This post contains spoilers.
As I watched Netflix’s “Anne with an E”, my family had to tolerate my enraged shouts at my laptop and my bookish friends had to endure text message rants in real time:
Every episode is worse than the last.
WHY is this happening?
They RUINED MATTHEW!
I challenge anyone who likes this version to a duel!
THAT’S THE LAST SCENE?!
I was writing a review for America Magazine so I couldn’t just quit watching, bleach my eyes, and burn my laptop, but I have big issues with this betrayal of my friend, Anne Shirley. Partly because I think the series is an aggressive charge in the war on whimsy, but also because I think it failed in it’s lazy attempt to insert modern feminism into a classic story that already HAD a lot to say about the strength, intelligence, and power of women. And in the process, the creators ruined characters and plotlines that expressed that strength.
Anne is a classic heroine. She doesn’t need you to throw in the word feminism or yell peevishly, “I’m going to be my OWN woman!” in order to be inspiring. Not only does she get her teaching license at Queens and wins the Avery scholarship for being THE LITERAL BEST. She goes on to complete her BA at a four year college, a highly unusual accomplishment for a woman in that era. She turns down suitors right and left. And she becomes a published writer and principal of a school before she marries a man who appreciates her intellect and they raise a gorgeous family together. Why would she need you to modernize her?
And although the writers have Anne crying in desperation, “Girls can do anything boys can do!” they fail to demonstrate the strength of women in the plot. In Montgomery’s book, Anne’s first meeting with Gilbert Blythe involves her breaking her school slate over his head when he comments on her physical appearance.
Here, here! Am I right, ladies?
Yet in our Oh So Very Enlightened new Netflix series, White Knight Gilbert’s first encounter with Anne is when he saves her, the Helpless Damsel in Distress, from a bullying older schoolboy who is threatening her in the woods. C’mon now.
How about we skip the clumsy modernized dialogue and instead stop stripping the heroine of her strength? And for the record, if a prospective suitor is going to save me from a sticky situation, I’d prefer it to be from a hilariously disastrous rendition of Tennyson’s “Lancelot and Elaine,” thank you very much. But don’t expect me to be friends with you EVEN THEN, Gilbert Blythe.
The new series inserts a sewing circle called the “Progressive Mothers Club” in which the members spout their ideas about raising daughters and make comments like, “Feminism. What a wonderful word!” as they embroider together. Eye roll. However, it’s made of up the same women who villify Anne for sharing about her confused views about sexuality that she’s developed from living in a home in which the drunken husband would sexually assault his wife.
Wouldn’t a “progressive” woman show Anne compassion for her painful past? When Anne points out that something sexual is going on between a student and the teacher, the “Progressive Mothers Club” ladies find fault with her instead of taking action and removing the teacher in order to make the student (one of their own daughters) safe from a pedophiliac predator. Is this series supposed to score points for feminism? Because it’s doing a terrible job.
It seems that the creators mistakenly assume that the story of Anne would be more relatable to modern audiences if they use the word “Feminism” and at the same time, remove all the strong female characters. Miss Muriel Stacey, one of Anne’s schoolteachers in the book is an excellent role model for an intelligent, ambitious woman. She helps prepare her pupils to further their education at Queens Academy so that more choices will be open to them. But in the series, they’ve removed her altogether!
And why did they flatten Rachel Lynde? What happened to the bossy, unstoppable Mrs. Rachel that makes everyone (including her husband) cower in fear? This portrayal is a terrible butchering of her character, that’s what!
Now I’m not saying that we should all go back to 1908. I for one very much enjoy having the right to vote and I think we still have a long way to go in matters of women’s equality. But the creators of “Anne with an E” have altered Montgomery’s original story so that there are no longer many different characters showing us how a strong, capable woman can look. They’ve replaced it with a bleak world longing for the one kind of feminism acceptable in 2017, and it just doesn’t work.
How does this series equip our daughters to be fierce, intelligent, capable, independent, unrelenting, compassionate, ambitious, powerful women when it has removed the plotlines and characters that inspire those ideals in exchange for awkward alterations and dialogue inserted to gain progressive points?
Do we have to impoverish the tale in order to modernize it? I don’t think Anne Shirley needs a damn thing from you, “Anne with an E.” And that includes an invitation to your progressive mother’s sewing circle. She’s far too busy taking names, breaking slates, and inspiring girls the world over.
P.S.If you want to read a less ranty, more reasoned review of the series, I wrote one for America Magazine.
Hi Haley this is my first comment after reading for five years (waving sheepishly) but I can’t contain my CONTEMPT for Netflix Anne. I DESPISE everything it represents. It’s like trying to ‘improve’ a national park by paving it and constructing sculptural trees out of plastic. Thank you for standing up for our beloved Anne!!
Best description ever!!????
Totally agree. Not an improvement.
Haley apparently you never read books because the 1985 & 87 versions didn’t follow the books either. You are an awful reviewer he doesn’t recognize art.
Welcome, Malcolm! I actually read the books once a year. And I didn’t claim that the 1985 or 87 versions followed the books perfectly. The first makes some big changes and the second departs from the plot completely. It was your (incorrect) assumption that I think the 80s versions followed the books. The first one is significantly closer, but it even changes the era. I also think you meant “who” doesn’t recognize art. 😉 Have a great day!
