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.

I only had to watch the trailer and I am completely horrified. So, pardon me, but this is not a review of the actual movie because it would be "heaping coals of fire on my head" to watch the actual movie. If you don't know what that expression means, then you, like Kevin Sullivan, have not read the books.Who knew Anne would have plastic surgery in her dotage?(sorry Barbara, but it's really obvious, and you are not well cast as Anne) Who knew her father didn't die at the same time her mother did, although it states this clearly in the books.Who knew Gil would go to war too and DIE (who the hell is Gil? There was no Gil! You mean Gilbert. He was never called Gil, ever...only when Anne cut his name off because she didn't want to be suspected of liking him-DUH) Why would you make Anne single, what, to spice up the story? Guess what, romance actually can exist in a marriage that lasts for many years. It's right there in the books, but again, you don't appear to be able to read.Why change something that is already so perfect? LM Montgomery's family should be totally ashamed of themselves for giving this soulless man the chance to take such awful liberties with a cherished gem.Mr Sullivan, you are the worst kind of filmmaker. You don't GET IT. You don't understand your story and have killed the whole beauty of it. You smelled money and you haven't looked back. And people no longer have the ability to READ so they think the movies you have so badly messed with ARE the stories. I couldn't watch any of them after the second one they were so horrible. This goes for everything Sullivan Home Entertainment has ever done that has been based on poor Maud's books. She would just despise you.WHAT IS WRONG WITH US? Do the British have to get hold of this to make it work? Do we have to ask the producers of the 1995 (NOT 2005) version of Pride and Prejudice to come and do all of this over and make it work? What a horrendous, shameful, idiotic mess.

It has been years since I've seen the original Anne of Green Gable films and I think I've only seen the third installment once. Nonetheless the first two films are two of my favorite films and brilliant classics of the story and very much defined Anne of Green Gables as much as the books have ever been. So I was excited to see Kevin Sullivan adapt another story about Anne Shirley and her life. I knew by looking at the commercials that it would be a different spin on the story and maybe even take liberties with the story and I'm okay with that if it fits. I will give Sullivan credit this story does manage to mostly fit perfectly in with the other films he made. However it also changes the entire Anne Shirley story a great deal and while some reviewers argue it doesn't matter I think it does. The entire concept of Anne not being a true "orphan" is a liberty that I don't think should have taken. Her existence as an orphan shaped her entire life. But the new adventures, the story before she came to Green Gables is still fun and interesting and it gives you a new side to the overall story which is a welcome addition.If there is one truly brilliant thing to come from this film it is the performance of the young Hannah Endicott-Douglas as Anne Shirley. Meghan Follows embodied and created the single best character performance of Anne Shirley, it would seemingly be impossible to find someone who could do the same job at the same caliber and yet here comes young Hannah and she does exactly that. Her performance is brilliant, Emmy worthy (or Canadian equivalent), and she is completely believable as a predecessor to the character Follows created. She is a gem! I don't know what circumstances prevented Meghan Follows from returning to her role as the older Anne but Sullivan should have stopped at nothing to bring her back. She could have easily played that role and instead they got Barbara Hershey? A peculiar and wrong choice for the role. She was just boring and didn't have any of the heart required to play this role. By calculations she should have been mid 40's at the oldest and she looked and acted like she was in her sixties. For big fans of the original you will be pleased to see the return of Jayne Eastwood as Mrs. Hammond, and a brief cameo by Patricia Hamilton as the classic character Rachel Lynde.What has made Anne of Green Gables the classics they are thus far are the adventures and the midadventures. On top of that the characters are probably the most important part. So what made this installment not meet the previous grandeur of the series? The adventures were there, the stories in tact but the characters lacked the same depth and heart. Outside of the main character there were no supporting characters that you really become enthralled with. Certainly if you happen upon this film without seeing the previous ones you might not catch some of the true story behind it but then you might find it more entertaining but if you, like me and millions of others, are enormous passionate fans of the original films (especially the first two) then you'll appreciate the attempt at continuing Anne's story but miss the heart. 7/10