Incannerax What a waste of my time!!!

MoPoshy Absolutely brilliant

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Jemima It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

mickeyandme20042000 The only 2 scenes I actually like in this weird production are Anne and Gil's wedding reception and when they are reunited at the end of the war. Even those are somewhat ruined. The tent falls on their wedding reception and the preacher was half drunk. And during their reunion that jerk Jack Garrison has to walk up looking all butt-hurt jealous. This movie does not follow the novels at all. In the books they were married in 1890 and it was their 3 sons who went off to war (one of their sons was killed in the war).

libbygi I'm an avid Anne lover and adore the first two movies....I've attempted watching the Continuing Story in the past but could never get past the first 10, sickening, minutes.Since it's been years since my last crack at it, I thought I'd give it another try tonight - but oh, how I'm regretting it. Seeing an additional 30 minutes into the movie has only polluted Anne & Gil & Green Gables further!Everything is off in this movie. Familiar and beloved characters are rendered complete strangers. Anne's voice is unnervingly different & gravelly, and both Anne and Gil look...awful (especially Megan, I hate to say it...she's a natural beauty but it looks like she had botched plastic surgery before this movie or something...her mouth and chin are so tight and strained looking)...sorry, but it's true :(As other reviewers have pointed out the time-line is all wrong. But worse than that, it all feels so thin and empty.Bottom line: It's disturbing for Anne lovers to even catch a glimpse of. Steer clear - don't let your curiosity get the better of you!

folsominc2 I have to say from beginning to end, this movie was very terrible.First of all, it failed to recapture the chemistry of the first two movies by these actors in their roles for Green Gables.Second, they lost touch with the original time period and sequence for the picture. The original theme was obviously set in the 1890s and then they jump to 1915. If they wanted to include a war, it should have been the Spanish-American War.Third, why was it even called Green Gables when the entire time at Green Gables for the movie is less than 5 minutes (ok maybe less than 6 minutes)? Fourth, the actors obviously had been longer than 5 years since the last movie. Unfortunately, this is something that age and time never seem to hide.Fifth, there were many elements to the movie that left loopholes. For example, how did they find the child after the war was over? Wasn't Anne already a published writer? She would have had some clout by then. How about the real purpose of the crooked publisher/editor and his brought to justice after murdering Jack Garrison? Why would Anne have ANY feelings for Garrison after he stole her work? What about the woman editor? And WHY for heaven's sakes, was it imperative to take the child back into instead of safely into Canada away? The writers for this screen play skipped over the major elements and details in the story that was not done in the previous movies - perhaps because they were more authentic to the books? At any rate, I found this film, after much anticipation, a drag and boring and unbelievable.

anna-39 The problem with this film is not the film itself. It is entertaining enough and there is lovely chemistry between Megan Follows and Jonathan Crombie. Fans had been longing for a long time to see these two in the roles that they own so much. But... the problem really is that producer Kevin Sullivan thought he had the right to change the life story of characters created by someone else. He thought that Anne's story was not dramatic enough (and the legal disputes with the heirs didn't help) and decided to invent something that would be bland and entertaining. By doing this he overruled the expectations of millions of fans that loved Anne's story - he had the perfect chance, perfect actors and a great story (who in their right mind can say that Anne's House of Dreams is not dramatic enough??) and he missed that. It is really unfortunate and sad. Why call them Anne and Gilbert when they obviously are not them?