You are awesomely gracious towards sad trolls.
Anyway, I can’t believe they left out the slate-smashing!
I was going to watch it but I don’t think I could stand it…
Thanks for saving me the heartbreak and outrage!
1985 version was all right but 1987 version had nothing to do with anne of avonlea . it was based of anne of windy polar which actually happened after anne and gil got married . best off anne version to me in 1975 bbc version
Amen, preach it, sister. All they have succeeded in doing is making Anne a 2017 bag!
Preach!
😉
Thank you for this, Haley. I might subject myself to watch a few episodes just so I can justify my hatred of it — not that I don’t trust everyone’s judgement on this, everyone I know who’s seen it HATES it but I like to feel credible — and I think you’ve hit the nail on the head here. 🙂
The first episode really isn’t terrible. The cinematography and music are splendid and the casting is (with a few exceptions) excellent. The pilot follows the story somewhat closely. Episode 2 starts the downward spiral..
Thanks for sparing me the trouble!
I watched the preview and thought it would be more accurate. And then I started seeing articles. And I pretty much decided it was going to be awful with all the changes (and the attitude of the director!). Yeah, I don’t think I will bother seeing it. And well, I already loathed the first movie adaptation. Much of the issues started with that. Those AREN’T like the book, and they essentially plagiarize from Little Women (which does reflect some of the author’s feminist, for that time, leanings). Anne wasn’t set in 1908, it was written in 1908 and set much further back (Anne’s children are adults in WWI). The moving forward is one of MANY issues that I had with the first one. And the feminism started in that series in the 80’s. They just stole it (and much characterization of Anne and Gilbert) from Little Women. It is not surprising that it is really incoherent and extreme now. I don’t understand why filmmakers think that they can replace, plagiarize, improve, etc. the work of geniuses. I read a comment from another irritated person regarding these changes that asked essentially “why don’t you just write your own series; do you only have enough “creativity” to warp other peoples’ work?”
I really love the Kevin Sullivan film but it is so sad that they set it in the wrong era because then the timing was all off for the rest of the series and resulted in the ABYSMAL “Anne the Continuing Story.” I wish they’d done it right and could have continued on through Rilla!
YES! This article is so accurate. Also, I completely agree with this statement. I could deal with the Sullivan films being off book sometimes because they kept the spirit of them in there…. until that last one and the prequel. I would have loved it if they would have had the last film about Rilla!
Thanks for powering through and laying it all out there so I don’t have to see it. What a shame. What a shame.
(Could your post title be any better?!?! That is seriously the only good thing to come out of this movie.)
Ha! Thanks 😉
Yes, yes, and YES!!! This show was like watching a train wreck is slow motion. My family had to deal with the yelling at the screen to! I’m so glad you are of the ‘race that knows Joseph ‘, kindred spirits can be hard to find these days. Keep preaching on sister!
Solidarity, sister.
I like the rant-y version MUCH better. 🙂
Haha!
YEP^nth degree!
The first episode, I was like, “all right, I like the look of the characters in their casting, it is beautiful, I remember this incident from the book,” etc. And then it ended. And I was like, “huh?” Why did *that* happen? That’s …. changing it quite a deal. Even then I reserved judgement. But the second episode was such a glum, convoluted mess there was no saving it for me.
It is a personal pet peeve when original dialogue is mixed with modern banter that sticks out like a sore thumb. It was *painful* to hear the characters yell back and forth “What’s your problem?” at each other intermingling with the beauty of Montgomery Anne’s dialogue about the White Way of Delight and things that are scrumptious.
I’ll take that Green Gables house, though!
Ugh, yes. The dialogue was so awkward and clumsy. And why could they only think of “scrumptious” when they wanted Anne to say a “big word”? AH! But I totally agree that the casting was good and that cast could have made it great if they’d had a decent script.
Not watching it after all I’ve heard. Thanks for confirming!
Oh my gosh! I love you and everything about this post! Couldn’t agree more!!!! I often find myself yelling at the screen if a movie doesn’t capture the true character of a book! And Anne’s character is sacred !!!
This is just how I felt about the new Beauty and the Beast! It felt like it was trying so hard to make Belle a “real feminist” that it blotted out her humanity. I read that there’s also a new Little Women adaptation in the works. Let’s hope it doesn’t butcher up the March sisters, too .
Whaaaaaat? How does *anything* make sense without Miss Stacey? And without Rachel Lynde being a loud mouth meddling holy terror? I don’t get it. I’m in Canada and am just embarassed that the CBC has let this loose on the world. :'(
we will all die when season 2 comes, it’s more of a travesty than the season that preceded it. Kindred spirits unite!
CBC is behind this? THAT explains everything!
Haley, thank you for watching it and sharing your thoughts with us. I have some idea of how much you love Anne, and so I’m really sorry that you had to subject yourself to this. However, I’m grateful for your ranting honesty.
Now go watch something that will fill you with joy! Or go re-read Anne.
I hope you keep writing rants about this as you think of them. Because. Seriously.
Quick! What Hogwarts house is Mrs. Rachel Lynde in?!
AAH. Yes. All of this.
