The movie "Gone with the Wind," while a classic, didn't live up to the book it was based on.
The CBS miniseries "Scarlett," on the other hand, is considerably better than the book its based on.The difference is that while Margaret Mitchell's novel was a landmark in American literature, Alexandra Ripley's sequel is utterly dreadful.
Why Mitchell's heirs chose romance-novelist Ripley to sully their legacy remains a mystery.
All that said, "Scarlett" isn't bad as four-part, eight-hour miniseries go. The teleplay actually improves on Ripley's book, which actually wasn't hard.
The miniseries opens (Sunday, 8 p.m., Ch. 5) with the funeral of Melanie Wilkes. And, close on its heels, Scarlett (Joanna Whalley-Kilmer) is scheming to regain the affections of Rhett Butler (Timothy Dalton).
The miniseries plays out like many others we've seen before - lots of exoctic locations (everywhere from Charleston to Dublin to London), fabulous costumes, overblown drama.
The teleplay is based on Ripley's novel but makes some rather large changes - the last quarter of the miniseries is almost entirely different from the book.
Taken strictly on its own, "Scarlett" is OK. Just don't compare it to either "Gone with the Wind" the book or the movie.
Try as they might, these are not the same characters. Whalley-Kilmer in particular is out of her league as the title character - not so much because of her looks, but because of her rather vapid portrayal of one of the strongest female characters in American literature and film.
Dalton fares better as Rhett, making that character at least recognizable.
But, again, this is a television miniseries, not an epic motion picture. The differences are self evident.
If you go in expecting something rivaling either incarnation of "Gone with the Wind," you're bound to be disappointed.
On the other hand, if you've read "Scarlett," you'll be pleasantly surprised.