Anne of Green Gables: The Continuing Story
- Mini serie TV
- 2000
- 1h 33min
VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,9/10
5294
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Le continue avventure di Anne Shirley a New York e in Francia durante la prima guerra mondialeLe continue avventure di Anne Shirley a New York e in Francia durante la prima guerra mondialeLe continue avventure di Anne Shirley a New York e in Francia durante la prima guerra mondiale
- Premi
- 6 candidature totali
Sfoglia gli episodi
Recensioni in evidenza
The only reason I can think of that this movie even bears the title "Anne of Green Gables" is that the director/producer/whomever decided that they could make a lot more money misleading hundreds of loyal Anne fans. This movie is so unlike the other two that it could be about any couple during WWI. Whatever possessed the wonderful Megan Follows and Jonathan Crombie to be in this disaster of a film, I am sure none of us will ever comprehend.
I also cannot understand why Kevin Sullivan, who first presented Anne on screen with such sincerity, could somehow think that the original L.M. Montgomery stories were simply not good enough anymore? This movie might not be exciting to the "Mission Impossible" fans that it seems to be geared towards, but Avonlea was exactly the setting that made the Anne movies so wonderful. This "continuing story" has none of the beauty and vivacity of the former films. We loved Avonlea and Prince Edward Island, because they provided simple and natural backdrops, allowing the talent of the actors to shine through.
And speaking of the talent of the actors, where on earth did it go? To agree with another reviewer, the actors looked tired and restless during their scenes, as if they wanted nothing more than for all of it to end. Maybe they were blackmailed into doing this? Not only did we have to endure Megan Follows and Jonathan Crombie simply looking old, we were given the added benefit of seeing several other actors coming back to play their former rolls, and clearly not having fun with them. I am not even going to discuss the new character of Jack Garrison, who seemed to be pulled out of thin air to form a soap opera-like love triangle.
When I read a wonderful book like "Anne of Green Gables" (and "Anne of Avonlea", "Anne of the Island", etc.) It disappoints me so much when a movie comes out that is nothing like the amazing piece of literature I have enjoyed. When I heard that there was going to be a "continuing story" my mind automatically filled with images of Anne and Gilbert's joyful wedding at Green Gables, and of their "house of dreams" and their many children. When I heard that it was to be nothing like the book, I could hardly contain my disappointment! We loyal Anne fans have waited so long...for this?
Other reviewers have complained that their visions of Anne have been ruined forever. I did not have this problem, because I have an imagination that allows me to "imagine things differently from what they are." This movie was so unlike Anne of Green Gables, in storyline, setting, and characters, that it had no effect on my longterm enjoyment of the first two films.
If your curiosity cannot be contained, and you simply must risk it, then by all means, watch this film. If not, however, I caution you, do not touch this movie or it will contaminate you for life!
I also cannot understand why Kevin Sullivan, who first presented Anne on screen with such sincerity, could somehow think that the original L.M. Montgomery stories were simply not good enough anymore? This movie might not be exciting to the "Mission Impossible" fans that it seems to be geared towards, but Avonlea was exactly the setting that made the Anne movies so wonderful. This "continuing story" has none of the beauty and vivacity of the former films. We loved Avonlea and Prince Edward Island, because they provided simple and natural backdrops, allowing the talent of the actors to shine through.
And speaking of the talent of the actors, where on earth did it go? To agree with another reviewer, the actors looked tired and restless during their scenes, as if they wanted nothing more than for all of it to end. Maybe they were blackmailed into doing this? Not only did we have to endure Megan Follows and Jonathan Crombie simply looking old, we were given the added benefit of seeing several other actors coming back to play their former rolls, and clearly not having fun with them. I am not even going to discuss the new character of Jack Garrison, who seemed to be pulled out of thin air to form a soap opera-like love triangle.
When I read a wonderful book like "Anne of Green Gables" (and "Anne of Avonlea", "Anne of the Island", etc.) It disappoints me so much when a movie comes out that is nothing like the amazing piece of literature I have enjoyed. When I heard that there was going to be a "continuing story" my mind automatically filled with images of Anne and Gilbert's joyful wedding at Green Gables, and of their "house of dreams" and their many children. When I heard that it was to be nothing like the book, I could hardly contain my disappointment! We loyal Anne fans have waited so long...for this?