The gifs MAKE this! 🙂
So sad about the series, though. I was excited when it was announced, but heard nothing but bad things from reviewers so decided not to watch. I’ll just revisit the Megan Follows version! 🙂
Ugh. It pretty much just took watching ONE trailer for this new series for me to decide that I would never ever ever ever EVER watch it, and I’m sincerely sorry you had to subject yourself to it for the sake of your article. I 1,000% agree with the commenter who doesn’t understand why filmmakers think it’s their business to improve on the timeless work of esteemed authors. If you want to make a show pushing your progressive feminist agenda, then GO MAKE YOUR STUPID SHOW AND LEAVE MY BELOVED ANNE OUT OF IT!
I for one cannot stop ranting about it at every turn and got stuck at episode three and unable to continue for fear of sinking into darkness…
More than anything, I fear that after this, some impressionable people will not only have this as their FIRST experience with Anne, but that they will NEVER touch the books, and if they do, they will be un-smitten by the poetry of the landscape and the quiet loveliness of every single bit and bored by the lack of drama, edginess, and “all the feels” on the outside that seem to just appeal to this audience.
And now, I have to somehow reconcile the fact that I keep ranting with the fact that I hate that this show has Anne ranting in an angry, abrasive tone that is so unlike her.
Thank you, Haley, for fighting the good fight alongside us!
Oh my goodness, I am so glad someone else also thinks that this adaptation has been a disaster! I had such high hopes. And it’s such a shame, because it has great actors, it’s beautifully shot, and I thought the first episode had a lot of potential. Although I love the original books so much, I wasn’t against a darker version. There is quite a lot of darkness in the original, after all – lots of hints about Anne’s painful past, and in some ways it is a tough world that Montgomery depicts, which is why Marilla is as emotionally repressed as she is. Montgomery is definitely a romantic, but it’s her lack of sugary sentimentalism that makes ‘Anne’ so powerful when you reread it as an adult. But it’s also hilariously funny, and there’s real warmth at its heart – and that’s what got lost here. From the second episode onwards, they exaggerated the darker elements to such an extent I can’t even… I mean, just for starters, Marilla would *never* send Anne back to the orphanage for losing her brooch, she is depicted as being totally incapable of that kind of cruelty: that’s why she lets Anne stay In The First Place!! Marilla often gets things wrong, she is often unsympathetic and inflexible, but she is never, ever knowingly cruel. The conflict in the book (about whether Anne can attend the *picnic*) is realistic, nuanced and emotionally charged without being melodramatic: it’s about the real difficulties of parent-child relationships, and all that nuance has been lost here. And ditto with all the other things they changed!! I don’t think that introducing some sexual themes had to be a problem, but again, they take it way too far – they make Marilla a thoroughly tragic character, rather than ever-so-slightly wistful for what might have been. And why rewrite Gilbert’s story like that? And I totally agree that the feminist elements of the book – how great Rachel is when we get to know her, Marilla’s real strength, Anne’s gradual growth in self-confidence, her learning to love the boy who puts *her* first and truly respects her (what about him giving up the Avonlea school for her?? In the most romantic scene ever???!!) – that all gets lost in this rewrite.
It makes me so sad a) that this is an adaptation of my favourite children’s book which is totally unsuitable for any child to watch, and b) that the makers couldn’t see what makes the book so special and so beautiful.
Yes! This is so well stated!
Haley, this is SO good. Thank you for shedding light on this. I think the saddest part of this is that so many people in our generation and younger who haven’t had the pleasure and privilege of encountering the original Anne of the books will assume this is what she/they are like! NO! No. I abhor this recent trend of imputing 2017 liberal elite ideology onto classic stories. Anachronistic, anyone? Why can’t we take these incredibly talented, courageous women as they are, without painting them over with terms we think will make them more popular? We have enough modern women in movies and books that could “inspire” radical feminists…why are they taking our good, strong, yet tender, *feminine* heroines?! I think we should stage a coup, spearheaded by you and Karen Savage! 🙂
New reader, but I’m so glad to have found my people on the inter webs. Thank you for this review. Was on the fence about watching this train wreck. Now I won’t waste my time.
Enjoy the new day with no mistakes in it yet!
Thank you for your review! I won’t be wasting any more of my time on this series. I watched the first episode, and I thought it was alright, but the second episode’s made me angry! Anne is one of my all time favorite characters. I don’t need to see her ruined like this. It’s been a few years since I’ve read the entire series. I guess it’s time to break out my books again!
Haven’t seen this version of Anne. My daughter and I re-watched the 1985 one instead (re-watch for me, new for her). Your article brought to mind one thing a professor once said to me when I was TA for her Renaissance Art history class – that she found it so frustrating when the students couldn’t even imagine how people in different eras sincerely believed in things that many of us don’t know, and that it didn’t mean they were stupid (and this was a completely secular prof at a secular university). I feel like what you are describing is just like this.
One thing I find interesting is that period movies often reflect more the period they were made in than the one they are trying to represent – you can notice this in the fashions, hairstyles and makeup as well as in the underlying themes. And every new period movie thinks that it is somehow the exception that is now a truly accurate historical representation.
edit: I mean’t “don’t now”, not “don’t know”
Thank you for your rant, it saved me mine.
Thank you for your accurate review of this…production.
After your spot on review of the Harry Potter play and your detailed review of Anne with an E, I will not be watching any of it.
Thank you for saving a few hours of my time and some considerable irritation! 🙂
I love the book series and, despite the liberal adaptations, enjoy the 1980’s mini series.
