Jacqueline Susann's Shadow of the Dolls

Rating:
Summary: Wake me up when it's over
Review: What a bore. This book isn't a shadow of VOD. It's more like a cloudy, gray day to VOD's midnight neon lights. Yes, Anne and Neely took their modern-day dolls, and, yes, Lyon went back and forth to Neely, but who gives a flying leap? The original VOD had meat. This sequel has only empty calories. Don't waste your time.

Rating:
Summary: Terrible; couldn't wait to put it down
Review: I really loved the Valley of The Dolls. It was a novel that you could just NOT put down; a real page turner. This story on the other hand is very boring. Nothing to hold the reader's interest. I was especially offended by the Ted Turner/Jane Fonda comparison. I doubt that that was part of Jaqueline Susann's original outline. I also felt that the reappearance of Gretchen was a little far fetched as well.

Rating:
Summary: Shadow was just ok
Review: I feel like the only person on the face of the earth that hasn't read, "Valley of the Dolls" - yet. I read that "Shadow" was a good read and it wasn't necessary to read "Valley" first. I wish I had but I don't know if it would have changed my mind. Perhaps their's, Anne and Neely, is just not my life style and I couldn't relate to the characters. I just borrowed "Valley of the Dolls" from my library. I'll see if this is better and if it makes "Shadow of the Dolls" better.

Rating:
Summary: Lost interest
Review: I was looking forward to reading this book as I had very much enjoyed Valley of the Dolls. The characters in the original drew your interest and keep you turning pages. In this new effort by Rae Lawrence the characters have lost thier appeal. Anne comes across much darker then she did in the original. The book is not bad just has nothing to hold ones interest. I tried...I kept reading, but finally around pages 150 or so...I put it down and thought I'd start something new and more interesting. There was just nothing about the plot or the characters to make me want to read on.

Rating:
Summary: Great sequel to a classic novel
Review: Shadow defines Pool-side literature this summer! It has all the trashy fun of the original, but in a funny, intelligently written, modern package. I think that most of the reviewers on this page are simply interpreting Shadow incorrectly. ( I write that with the utmost respect.) After reading the book, I do not think that Ms. Lawrence intended this as a true sequel. The reviewer from Toronto writes that, "The characters have not been properly aged."--it's obvious that Lawrence did not intend them to be "properly aged"-and of course they use expressions from the sixties, they lived in that decade! Lawrence is not tring to rewrite Susann's classic, nor is she trying to copy it. Enjoy it for what it is, a smartly written book that enables all of us to venture back to a bygone era-that is worth the 15 dollars alone!

Rating:
Summary: Shadow of the Dolls or Ho Hum
Review: I must admit I was anxiously awaiting a sequel of sorts of the Neely O'Hara/Anne Wells saga. I thought this would be it but let's be realistic - Rae Lawrence is NO Jackie Susann. Also, I found a misprint - Kevin Gilmore in the original Dolls is listed as Kevin Gillian in Shadow......However, it was fun to read about Neely, Anne and Lyon Burk again - even the addition of the offspring was kind of fun. I felt melancholy when Jennifer North was mentioned - if you're looking for a great sequel to a fantastic book - this is NOT it.

Rating:
Summary: In the Shadow of the Valley
Review: When I finished Valley of the Dolls, I wasn't particularly hungry for a sequel, but I was a little curious about Lawrence's attempt at a follow-up. But why oh why did she have to fool with the time period? What may have been shocking left set in the sixties is pretty tame by today's standards. The whole charm of the original "Dolls" was directly related to the period in which it was set. Lawrence's "Shadow" is has nothing new to say, nothing you wouldn't find in any Jackie Collins novel. Stick to the original.

Rating:
Summary: Jackie's "Shadow"? Hardly
Review: Neither Barbara Seaman's bio of Jacqueline Susann, "Lovely Me", nor that of Ms. Susann's husband Irving Mansfield hint at there being any further, leftover material - why else was her first effort done in the early 1950's, "Yargo", dredged up in 1979? Nearly 30 years after Susann's death, Rae Lawrence without question casts a "Shadow" over its predecessor. Allegedly created using a "recently discovered outline", it would seem that Jackie Susann was as prescient as Nostradamos, predicting Xanax,the altered shape of Valium (it didn't always have a "V" carved out in the center), the PC, the need for safe sex, and more! There exist photographs of Jacqueline Susann working on outlines for her books - *She chalked various "trees" of people and events on large blackboards*, which makes the "recently discovered outline" claim highly questionable. In spite of all that, Ms. Lawrence does seem to have studied the Susann style and emulates it rather well throughout the book.

Rating:
Summary: A Waste of Time and Money
Review: I spent $... for this book at a wholesale club -- $... too much! The plot is fragmented, but what can one expect when the lives of the characters are as disfunctional as they are. What a waste of time to read about people who consistently mess up when there is a world of great literature to choose from. I just selected this title as a relaxing break between some quality titles. What a colossal bore! I did not find it the page turner some readers claim it to be. Just finished the last page, so this afternoon this book goes to the local used book store as a donation. Can't wait to get rid of it. And, by the way, I read "Valley of the Dolls" when it was published in 1966. This book is certainly a poor excuse for a sequel. Like I say -- save your time; save your money.

Rating:
Summary: Better than nothing
Review: This was a fun book, which would never be considered great literature -- it was really a sequel to the 1967 camp movie, and more in the spirit of the movie, not the original novel. If you have been wondering, what would have Neely, Anne, and Lyon done over the next ten years, this is the book for you. The book is all plot, well-written, a page turner. Not erotic at all -- like the movie, it is at bottom moralistic. Neely has some great lines.