Tetrady not as good as all the hype

mraculeated The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

Micah Lloyd Excellent characters with emotional depth. My wife, daughter and granddaughter all enjoyed it...and me, too! Very good movie! You won't be disappointed.

Stephanie There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Kris Regbot Although normally I get upset when movie-makers deviate from a well-known story I have read, I understand that for legal reasons and timing -- if the actors had gotten much older there would have been no point -- he needed a script. This one gave them an opportunity to pursue themes of the era and explore how Anne and Gilbert could have responded to them: a woman writer, the glass ceiling and other gender role situations, WWI with its patriotism, espionage and tragedy, medical ethics in a teaching hospital and in war, sucking up to donors because public money isn't there... come to think of it, those are themes of today too, which is why I liked the movie. (The LM Montgomery books of Anne as an adult were disappointing to me in the lack of serious themes.) The war scenes in the movie were realistic and tension-filled but I endured them better than I do many war movies. I loved seeing how Anne could grow up and deal with more serious challenges, and I loved Megan Follows' performance. She was able to portray more depth of character and variety of emotion than the earlier movies required. The only thing I didn't like is, the "chaos of war" scenes went on longer than necessary.

MyrPraune I have not read all the Anne books. I don't like the flowery style of Lucy Maud Montgomery that much. But the 2 first TV series were really nicely done, with the romantic and "frilly" side of the story being anchored with really good interpretation. But this is just horrible. It really plays like an excuse to try and bank of the previous success of the 2 first series; the story is ridiculous, the characters so shallow it's a real joke. There is NONE of the warmth and charm of the first series. Even the character of Anne... I mean, it's Megan Follows, normally she should have been able to play Anne like she's done it before........ But with such a screenplay and dialogue, there's no way to do a good job. I felt cheated after this; I felt like the characters and the story that I really loved had been used for $$$ and cheapened. Yuck. I still give a 4 for the fondness of remembering those characters and a certain curiosity in seeing them again on screen.

Pollyanna706 I have never read the books, but I was excited to watch the mini-series. I must say that the first two movies are excellent, but his last one was terrible. First of all, how do you justify making the last installment in 2000, when the previous movie was made in 1987. Megan Follows was bound to grow up, and cannot possibly pull a mid-twenties Anne Shirley after 13 years. The other thing that bothers me is the change in Diana. How does someone change like that in just a few years? She's far too old to be portraying someone of Anne's character and loses some of her spunk that she had in the previous movies. She isn't enthusiastic and certainly does not extend from the previous movie. Gilbert is a decent character in this final movie, but all in all it wasn't the greatest. It is hard to continue a mini-series without doing the sequels immediately. I compare this poor rendition to the 3rd installment of North and South when they change the characters and bring in others that didn't exist in the first two installments. Kevin Sullivan... better luck next time.On a more positive note, the costumes are quite accurate and the clothes were very pretty. I do give credit for the scenery and costumes all around.

edwagreen While entertaining, this film was disappointing for a trilogy.The innocence of youth has long been forgotten with the advent of World War 1. Anne is thrust into a clock and dagger like atmosphere as the story takes on an espionage subject matter. The problem is that we really don't know for sure where the espionage is coming from. Is that newspaper editor the traitor that he has been made out to be by that woman society gossip writer?It's also hard to believe that the baby would recognize Anne. After all, he was just a baby when they were separated.To just say that the Colleen Dewhurst character died was not giving the part much justice at all.Parts 1 and 2 were so much better. Blame Part 3 on World War 1.