It is so depressing to think that this new Anne is the Anne many of our daughters will meet first.
On a side note, have you read Before Green Gables?
I really enjoyed it and felt the author was very true to LM Montgomery’s Anne.
(Did I already leave this in a comment? I’m having deja vu! )
The more I watched of this the angrier I became. Another retelling of a beloved children’s classic made unwatchable for children. The whole ” pet the mouse” thing was so disgusting and inappropriate I had to wonder who the target audience is supposed to be. Then when Marilla made the point about compassion for Anne who had been exposed to sexual assault in the Hammond home, I thought at least there was a moral point there. But wait a minute, they just made a point about exposing children to immorality by EXPOSING children it immorality!!! What?! Just so sick of this.
Very good point!
And what about that scene with the local minister? Could they be more obviously anti-religion? In the book, Anne loves the minister and his wife and she grows in her spirituality. This guy is awful and has zero positive qualities — just they way they wanted him to be. Telling Anne it doesn’t matter what she thinks, etc.
And finally – I was trying to watch it with my 6-yr-old daughter who ADORES the book and found out quickly we couldn’t watch together. She was very confused by the violent scenes and I hurriedly turned it off.
Yuck, yuck, and more yuck!
I so agree about the awful depiction of the minister!
Exactly! She was so close to Mrs. allen in the book and the minister was such a GOOD man.
This is in reply to one of your comments above- why do you read the books every year? Just for enjoyment and familiarity?
Hi Haley! This is my first comment, despite having met you in Dr. Moore’s class back in the day and lurked on your blog for at least two years now.
Without having watched the new series myself, I’ll say that your description of it reminds me of a wider phenomenon in contemporary pop culture: the tendency to fall back on the dark, the ironic, and the jaded as a way of signalling our own sophistication, intelligence, worldliness, etc. The “gritty reboot” started out with noble intentions, I think, as a vehicle for real critique of real problems, but these days the grittiness has become an end in itself, totally divorced from the impulse to redress a social problem. The social problem becomes the pretext for the adapters (and the audience) to demonstrate how knowing/world-wise/jaded they are. It’s like irony is the only virtue we have left. I see this a lot with my students: sometimes I am afraid that they think that the only form of intelligence is having “seen through” everything. Anne is the perfect target for such a project, because (as you point out in your other review) it is a celebration of the opposite: a whimsical, earnest, sanguine heroine.
I have to admit that I was skeptical about this adaptation from the earliest rumors I heard about its production, as it seemed like another case of Netflix grafting together “trending” formulae and tropes with mercenary precision. Based on your reviews, it seems like that’s exactly what happened, resulting in a not-very-compelling combination of the confused feminism of our present moment and a grittiness aimed at enticing more viewers rather than leveling a coherent critique.
There were spoilers in this ? I had to stop reading
I’m only like 4 episodes in and I like the loose adaptation. I love this Anne!! I love this Marilla. I love Annes struggle with dealing with all of the dreadfully normal people on her life. And the fact that she is still SOOOO wonderfully grateful for this new family. I love her struggle with womanhood and her past. I do love it!
Yes, Katie. The very first line of this post is, “This post contains spoilers.”
Thank you!!!!! I have my own set of issues with the older film versions because I’m a die-hard for the books, but I only got through the first two episodes of this new version before I just had to stop.
Anne has been a friend of mine for decades at this point and TV writers would have something near perfection by just sticking to the books. There are so many stories that show courage, humor, strength, and all the great qualities that have made these books special to girls and women for decades.
The only question I have for the Netflix people is whether or not they actually read the books because they are so far from everything in these episodes. They kept the names and everything else got lost.
Also, why would anyone change the slate-breaking scene?! I mean, COME ON!
AMEN.
I actually didn’t mind Anne with an E, I had to look at it as a completely different movie altogether. It was rather dark and sad and I found Anne difficult to like but I liked the fact that it was so different from the Anne of Green Gables movies, it kept me interested. That’s just me though ☺
I have always absolutely loved Anne and all of L.M. Montgomery’s books! I loved the original portrayal of them in the Anne movies even though they were misconstrued in some aspects as well. I was a little hesitant to watch the Anne with an E series on Netflix because I was afraid it would not be done justice and I was right. I got through barely 15 minutes of it and had to turn it off. I have to say I wasn’t to surprised but was none the less disappointed. Thank you for your honest review and I couldn’t agree more. I hate when they have to pound an agenda in movies. You are right Anne doesn’t need to flaunt how she is a woman. L. M. Montgomery already made her a strong woman yet showed her as a wonderful, wife mother and friend as well.
“I challenge anyone who likes this version to a duel!“
I am forced to accept because I don’t like it, I LOVE it. I leave you the choice of weapons.
But joking apart, for me it’s one of the best series in recent years. It’s like a breath of fresh air in a world of madness, violence and fanaticism. A feel-good series who make my family and me happy and wanting for more.
That said, I am a little surprised that adults can follow the opinion of a person without having the healthy curiosity to see by themselves if they like it or not.
Ok, but have you ever read the books though? And if yes, did you even like them at all?
Sorry for the late reply. No, I never read the book. I watched a few scenes from the “original” movie, the Sullivan production. Never attract me. It was pretty, pleasant but boring for the young guy i was then. If i remember well, I think what bother me the most was seeing a young woman playing a little girl. I never believed that the Anne of Megan Follows was a 13-year-old child and that she was an orphan.
