Because Empty Fame Is Evil. That's Why.

For whatever reason, I was super sure I'd already posted this. IDEK.

Re-reads. HUH

None. I'd planned to reread a couple of things before the year ended. Unfortch, that doesn't seem likely. *pouts*


I DNF'd

* A King's Mage by S.E. McPhearson (Book 1 of Heart-Mage Trilogy, Fantasy polyamore romance) - Beau, the spare prince, becomes the heir. He's also got to marry Penny (his dead brother's fiance who hates his guts) despite him being in love with Elias,his personal bodyguard.

DNF'd at the beginning of Chapter 4

The writing is fine?

Sadly, the more I read, the less interested I became abt the story. If the setting up isn't enough to get me hooked. . .

Also, the worldbuilding was a total fail. Yes, this is a book in a fantasy setting, but the overall vibe gives "inspired by French monarchy" and that's abt it! Most characters' names were French or French-sounding. And yet, the dialogue was v. modern. But there was (as far as I could tell) no electricity, cars, etc.

Picked up this book in hopes that I'd get lost into a whole new adventure. Again, I didn't connect with the story and found most of its worldbuilding v. confusing. Given that I have a lot of other books to read, I gave up on this one w/o any regrets. Which is sad cuz I was eager to read abt the M/M/F-as-endgame ship. Alas. I gave it a 1 out of 5.


Had an awesome time at first (but it all went downhill from there).

* That Weekend by Kara Thomas (YA Mystery) - Claire wakes up in the middle of a forest with no idea of how she got there or what happened during the previous 2 days. Also, even though she tries hard, she's got no idea where's Kat, her BFF, or Jesse (Kat's boyfriend) . . .

I'd read two of this author's other YAs a whole decade or so ago and distinctly remember liking them. For whatever reason, I decided to check this one out too. This author has a v. clean writing style--which is something that's quite important in mysteries. Even more so in this instance since the narrator is totally unreliable due to amnesia. At no point did I get lost or confused as to what was happening. 👍🏾 for that.

Additionally, this author has a flair for writing teenage characters that read like actual ppl. They've got insecurities, desires, good parts and bad ones too. Their interior lives are rich. This enhanced the plot in the best way.

As for the mystery, I REALLY enjoyed certain aspects of it. Especifically the reveal as to WHAT HAPPENED and, even more, WHY did the events happened. The motivations everyone had within themselves and how those desires (etc) kept the plot moving for the most part.

In a way, I'd say the keyword for this book is MOTIVATION. Sometimes, the characters' agendas ran parallel, oftentimes they ran against each other. And it was v. exciting to see everything being played out. Sometimes even within the same chapter.

Re the mystery: I did 🙄 at the explanation of HOW the events happened. It crossed the line into unbelievable. HOWEVAH, I shrugged it off despite how ridic it all was.

Claire . . . *sighs* OTOH, I think she was a good protagonist cuz her amnesia helped her become a conduit into the story. OTOH, once she got home, the pacing really slowed down and became repetitive with Claire self-medicating AND spiraling every waking moment AND being extremely selfish yet she was also traumatized.

MY problem was that she's someone who had severe anxiety. So, watching her being on the verge of an anxiety attack 24/7 while being unable to look away (due to her being the sole POV character + the fact that the story was told in 1st person) made this part of the book a deeply unpleasant reading experience. From time to time, I had to put the book to the side for 10 mins or so cuz it was exhausting and suffocating.

There were things that happen in the last two chapters that got me wondering what "inspired" the author to include a v. specific thing TWO CHAPTERS AWAY FROM THE ENDING. This meant that the book didn't land the ending but fully crashed it nose-first.

MEGA SPOILERS FOR THE ENDING AHEAD:

It turns out that Kat and Jessy are HALF-SIBLINGS BY BLOOD--which HUHHHH?

NGL, I didn't like the incest twist and how its repercussions (once OTHER CHARACTERS figured it out) were handled. I'm confused why Marian (Kat's own grandmother) wasn't clearer with Kat as to why she was so opposed abt Kat and Jesse's relationship, frex.

