medical ethics in a teaching hospital and in war, sucking up to donors because public money isn't there... come to think of it, those are themes of today too, which is why I liked the movie. (The LM Montgomery books of Anne as an adult were disappointing to me in the lack of serious themes.) The war scenes in the movie were realistic and tension-filled but I endured them better than I do many war movies. I loved seeing how Anne could grow up and deal with more serious challenges, and I loved Megan Follows' performance. She was able to portray more depth of character and variety of emotion than the earlier movies required. The only thing I didn't like is, the "chaos of war" scenes went on longer than necessary.

MyrPraune I have not read all the Anne books. I don't like the flowery style of Lucy Maud Montgomery that much. But the 2 first TV series were really nicely done, with the romantic and "frilly" side of the story being anchored with really good interpretation. But this is just horrible. It really plays like an excuse to try and bank of the previous success of the 2 first series; the story is ridiculous, the characters so shallow it's a real joke. There is NONE of the warmth and charm of the first series. Even the character of Anne... I mean, it's Megan Follows, normally she should have been able to play Anne like she's done it before........ But with such a screenplay and dialogue, there's no way to do a good job. I felt cheated after this; I felt like the characters and the story that I really loved had been used for $$$ and cheapened. Yuck. I still give a 4 for the fondness of remembering those characters and a certain curiosity in seeing them again on screen.

hms_jellybean The "Anne" series has been my favorite book series since I was about 12 years old. My younger sister had the series but wasn't interested, so I stole it and read all eight books in a week. The same books, now haggard and dog-eared, sit on my bookshelf and get read at least once a year. The characters are lovable and realistic, the plot always well-defined, with bouts of humor and seriousness. The first two Kevin Sullivan "Anne" films captured the books quite well, especially the characters of Anne and Gilbert. After watching the movies, every time I read the first three books, I see Megan Follows as Anne and Jonathan Crombie as Gilbert.But "Anne of Green Gables: The Continuing Story" leaves a bitter taste my mouth. Basically, Kevin Sullivan abused and maimed one of the most beloved book series of all time. The movie moves the timeline of the entire series forward almost 40 years, making Avonlea and its inhabitants in the previous movies seem backwards and primitive. Which makes sense, since those movies are set in the 1870's, while this is set in in the 1910's. Green Gables is in ruins due to it being rented after Marilla's death, Anne and Gilbert are still unmarried though Gilbert is finished with medical school, Fred and Diana share a rather passionless marriage, Diana has turned into a society wife obsessed with wealth, and both Fred and Gilbert seem in a rush to escape PEI for the warfront.As any book fan can tell you, pretty much everything about this movie is wrong, right down to the characterization. Diana and Fred were in love in the books, which never comes across in the movies. Anne and Gilbert were eager to be married; the three-year engagement and separation was hard on both of them and they married almost as soon as Gil walked out of Redmond. Neither could bear moving away from PEI; Anne could barely stand to move 60 miles away from Avonlea. Though both characters mellow with age, they are as they always have been: Anne is still opinionated, dreamy, and fiery. Gilbert is stable, steady, with both a realistic and humorous outlook on life. They complement each other, which is the beauty of their relationship. By the time World War I rolled around in canon, Anne and Gilbert are proud parents of six children, ranging in age from 14 to 21. They were quite against their three sons joining the war, and are heart-broken when all of them end up joining, anyway. In the movies, both Anne and Gilbert come across as flat shadows of their former selves. Probably the most glaring error is in Gilbert: he never would have joined the war and left Anne behind. He waited 10 years for her, for crying out loud! There really was a wasted opportunity here. "Anne's House of Dreams" was a big book of character development for our favorite couple. Anne and Gilbert must cope with the gritty realism of adulthood outside their haven of Avonlea. Gilbert is a poor country doctor, he and Anne must now navigate their first five or so years of marriage, being in a completely new town and new house, how to make new friends, and establish their new lives. They experience the giddy rush of being newlyweds, the quirkiness of their new neighbors (who are "kindred spirits"), and the loss of their first child in childbirth, which sobers Anne and terrifies Gilbert, for as a doctor he was not able to save his daughter and almost lost his wife. They suffer the death of a good friend juxtaposed against the joyous birth of their second child. By the end, they move to a larger home and are much more mature than the Anne and Gilbert we knew at the beginning.That said, if it were not connected to the "Anne" series, I think it would be a fairly good movie on its own. Using different actors with different names and backstories, this could be turned into quite the romantic flick. But since it is connected to a much loved book series and completely deviated from canon in every way possible, it brings it down a lot.

elizabethanne628 I agree with so many of the comments...but just to add my very sad, little two cents: 1. Anne NEVER would have let Green Gables go like that... 2. Everyone does look really old, which if course is not their fault but it does make a difference. What took the director so long?!..and to make *this* 3. Someone posted about how the behavior is more like 2000 than 1900 and it is. Anne and Gilbert never would have basically made out on the beach as they do within the first few minutes. They wouldn't have traveled to NYC unmarried to live together either. Also, Diana never would have been so candid about her marriage being emotionally empty. Did anyone even talk about that with such language back then?I could go on and on, but this movie broke my heart. What a tragedy! Avoid it or watch it with caution and Kleenex while your mourn the loss of the hope of a good third film to end the trilogy.