If you’ve never read the books (there are 8), I don’t think you can fully appreciate where Haley and so many of the commenters on this post are coming from. If you love the series only having compared it to the Sullivan production from the 80s: fine, I get that. But I really love the books and decided months ago that I had no interest in this new series at all. I would venture to say that a lot of the adults on this post who are following Haley’s opinion and deciding to skip this series are ones who have probably read the books themselves and have been around long enough to appreciate Haley’s common love for Lucy Maud Montgomery’s Anne. I’m sure if any of them were that interested or curious about the show, they would watch it. 🙂
I didn’t expect any follow-up to my first comment. So I’m a little surprised and amused to participate in this exchange.
I don’t remember how I got here, on this site, all I know it’s that I simply couldn’t resist at the funny phrase “I challenge anyone who likes this version to a duel!“
But I know very well that I am a sort of stranger on this site.
I never read the books, don’t care for the beloved “original”
series and I’m not angry, frustrated, offended, etc. by this Anne With an E. I don’t compare it to anything and I could fully
appreciate this series for it own merits which are numerous.
I simply love this series, I dearly love this Anne, and I love this Marilla, and Matthew and all these characters. It’s silly, I know, but I care for them. And it’s so different than what we see usually. So maybe, just maybe, you miss something great.
(There’s a smiley at the end of my text, like yours, but invisible, because I didn’t know how to do it.)
Haha! I never expected you to even answer my follow-up comment. I’m glad you found a show you love.
I totally agree with your views here. I thought the first episode was definitely different than the original books and movie, but I was willing to keep trying. But after the “mouse in his pocket” scene, I was turned completely off. I couldn’t believe how jaded the entire thing was. For instance, I suppose Anne’s life as an orphan was not very easy, but L.M.Montgomery did not paint a portrait of abuse as this adaptation did. It made me cringe–absolutely hated it! As many of you have said, I grew up with Anne, read all the books, and so feel as if I personally know her. I do not want her to be redone at this late date, just because producers have some kind of modern agenda. Write something new; leave Anne alone.
First of all, I’m pretty sure they intend to continue this series with new seasons–Miss Stacey can still show up! The writers may be viewing things from the perspective of having quite a few episodes to work with down the line and felt they needed to express certain aspects of Anne’s personality/character bluntly and right away. What the Sullivan production got across in three hours may take Netflix three seasons. Through this series, we may be seeing Anne in slow motion. But I don’t think it’s helpful/fair to compare the two productions.
This series is simply another adaptation–and that’s okay with me. It is new and its own. I would hate to have missed out on this Netflix series simply because I couldn’t get over how it doesn’t match the books or the Sullivan production. It’s just another version of a story–and it’s pretty entertaining.
I agree that there is or seems to be a “war on whimsy”. It seriously makes me sad. I really enjoyed reading your negative review of Anne With an E because of your mention of this and how “…we (must) keep fighting for a world of innocence and joy for our children, even when the quest seems impossible.” But I think everything ebbs and flows. I suppose at some point people became annoyed at too many whimsical representations of reality (if that makes any sense). Now we are in a time where we try to make things seem more “realistic”, I guess. It’s how things go.
I think it’s important to have an open mind, too. I love Anne. The TRUE Anne is in the books. I just think it’s interesting and fun to see different adaptations. It’s art. A story filtered through the times and through someone’s unique brain. I do love that.
I totally agree Jane! I enjoy it on it’s own merits.
I agree as well. I love the books. I love the Follows adaptation. And I love Anne With An E. All for different reasons.
To further explain my first paragraph:
You wrote:
Anne is a classic heroine. She doesn’t need you to throw in the word feminism or yell peevishly, “I’m going to be my OWN woman!” in order to be inspiring. Not only does she get her teaching license at Queens and wins the Avery scholarship for being THE LITERAL BEST. She goes on to complete her BA at a four year college, a highly unusual accomplishment for a woman in that era. She turns down suitors right and left. And she becomes a published writer and principal of a school before she marries a man who appreciates her intellect and they raise a gorgeous family together. Why would she need you to modernize her?
My response:
It is impossible for Anne be that classic heroine in only one season of Anne With an E, so they annoyingly have 12 year old Anne shout “A girl can do anything a boy can do…and MORE!” You know what I mean? They have to bluntly express her feminism. I’m thinking she IS going to grow up and be that classic heroine but it’s going to take several seasons over the course of a few years.
Hopefully. 🙂
It does make a disclaimer at the beginning by saying “based on the books by Lucy Maud Montgomery” so we can’t accuse them of butchering the original story when they did give us a clue. If you don’t like this version don’t watch. I like the show and look forward to Season 2.
Seriously. Matthew never would have considered *******. Mon Dieu! Ironically my first thought was, “Yay, this one’s actually got ‘Teddy’ Phillips’ age right.” Call me unreasonable — that always has annoyed me so much about the Sullivan. In the book, he was a young dandy, probably not even twenty, complete with full mustache and empty head. It would have been appropriate at that time for him to court a sixteen-year-old. She was heading to Queen’s to be a teacher, too — they may have married. Sullivan made him old enough to be her dad.