AND THEN, finding out that Jesse had known all along and didn't care made everything TEN TIMES GROSSER. My best guess is that the author wanted to add a major flaw to Jesse as a character since, aside from kinda leading Claire on a little, he hadn't done/said anything bad. And then, it's like "boom, yeah, we're half-siblings and I CHOSE TO NOT TELL YOU, but it's cool cuz we love each other." Me: 🤮🤮🤮🤮"

Averaging how I'd liked at least half of the book vs. that mess of an ending, I gave it a 3 out of 5..


* The Wife Deserved It by Darby Kayne (Domestic thriller) - Reid is over his marriage and, after much planning, he's decided tonight's the night his wife will die. But, the one thing that Reid has never considered is that his wife is READY for him. . .

The first half of the novella is tight. Excellent timing. I didn't mind how the story pushed and pulled me while the sense of utter dread abt the goings on kept building up. Good worldbuilding too. For a story with multiple POVs, everyone sounded like real people who had great and terrible motivations.

The keyword for this story was confrontation. Both in the sense of characters facing each other as well as facing (or not, in some cases) the truth as to who they really are.

OTOH, The story plateaued in the second half. I can't explain why w/o going into

FULL SPOILERS:

One of the POVs was Anna's (the wife). Somewhere near the beginning of the novella, she gets a full chapter where it's extremely clear she's made her choice. She will kill Reid as that's the only way out (and also cuz he's decided to kill her cuz he's a jackass.) The chapter includes a moment where Anna sees Reid searching for her and he's holding a knife.

Things get complicated and plans go awry..

THEN, starting around Chapter 15 and going on until Chapter 25, the story spends several POV chapters from Reid and Paige's POVs. With BOTH trying to convince Anna to get on their respective sides.

NGL, this was v. tiresome to read. ANNA HAD ALREADY MADE HER CHOICE! So IDK why the author made Anna appear unsure/wavering chapter after chapter. If anything, I'd have preferred that the author had made Anna's choice at the beginning of the novella uncertain. Because THAT would've kept up the suspense.

Instead, I spent those 11 (thankfully short) chapters mentally tapping my watch so Anna and Paige could help Reid shuffle off his mortal coil.

But the author had already made her choice and so I just had to keep waiting.

In the end, I liked it enough to give it a 3.3 out of 5 and will deffo read more of her books. 😛


It was . . . fine?

* Sweep of the Heart by Ilona Andrews (Book 5 of the Innkeeper Chronicles) (Urban Fantasy Romance) - Dina and Sean are chosen to host the space version of The Bachelor for one of the most powerful rules in the entire universe. There's additional drama via the disappearance of Sean's mentor. Oh, and the Costo lady returns . . .

There was worldbuilding (and how!) and plot (ditto) as expected from an IA book. I also gotta give 👍🏾 to having a character who is Black AND openly queer. Also how the latter was reflected on the selection of the contestants (with female and male hopefuls) without any of it being any kind of big deal. Oh, and the plottier developments toward the end were hella yummy too.

The key word for this novel was EXCESS.

NGL, my brain sorta @ ____ @ many, many times over the multiple descriptions of each setting: from the individual teams' rooms to the locations where each trial and date took place. Although I do appreciate that, like the rest of IA's novels I've read, this one doesn't have White Room Syndrome, this time IA really went OTT in terms of creating a picture in their readers' minds. Quasi infinite accounts of what every nook and cranny looked like.

This was also reflected in the tons of accounts as to what everyone wore. Something that was underlined by the size of the cast.

Off the top of my head, this novel had around 40 or so MAIN CHARACTERS. NGL, there were moments where I lost track as to who was from which group/planet. Why couldn't IA had started with 6 hopefuls for the contest vs. 12? :|

There was also Too Much focus on the Bachelor plot, IMO. It ran for over 70% of the novel. Hell, I even FORGOT that the A Plot was abt rescuing Sean's mentor. AND THEN, when the story finally got back to that, the actual!rescue was gently pushed to the side.

And this is where the push-and-pull feelings I've got abt this novel rear their head cuz the last 2 chapters drop so many things that had me going WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA??? and OMAIGOOOOOO!! IF ONLY THE BOOK HAD CUT SOME OF THE BACHELOR-ESQUE SCENES IN EXCHANGE FOR MORE OF THE MAIN/A PLOT!!!! *Pouts*

FINALLY, I know this novel was initially published in serialized form over at IA's site.

What I don't understand (and irritated the fuck out of me) was the inclusion of summaries (of what had happened in the previous chapter) whenever there was a new chapter. