Anne of Green Gables (2016)

Such a frustrating disappointment

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

I thought the first episode was lovely, and drew me into the scene. It depicted a charming setting on a rural farm in Prince Edward Island. I would not want to be overly critical for these young actors who put a great effort into their acting. The young girl who played Anne did a marvelous Job. I am not sure why we have to compare each version and be so critical. I also saw the 1985 version and also enjoyed it but I was a teen then so it was awhile ago but I think Ella Ballentine and Martin Sheen did a great job. The friendship between her and Diana was so very sweet. I do agree it was a little rushed but was a very sweet story.

I had hoped to love this! I had every intention of loving it!I wanted to add it to my list of amazing rainy day movies to watch and approached it with an open mind. I ended up being disappointed at every turn. To start with, it was rushed, and mechanical. They tried to fit too much into the time frame. The cinematography, though lovely wasn't as rich as the Kevin Sullivan version, and the core cast cannot even begin to compare with the timeless performances of Megan Follows and the late Jonathan Crombie. Save your time and watch the 1985 version - your time will be much better spent!

This version of Anne of Green Gables was absolutely dreadful. Where do I begin? Right off the bat, when I knew I was doomed to disappointment, was Martin Sheen playing the soulful shy Matthew as if he was some kind of slapstick comic. Yakitty yakkity Yak to his horse, and then falling face first into a mud puddle. SMH.Too bad, because the scene on the train was actually quite promising. I thought Martin Sheen was a good actor and was willing to give him a chance, but this was disgraceful. It was probably the direction. The young actress who played Anne, delivered her lines. Period. Whenever a line came close to echoing a line Megan Follows said, the contrast would have been laughable if it weren't so inept. One of the pivotal comic scenes, (Anne's "apology" to Rachel after her rude behavior) took place in a wide shot and without audible dialogue. It was probably a mercy. She wasn't helped by the freckles put on with a pencil that kept appearing and disappearing, and that dye job on her hair! When she got into the sunlight, it looked like something a cheap tart would do to her hair. Again, probably the direction rather than the young actresses fault.Any production has a tough row to hoe to even come close to the perfection that was The Sullivan Production. That whole cast was perfection itself and truly inhabited their roles. I won't talk about the lack of depth. The whole Minnie May episode,I swear, clocked in at under a minute and that included the reconciliation scene. And "Matthew" continually on the verge of a heart attack. I guess stay tuned for the next installment. The Actor who played Gilbert looked younger than Anne and came across as a bratty little brother. The actress who played Marilla actually was not bad, though not the same character that Colleen Dewhurst interpreted. And Rachel was also excellent. The little actress who played Diana was a bright spot, as little screen time as she had. Again, no depth. And miscasting. She should have played Anne. There will probably be a second installment to this as many of the key scenes were left out entirely (no Lily maid of Astalot. No Miss Stacy.) If they recast an older Anne and Gilbert, and kill Matthew off quickly, it might have a chance to be half-way decent. There is hope. The early 1930's version with Dawn O'Day (Anne Shirley), Tom Brown, and Helen Westley was a wonder and showed that you could convey the charm of this story in 78 minutes flat, and even manages to include a satisfying romance between Anne and Gilbert.

Positively horrible! I adored the 1985 version and couldn't imagine a better version. I was right. The acting seems so contrived. The lines are delivered quickly with little emotion. The newer version is so rushed that it is more like a Cliff Notes version of the story. The plot is just snapshots thrown together, giving viewers no time to digest what is happening or to become emotionally invested. The actors: The young man who plays Gilbert is not as adorable and refined as the late Jonathan Crombie, and Martin Sheen does not exhibit the same adoration for Anne that Richard Farnsworth did. Ella playing Anne is unbelievable whereas Follows became Anne of Greene Gables. I will stick with the 1985 version.