.....at the end of their novels and put a clause in their wills preventing anyone from writing any sequels, prequels, etc.
Wretched from beginning to end and a complete insult to Margaret Mitchell, Gone With the Wind, and everyone involved in the 1939 film.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. Albert Einstein
Yup.
shareNever knew a sequel was made, let alone based off a book. Apparently the book itself was widely panned too in the press.
shareI read the book, for shits and giggles.
Holy cow, the giggles were there! So was a lot of deadly dull stuff, but some of the crap the author came up with was hilarious.
I haven’t read the sequel. I read Mitchell’s novel when I was 16. Once was enough. I did see the sequel on tv years ago. I liked it better than film, which isn’t saying much.
shareI can't recommend the sequel, except to extremely patient seekers of shits and giggles. The first third of the book is almost entirely dreadful (there's a passable chapter or two set in Charleston), it's spent extricating Scarlett from the life that Margaret Mitchell made for her, and packing her off to Ireland.
Once she arrives in Ireland things get very silly, but it's a long slog to get there.
The book was barely readable. There was a whole chapter where Scarlett goes with her aunt(?) and they say hello to the aunt’s friends, get some coffee, walk around again, and then say bye to the friends. A whole chapter and that’s all that happens.
It’s a bit better once they got to Ireland, that is to say something happens. I don’t think the Ireland idea was terrible in paper and a least was something different.
If I recall correctly, the movie ending is some weird murder mystery thing that didn’t have much else to do with the rest of the plot.
The other book sequel that focuses on Rhett (Rhett Butler’s People) was much better written, but quite forgettable.