Other reviewers have complained that their visions of Anne have been ruined forever. I did not have this problem, because I have an imagination that allows me to "imagine things differently from what they are." This movie was so unlike Anne of Green Gables, in storyline, setting, and characters, that it had no effect on my longterm enjoyment of the first two films.
If your curiosity cannot be contained, and you simply must risk it, then by all means, watch this film. If not, however, I caution you, do not touch this movie or it will contaminate you for life!
I completely agree with the majority of comments posted here about "Anne 3". As a longtime fan of the first two films (and books), I was so excited for this third installment. When I first saw it, I didn't fall in love with it the way I did the first two films. Upon a subsequent viewing and discussions with my sister, I was able to pinpoint what bothered me about this movie. Most of these issues have been covered by other viewers (drastic change from the books, almost completely joyless, weird quasi-unfaithfulness to Gilbert, etc.), but I thought I would add a couple of thoughts that my sis and I discussed.
The "Anne" books contain the simple stories of one woman's life, from madcap girlhood to mature motherhood. When she becomes an adult and marries, the Anne books cover the themes of life, death (loss of children), joy, despair and hope...in other words, the books are about experiences that women of the time could identify with. Apparently, the creators of this third movie didn't think that a "woman's story" was interesting enough. Aside from changing the time frame, they changed the location of the (majority of) the action from Prince Edward Island to World War I-era Europe, chock-full of blood, gore, "action" and spies. If the period of the story's setting had to be changed to WWI, wouldn't it have been more interesting (and truer to the spirit of the books) to portray Anne as a woman coping with the war on the homefront? But, like I said, the story of a woman dealing with life and war must not have seemed as important to the writers/director/producer as spy capers and battlefield scenes.
Also...I'm surprised that none of the other viewers commented on the movie's tiresome anti-American bias. I lost count of the times that we were insulted. Thousands of American soldiers gave their lives to help end World War I and the pointless jibes at "the Yanks" in this film belittles their contribution in ending the stalemate that the war had turned into. If the filmmakers wanted to promote Canadian nationalism, there are better ways to do that than at the expense of Americans.
For a movie that seemed to want to extoll the virtues of Canada, there was precious little of Canada (and Prince Edward Island) shown on-screen. Like Anne and Gilbert's life together, I guess Canada wasn't considered exciting or dramatic enough for the setting of this movie. What a shame.
The "Anne" books contain the simple stories of one woman's life, from madcap girlhood to mature motherhood. When she becomes an adult and marries, the Anne books cover the themes of life, death (loss of children), joy, despair and hope...in other words, the books are about experiences that women of the time could identify with. Apparently, the creators of this third movie didn't think that a "woman's story" was interesting enough. Aside from changing the time frame, they changed the location of the (majority of) the action from Prince Edward Island to World War I-era Europe, chock-full of blood, gore, "action" and spies. If the period of the story's setting had to be changed to WWI, wouldn't it have been more interesting (and truer to the spirit of the books) to portray Anne as a woman coping with the war on the homefront? But, like I said, the story of a woman dealing with life and war must not have seemed as important to the writers/director/producer as spy capers and battlefield scenes.
Also...I'm surprised that none of the other viewers commented on the movie's tiresome anti-American bias. I lost count of the times that we were insulted. Thousands of American soldiers gave their lives to help end World War I and the pointless jibes at "the Yanks" in this film belittles their contribution in ending the stalemate that the war had turned into. If the filmmakers wanted to promote Canadian nationalism, there are better ways to do that than at the expense of Americans.
For a movie that seemed to want to extoll the virtues of Canada, there was precious little of Canada (and Prince Edward Island) shown on-screen. Like Anne and Gilbert's life together, I guess Canada wasn't considered exciting or dramatic enough for the setting of this movie. What a shame.
Although this could almost have been a decent war drama by itself, this film should by no means bear the name 'Anne of Green Gables'. For this film, Kevin Sullivan was fortunate enough to have 4 more books from which to write his script- but he chose to ignore all of them. For him, this was a 'what if' movie - not a 'what was written' movie, which - as a die hard 'Anne' fan - put me in the depths of despair. I won't even go into the under-developed characters or predictable plot. After capturing so many girls' hearts years ago with two beautiful films, Kevin Sullivan has betrayed us by substituting scenery for explosions and character for carnage. Amongst all the victims in this film, it was for the death of Anne's spirit for which I grieved the most.