But that turned out to be the ONLY good thing. About Miss Stacy, though: she didn’t teach in Avonlea until the time came for Teddy to depart. He was Anne’s teacher the first year or two. (Of course, these people made Anne thirteen at the beginning instead of eleven, so Miss Stacy WAS there when she was thirteen, but… this is giving me a headache. I can’t go on.)
I wouldn’t even know about this wonderful place if Julia Dent at Acculturated hadn’t linked here today. I appreciate it, Julia!!!!
@ Hannah & Haley(Queen Mother of this site)
A last word before leaving for good, I am sorry for the bad formatting of my last reply, the space for writing shrink increasingly as replies are added. I hadn’t noticed it before sending my reply. And I don’t saw any edit button. So it was to late.
It’s not visually appealing, I know, and not an invitation to read my memorable prose on this subject but believe me, the presentation was originally pretty cute.
RE: “I challenge anyone who likes this version to a duel.”
Shane is right, you did set out the challenge – and about the show. Since the plan is to do five seasons on the first book, that certain scenes and Ms Stacey etc have not made her appearance, YET … is about your weakest point. I liked Gilbert’s cheeky comment after Anne hit him with the slate, you didn’t. In fairness, I found the idea that Anne would be frightened by a frog in the Sullivan version offensive. I liked Anne’s very logical argument when she was trying to convince Marilla to let her stay, you didn’t. And, since the former Josie Pye is the Exec Director, they let Josie have her fun before she loses everyone to Anne forever.
The “Progressive Mothers Club” was so that Mrs Andrews could share her high hopes for her daughter Prissy – high hopes that will be thwarted because, as you say, Mr Phillips is more interested in helping himself than in helping Prissy study for her exams. The “innocence” that some crave isn’t serving Prissy very well, it is not meant to. Sure, Mrs Andrews prefered to believe that Anne was making things up than face the truth as to what is happening to her daughter and this denial outed her as being a bit classist – caring little about whether the farm hands and domestic help are educated. The second aspect of it is to get Marilla to start thinking of her own lot in life – that her skill-set prepared her only to be domestic help if she were ever to leave the farm – because she was taken out of school early. Mrs Andrews sees education for girls as a status thing, Marilla looks at it in more practical terms.
You are right about Gilbert, on the surface, being a knight in shining armour may seem romantic, but it does cast Anne, who prides herself on being independent and self reliant as the damsel. The knight instinct, which influences Gilbert’s eventual choice to be a doctor, needs to be tempered. LMM never knew what to do with Gilbert most of the time, which is why she stretched out the original falling out and had him only appear in the book when she needed him to and had him hanging on for years hoping for Anne to change her mind. Gilbert’s somewhat contrived exit serves a similar purpose – though he and Anne had to make up just long enough for Gilbert to want to come back (and it allows for events to happen differently in his absence than they would in his presence). The last thing that Gilbert did before he left was threaten Billy Andrews (aka temporarily Draco), but Gilbert isn’t there to make good on his threats – so we will see if Anne could defeat Billy Andrews in a fight, like she told Matthew she could.
The first season seems to be about Anne slowly realising that being a Cuthbert is permanent – and the temporary downturn in fortunes was needed to fully and finally bring that about. I found that RHT captured Matthew perfectly – the shyness, his kind, gentle doting nature – the things Anne loved about Matthew (and what made him the very opposite of Mr Hammond). Anne may love puffed sleeves, but, as the scene you hated revealed, she loves Matthew more. So Matthew, whose best qualities are not traditional masculine ones, sees himself as patriarchy values him – and in his guilt and fear, contemplates acting as patriarchy expects him to – before Marilla and Jeannie talk him out of it. Patriarchy may hurt women more than it does men, but there is a downside to it for men as well. Anne is so much smarter than Patriarchy.
The Sullivan movie had Anne choose very unrealistically between being adopted as a girl in a rich family and the Cuthberts to show that she liked them more than puff sleaves. This version had Anne choose to be with the Cuthberts when Matthew called her his daughter and even more so, when Matthew was temporarily stripped of his ability to give her things – the first thing she did when she walked through the door was give him a big hug – like they knew she would.
For the record (Claire’s comment), Amybeth (aka Anne) is in Hufflepuff. Rachel, probably went to Ilvermorny.
Haley,
Thank you for your honest review and for stating everything that I wanted to say about this Netflix production, Anne With An E.
I suppose it would be considered prudish of me to say that this version was inappropriate and unnessarily edgy. It is clear the producers wanted to push their own agenda and modern perceptions of women young and old. I enjoyed every book in the series when I was a young girl and felt challenged by Anne and the other young people in the stories to succeed in school. I prefer L.M. Montgomery’s Anne who is strong yet pure and innocent.
But she isn’t innocent and pure, there is no way an orphan who went through that trauma to come out all sweet and smiley. Anne with an E depicts the very story that Montgomery was trying to show, Anne of green gables was never written for children, all these gritty and dark scenes are relevant because they are the story. They are the reality.
