Anne of Green Gables: A New Beginning (2008)

I love this movie so much

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

I am a big fan of LM Montgomery and her Anne books. The first two movies were faithful enough to the books (with some creative license taken), but the next two (AGG: The Continuing Story, and this one) are a bizarre detour with all sorts of fundamental changes from the books. Why? I won't even waste your time with all the weird changes, but Kevin Sullivan butchered this movie, and while Shirley Maclaine is a revered actress, she was wooden in this movie.If you like the books even a bit don't waste your time with this (in fact, don't waste your time even if you don't know the books, it is a weak movie, no matter what).

Throughout this film, I kept asking myself: "Who let the air out?" The story did seem to go along like a balloon, hanging close to the grown, the air slowly seeping out. All the ingredients were there, fine performers, beautiful photography, an interesting story...so why do things still seem so amiss?Had this film been a standalone story, with no connection to Anne Shirley, I think it would have been much better received. The tragic upbringing of young Anne was heartrending...but didn't ring true.There were fine points to this film, to be sure. The final monologue by the middle-aged Anne Shirley, sitting on the veranda at Green Gables and writing, was beautiful:"Everything that's happened in my life, the good and the bad, is more than I could have ever made up. I do long to write, and I will write about all of it. My life has been unexpected, exceptional really. Eventually, the more love a person gives, the easier it is to find. That's the only part that matters, nothing else. And it's so much nicer to be Anne of Green Gables than to be Anne of nowhere in particular."That last line brought a tear to my eye, because it's full of so much truth. However, most of the rest of the film was flat in comparison. I shan't criticize Sullivan's deviation from the books, as he was not permitted to adapt any more of the novels (which was the right decision, given the debacle that was Anne 3.) Sullivan did, however, stay truer to the television "Avonlea" universe in this film. In the series "Road to Avonlea" Anne and Gilbert were married when Marilla died, however in Anne 3, she has long since died when the Blythes finally marry. There are no such plot holes in this film, thankfully.Many of the performances in this film were quite good. I think Barbara Hershey was rather fine as Anne. Hannah Endicott-Douglas was an inspired choice as young Anne, at times bearing an uncanny similarity to Megan Follows in appearance and delivery. Rachel Blanchard, who I was mostly familiar with through her performance as Cher in the series "Clueless," has shown that she is quite a capable dramatic actress.I have always admired and enjoyed Shirley MacLaine. In this film, however, she seems to be phoning it in. I was left wondering if there had been script changes she didn't like after signing on the dotted line. That is mere supposition on my part, however.Sullivan's direction and writing, while adequate, don't really serve the performers well. There's a pitch to the performances that doesn't always ring true. It feels as if Kevin Sullivan kept asking them to make it bigger and bigger, until it was just TOO big.Another issue I had with the film was the way the characters motivations were a complete departure from what had gone before. Anne as a liar...one can believe a child from such circumstances doing the things young Anne did to hide her painful background. However, this is simply not Anne. For all her faults, Anne's saving grace was her honesty. That is missing here. Also, Marilla hiding the letter from Anne's father was unbelievable. While Marilla may have been reluctant, she was a woman with a strong sense of duty and of right and wrong. It is the essence of her character, and that was disposed of without a thought.There were a few interesting uses of stock footage in this film that actually work rather well. The Colleen Dewhurst footage was seamless, and quite welcome.Jayne Eastwood returning briefly as the cruel Mrs. Hammond was well played. Eastwood recreated the vocal part of her earlier performance perfectly. We only see her in long shot, so she doesn't seemed to have aged at all. That was nicely done.Patricia Hamilton's cameo as Rachel Lynde was most welcome, and it's good to know she and Hetty King are still going strong (however it is implied that Hetty King is standing next to Rachel, but there was no attempt to cast an extra that resembled Jackie Burroughs.)Despite the serious flaws in direction and storytelling, "Anne of Green Gables: A New Beginning" was an interesting, and sporadically entertaining evening of television viewing for me. While I understand what Kevin Sullivan was trying to accomplish, I really do think it's time that he put Anne to bed. I was never one of those fans who clamored for another sequel. I would have been happy if we had simply been left to imagine what happened to Anne and Gilbert after they declared their love on the bridge. I always hoped that it would inspire young and old alike to explore the books by Lucy Maud Montgomery.Taken on its own merits, the film can be enjoyed, but only if one can divorce it from all that has come before in the Anne franchise.

Wow. I'm amazed that Kevin Sullivan made this movie. To me, this is just sad. Pathetic and sad. Kevin Sullivan clearly is in need of some cash, so he and his company decide to trot the "Anne" story out again and see if they can ring it dry, squeeze a bit more profit out.I am completely rejecting this story as part of the "Anne" story. Kill off Gilbert? What a joke. That does not happen. I am actually angry at Sullivan for betraying the fans with this drivel. How dare he concoct this horrible junk about Anne just to try and come up with something passing for a story?!! As for the actors, of course they are poorly cast. But I don't fault them. No one could ever take the place of the original actors, so it was an impossible task.Maybe the movie could have worked if it weren't an add-on to such a powerful mythology that so many people care about and love.Shame on you, Kevin Sullivan, for betraying the fans that have loved Anne of Green Gables. You clearly can't come up with anything that can add positively to the "Anne" series. The horse is dead. Stop beating it.

SPOILERS!!! Although Anne 4 was far from perfect, there was an underlying beauty to it that touched me. It wasn't as emotionally detached as Anne 3. Being an adopted aspiring writer myself, it struck a personal chord with me when the adult Anne said things like, "Not knowing who your real parents are can haunt you," and "I used to long to write." These components truly got to me emotionally.I know I'm about to raise eyebrows here, but the performance of young Anne by Hannah Endicott-Douglas was dead-on pitch perfect, and honestly, it was just as good as Megan Follows' performance in the first film. This little girl is an absolute marvel. It was jarring, however, to see a different actress playing Anne in a Sullivan film. I'm so used to Megan's portrayal that I had to really try and get past that.Anne 1 and Anne 2 are glimpses into Anne's life after she has finally found happiness and a place to call home, as well as a sense of herself as a worthy human being, a girl (and eventually a woman), and a writer. She finds a new set of parents with Matthew and Marilla in an idyllic, beautiful setting that she so richly deserved. Anne 3 is a test of loyalty to both her character and the love of her life, Gilbert, as well as the aforementioned metaphor for the loss of childhood innocence. The world is altering the world, and Anne is trying to deal with that disturbing fact, especially when it reaches into her personal life. Anne 4 is a semi-dark, semi-warm introduction to someone we already know, presenting an explanation that fleshes out Anne's personality before we initially met her in the first film. Now that Gilbert has dies, the older, matured Anne must fill a void in her life by writing a play, finding the answers to new questions regarding a father she long presumed dead and a past she had buried long ago, and reconnecting to that part of herself which she had almost given up on due to her grief --- a writer. I will always prefer the first two films, because I grew up with them and I prefer the warmth of their stories. But I don't dismiss the third and fourth installments, either, because I feel that they, too have many interesting things to offer.I had no idea that the character of Hetty King would make a cameo appearance, but even though you couldn't really see her, I was ecstatic about it nonetheless. It was great to see Rachel again, and it's nice to know she and Hetty remained friends. (What a sweet homage to Road to Avonlea fans.) Yes, I wish Rachel had some dialogue, just as I wished that her part had been longer in Anne 3 and that we had seen her at Anne and Gil's wedding. But the movie wasn't about Anne's friends. It was all about Anne herself. I LOVED the music in this film more than in any of the other films, and the ending was absolutely beautiful, nowhere near as sappy as I'd read. Plus, the scene with Anne stretched out on Gil's grave was heartbreaking.Which leads me to another point. Some people are upset that Gilbert is dead. Well, would you rather have Jonathon Crombie in old age makeup playing opposite Barbara Hershey? Or would you rather have a different actor playing Gil altogether? There was a point to Gil's death, which furthered the story. It was Anne's grief over Gil and her worrying of Dominic that fueled her motivations to rediscover herself as a writer. It's a shame, though, that Matthew and Marilla never got to know any of Anne's children, and vice-versa. I mean, think about it. Kevin Sullivan was legally forbidden to adapt any more stories from the novels. But he did want to give the fans more of Anne. So when he does, everyone retaliates against him with dissatisfaction. I honestly feel sorry for the man. He did what people asked him to do, with limited resources other than his own imagination, and everyone still griped about it. It could've been worse. He could've made Gil die in WW1 and Anne run off with Jack Garrison. He could've had Green Gables not be reconstructed after it burned down (and there was significance in its burning). He could've had little Anne in part 4 be some sort of pathological liar, and older Anne marry her friend Gene Armstrong. Even though the later films deviate so drastically from the novels, everything Sullivan did was pretty true to the spirit of Anne (in my opinion), even if it was his own fan fiction. If Anne 3 and Anne 4 were fan fictions presented on this message board, rather than actual movies, people would be going wild with how much they loved them, saying things like, "That would make a great movie!"I mean, really --- who cares if Anne wasn't truly an orphan by the true definition of the word? All that matters is Green Gables and beyond. I think this entry provides an even more interesting layer to the first film, which I have since rewatched in order to see if everything from part 4 tied into part 1, and it did. People are making a mistake comparing the movies to the books. They're two completely separate mediums. I like the fact that we have two different Anne universes, those of the books and those of the films.Of course, nothing will ever top the second Anne film for me.