If you treasure your Anne girl, DO NOT see this movie.
If you treasure your Anne girl, DO NOT see this movie.
A big disappointment. The departure from L.M. Montgomery's novels and the creation of an entirely new storyline has sapped all of Anne's vivacity, impishness, and honesty right out of her. The production drags, the actors seeming less like the characters I've known and loved than, well, tired actors. The war story is a good idea, but with every implausible twist and turn it becomes clearer that it just doesn't work to superimpose a simplistic, slapdash storyline on classic, beloved characters like Anne, Gilbert, and Diana. I'm surprised that Kevin Sullivan, who created such beautiful adaptations of the novels in 1985 and 1987, allowed this melodramatic drivel to be produced with his name on it.
I am really disappointed in this movie. What was Mr. Sullivan thinking? I can understand changing the script to make a better movie like in Anne 2, but this was ridiculous. Especially the fact that it was supposed to be only 5 years later. Come on! The audience is not dumb, Mr. Sullivan. He could have kept his WWI story line but still integrate Avonlea people and timeline into it. Geeze! It would have been really simple! Anne and Gilbert should have been married already, had some kids and lived in Ingleside. The movie could have began with Gilbert buying Green Gables (since Rachel lives with Hetty at this point). And then the timeline would have matched! It is so simple that it erks me to no end and I have only seen this movie twice. The second time it was really hard not to throw something at the TV! All he had to do was include events that occurred in Road to Avonlea and a lot of the fans would be happy. And he could have still included his WW1 obsession by showing Davy Keith joining and how Gilbert wanted to be a doctor on the front. Rachel should have played a bigger role than she did. Fred and Diane could have had their problems too, but it should have been Fred Jr. going off to war, not Fred Sr. In the books,Anne's kids went off to war and Walter died. This could have been some of the plot as well. Also, I am annoyed that the orphan house Felicity works at was used as Diane's house as if fans would not recognize it from Avonlea. Not all the characters of Avonlea needed to be involved, but the story lines should have meshed better. Plus, what happened to the town of Avonlea itself? It would not have changed that much in 5 years!! Even Carmody was weird looking. I just wish Megan Follows had said no to this script until changes were made. I think the fault lies more in her lap than in Mr. Sullivan's since the actor usually knows what is better for the character than the writers do. Sigh. Only watch this movie once for the great scenes between Gilbert and Anne where you can just FEEL their chemistry. Otherwise, try to forget it exists!!
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe plot of this film bears little resemblance to the storylines of any of the "Anne" source books because of legal disputes that were at the time ongoing between Kevin Sullivan and the heirs of Anne author Lucy Maud Montgomery. Ultimately, Canadian courts agreed with the heirs that Sullivan had withheld from the heirs contractually promised profits from the first two films in the series (Anna dai capelli rossi (1985) and Anna dai capelli rossi (1987)), and the courts also found groundless Sullivan's $55-million suit against the heirs.
- BlooperWhen Anne, Gilbert and Jack are riding home on the train, and Anne is talking to Jack, he is smoking a cigarette, which he throws on the floor. After stamping it out with his shoe, it sticks to the sole of his shoe, and can be seen smoking heavily as he props his foot on his other knee. He actually shakes his foot to get rid of it! You can almost see Megan Follows trying not to laugh. Then he puts his foot down and stamps it out completely.
- Citazioni
Gilbert Blythe: You know, every day I would pick a different memory of you and play it over and over and over again in my mind, until every hair, every freckle, every part of you was exactly as I remembered.
- Versioni alternativeThe 2011 wide-screen 'Restoration Edition' DVD version uses new, re-created visual effects and matte shots. 'Anne of Green Gables: The Continuing Story' had many visual effects and matte shots that were originally created in standard definition. Each of these sequences had to be recreated using original green screen elements and embellishing them with completely new matte work.
- ConnessioniFollowed by Anne of Green Gables: A New Beginning (2008)
- Colonne sonoreScotland the Brave
(uncredited)
Traditional
(bagpipes)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Siti ufficiali
- Lingue
- Celebre anche come
- Anne de Green Gables: La historia continúa
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti