 |
|
Title: Lo que el viento se llev??, vuelve con scarlett
ISBN: 844064048X
Author:
Alexandra Ripley
Publicate Date: 2001 Publish: 2001
List Price: $9.95
Average Customer Rating: 3.0
Format: Paperback
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Amazon Lowest Used Price: $69.50
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Customer Review: |
 |
1: Scarlett
I thought this was a great book and a wonderful continuation of Margaret Mitchell's story. I hadn't ever ready Gone With The Wind until right before I read this story, so I was reading them back-to-back and couldn't do it. I had to wait a few weeks, read a few other books between them, to really appreciate Scarlett. Obviously the characters and the feeling of everything is a little different, because of the author's voice, but it's still a fun read. Scarlett still has a lot of spunk and Rhett is still one of the most romantic figures in literary history!
|
2: This book is ludicrous...
The book was good until Scarlett went to Ireland where at that point it just went down hill-the book was outrageous and far fetched-I hated it. This book is only good for kindle or as a door stopper.
|
3: This is not how Scarlett would handle her children! SPOILERS!
I enjoyed the film Scarlett and I found it a fabulous sequel to the MOVIE, but the book though I thought was good in the beginning, did not hold true to Scarlett.
In the book, Scarlett leaves Wade and Ella to her sister, Suellen. Now at the time prior to the Civil War she made have done this. Yet after the Civil War and Rhett Butler she would have never left her children! She wished to be with them and play with them. I'm wondering if Alexandria Ripley even read Gone with the Wind for having this happen. Scarlett leave the children she created, the ones whom she AND Rhett love? I think not! Nevermind that Rhett would find it horrible to be with Scarlett when she so easily gave away her children to her sister.
I can give you some pages of Gone with the wind which would show you the love she has for Wade and parts which bluntly state that she wishes to play with her children when the war is over, when she is not so busy. But Alas, instead of playing with her children, being with her children she knows she and Rhett would want...she instead has them stay with her sister. And Ella would not be so easy to stay, nor would Wade. Even though Scarlett was not the greatest of mothers, her chilren loved her. She is and forever will be their mother and they love her for that. They love their 'Uncle Rhett' and it just makes me angry that Alexandria Ripley would take away such a profound love. Separate the family that Scarlett would have kept together.
Yet, only because Wade and Ella are not in the movie, this book as a movie is good. So as long as I do not read it I am glad that Alexandria Ripley wrote it because now we have a sequel to the movie.
|
4: scarlet
this is a great book, it keep me from wanting to even eat until i finished
|
5: An insult to Irishmen, Southerners, Gone With the Wind Fans, People With Brains...etc.
I have read the book Gone With the Wind once, and seen the movie twice, so, even though I am not as entitled to complain as some of the rest of you, this book was so ludicrous that I shall.
First, riddle me this. If this is a sequel to Gone With the Wind, an American Novel about the antebellum South, the South during the Civil War and during reconstruction, how is it that most of it takes place in Ireland?
And while we are on the subject, if most of the main characters from the previous novel are only mentioned in passing, and largely ignored in favour of new characters (in Ireland), then how is this a sequel?
Also, most of the Irish people in the book are portrayed as poor, drunk, superstitious, and crazy, or some combination thereof. Also, they generally disport themselves as if they are the Lucky Charms leprechaun.
Clearly, the author has watched Darby O' Gill and the Little People too many times.
Actually, this book would make a fine sequel to Darby O'Gill and the Little People. As a sequel to Gone With the Wind, however, it is extremely lousy and generally awful.
|
|
|
|