I’ve decided, after watching part of the first episode with my wife (who turned it off after she saw that it was so inconsistent with the book and is basically a platform for modern propaganda) that it’s actually a brilliant piece of satire making fun of modern American audiences. But this is all based SOLELY on the first episode (or part of it, when I saw what was coming I decided not to let that garbage into my home)
First of all, Anne is all talk and no show – she uses fancy words to indicate that she is intelligent, and says things like “Why can’t I do what a boy can do” etc etc without actually doing anything. Much like modern feminism, rather than just getting to work and doing the job, Anne wants to talk about it and get the approval of the parent figure first and be told basically that she’s good enough to do it, etc. Without that initial approval and its inherent moral support, she doesn’t get started. Furthermore, while trying to maintain an appeal to feminists, the character rejects traditional feminine behaviors such as cooking, just as some modern feminists will say outright that women should not do those things (whether they want to or not – so it becomes just a different voice telling women what to do rather than telling women to do what they want). It’s also, I understand, very different from her attitude in the books.
Secondly, if the writers were seriously trying to support feminism, then they are basically telling the audience very plainly, “You’re too stupid to understand things unless we tell you outright. So rather than SHOW you strong female characters and how those characters accomplish things in a system that may be stacked against them, we’re going to TELL you what you want to hear and what you think feminism is.” And, sadly, many people suck at the nipple of that baby formula bullpat their whole lives.
At any rate, the entertainment industry trying to adapt a popular, time-honored work into a vehicle for their propaganda and spreading their way of thinking as the only one is nothing new, unfortunately. This is just one more story that someone has tried to subvert into the gospel of their way of thinking, ugh.
The thing is that, in the book and in the series, the Cuthberts wanted a boy to help them with the farm work (the series makes it clearer that it is because Marilla is worried about Matthew’s health if he continues to do it alone). Green Gables was like a paradise to Anne whose other placements were less than to be desired. If Anne can convince them that she can do the farm work, they will let her stay.
Anne later takes it upon herself to knock on doors and offer her services to clean houses before the holidays to help raise the money to save the farm. Anne is better at housework than she is at cooking.
Prissy Andrew’s mother, who does have such high hopes for her daughter, does ascribe to the “lean in” feminism of glass ceilings – a feminism for upper class women who want to gain rights within the structure of patriarchy. This sort of feminism was never meant to extend rights to servants.
Since the series promotes some degree of intersectional feminism (which has a class analysis, they show that Jerry doesn’t have the option of continuing his education – that Anne was living in a fantasy world by thinking that working class boys had it so much better. Do you agree that Anne was oblivious to something that is obvious even to you?
Intersectional feminism also shows how patriarchy hurts men. Patriarchy dictates that the sole value of a man is in his role as breadwinner – and one can’t always be the breadwinner – you get sick, the plant closes down, your job becomes obsolete – etc.
Wouldn’t you like to cook once in a while – even if it is just on the BBQ in the garage in the winter? Wouldn’t you like to spend more time with the kids? Wouldn’t you like the option of being the one who stays home with the kids until they are old enough to go to school?
I apologize, I forgot to specify that I meant third generation feminism, not all feminism, which may address your response right off.
I feel in my family (that is, my wife and I) that we’ve already achieved equality simply by doing it rather than trying to get permission from other people. I became a registered nurse after college without getting upset or making a case any of the many times I was asked “So you’re going to be a male nurse?” (I just said “I don’t plan on getting the operation to be a regular nurse” with a smile), was diagnosed with a crippling genetic mutation that has put me on disability (so I am no longer the breadwinner, and am largely homebound – thankfully we don’t have children because it’s a dominant genetic disease, but if we had I’d be in charge of watching them during the day), and the only reason I don’t cook is because I’m terrible at it.
So to me, third generation feminism really is about words rather than action – it’s largely about getting either permission or approval from society rather than just doing what one wants to in the first place. While first generation feminism achieved the vote and civil equality, and second generation feminism made tremendous steps towards financial equality, I fail to see any unifying goal behind modern feminism – though that may be my own fault, or perhaps history will make it more clear with hindsight. I mostly am just tired of being told how to think by every group with a chip on their shoulder at this point.
JT, I am very sorry for your current health problems and apologise for my assumptions about you. Nothing will give you back the life you had, but hope something comes along to improve the quality a bit. Not every woman likes to cook either – or is good at it. Think that third wave is radical feminism which tends to be very transphobic.
The lean-in feminism is for women who have maids and nannies and rich husbands – so it is about power, status etc. Intersectional feminism means that one’s situation depends on a lot of things. Being a white straight cis gendered upper middle class able bodied woman gives one more advantages than if one is not all those things – makes things easier. Privilege is a protective coating – it doesn’t make one bullet proof but it helps. Maybe I should say privileges – since you can have some and not others. Genetics shows that, while one can make certain choices (action versus talk), some are made for you.
The first episode is really two episodes – and the choice over where Anne is sent or whether she could stay was not hers at the early point that you are complaining about. Anne could have as easily been sent to the Blewetts as the Cuthberts. When Anne gets sent back to the orphanage, she chooses not to go back to the orphanage but to try to take the ferry to the mainland (the only way off the island at the time) – and then she chooses to go back with Matthew – they choose each other.
You are right, there are times that Anne is just talk – especially in the beginning. In later episodes, she is all action. When a house catches fire, she runs in and closes all the windows and doors to slow the fire so that they could put it out before it takes all the house. When Minnie Mae is sick, she goes into action and saves her life. When it looks like they are going to lose the farm unless they pay the bank loan before Xmas, Anne goes door to door offering to clean houses for the holidays to raise money.
You are also right, Marilla and Matthew may not have had the choice when their mother pulled them out of school after their brother died. The lack of education may have made have influenced Marilla’s later choices – made her less brave, less willing to defy her mother and take off with the man she loved to see the world – she did not act and regretted it.
Matthew and Jerry were pulled out of school at about the same age – the difference between them is that Matthew owns the farm and Jerry works for someone who owns a farm (privilege).
Ok, I want the privilege of a season two …
Vaudree,
I wasn’t saying anything about my health for sympathy or anything, if anything it could’ve been a whole lot worse. It’s just that instead of trying to make it a cause and get some sort of public approval or recognition for the fact that my wife and I were adopting nontraditional roles in our marriage (and in society), we just got down to the business of rearranging our lifestyle to match our needs. It didn’t require joining an organization, or trying to convert the general population, or getting the approval of society.
I know that you weren’t – but it was still a tough card to be dealt.
Still think that you would enjoy the rest of it … Anne may try persuading (which you hate), she may get fed up and pack it in for a short time, but she gets back on her feet and fights back. She can still see beauty and hope despite the cards she was dealt.
Vaudree, I am inspired by this site, your comments, and what I’ve heard about Anne of Green Gables that I think I am going to read the books – I generally like books better than films anyway, and it sounds like a good story from what I’ve heard about it in the last few days. Thanks for the encouragement 🙂
I love the books and the 1980s version, but as an adoptive mom (x 4) whose dealt with real trauma issues and having read about the orphan trains, I loved this version. I thought it was very realistic and still warm and funny. I would never dream of giving up on my original impressions of Anne, Gilbert, and the rest, but this version enhanced the story for me. (Love your site! Thanks for all you do)
For me, the dealbreaker came in the second episode when Anne took Matthew and Marilla’s name. Matthew and Marilla would never ask Anne to give up her last name, the one thing she had from her parents.
I also, like many on this site, can’t stand the whole making Anne into a feminist icon thing. What Anne really was was an individual. She knew she wasn’t typical orphan street trash, that she came from good, loving, educated parents who would have provided her a good home had they lived. Therefore, Anne was determined to make something of her life and be herself. Individuality is something virtually no one in the world can truly stand.
I would also recommend “Before Green Gables.” Budge Wilson at least tries to show all sides of the different people Anne had to grow up with and to provide a more accurate historical context.
That’s the other thing: the typical bad guy characters, such as Mrs. Hammond, are portrayed as quite one dimensional. The creators of this show have totally forgotten Anne’s quote about not minding the unkindness of people who mean to be kind but don’t live up to that.
Season 2 has dropped on netflix in the United States and it is absolutely horrible htough it starts out much better than season 1 ended. The first 3 episodes are almost good if not canonical. but then, the agendas commence long and strong.
I am in the middle of the second season which i was watching with my young daughter. We had been so excited about it coming out! Now we’re washing our hands of what we hoped would be a pleasurable entertainment, neither of us having been exposed to Anne of Green Gables before. – though I have always heard of it and my parents were completely submerged. Lol
I’m simply tired of Hollywood pushing all their old agendas down our throats and am aghast they couldn’t leave alone at least something as iconic as AofGG.
The marginalization of a black man on PEI and “Boston marriage” arrangements between women are not “Hollywood agendas”. Those were part of the realities of the era in which the story is set. Bringing into sharp relief some of these aspects of life isn’t “radical” as you’d have it.
Every small town, everywhere, had the exact same prejudices and the exact same “progressive” features?
That is not realistic. That is a world of puppets.
In real life, anywhere in Canada or the US, you could go twenty miles and find radical differences in religious denominations, cultures, and settlement patterns, as well as in the interests and politics of the locals. That is realistic.
I was saddened by the awful changes made to a beloved literary classic. It angered my wife more so. We were excited about sharing a new version of a series we had both enjoyed greatly as children, but after pre screening we both agreed that our kids definitely wouldn’t be watching it. For years my mother loved telling the story of how I didn’t want to watch “girly stuff “ being a 10 year old boy at the time, but how after watching the first VHS cassette I was hooked. My wife and I had talked many times about this because both of our families had borrowed the series from our local public library and she loved my moms story of how I didn’t want to watch it and teased me about then reading the books. My wife stated, it is a testament to the state of our world how someone can take something good, wholesome, and family oriented and turn it into trash”. I agree whole heartedly. I’m disgusted by what Netflix paid someone to do to a book and film series that I loved. After this travesty I found the 80’s films online, dug a VCR out of my father in laws storage building, and watched them with my five children…and guess what, they loved it!
Season 2 is even worse Haley. Season 1 had some redeemable stuff, S2 is outright third wave feminism propaganda.
Ms Stacey is in season two. Warning, they made her a bit like Frankie Drake. 3:)
I haven’t read the book so I got through season 1, but season 2… the lgtbi agenda is just too much
you wrote everything i feel and think about feminism in Anne with An E! congratulations on the wonderful article!
Found your review very helpful in a commiserating sort of way. I tried season three and it is so sloppily anachronistic and badly written. What a shame.
Oh I cannot agree more!! It gets more awful by the episode!
I think if they would have taken the first two episodes–the hour-and-a-half pilot and fourty five minute second episode–and packaged it up as a two hour and fifteen minute movie and charged people fourteen dollars to see it in a theater, it would have worked better as an artistic unit, and it would have made them more money to boot.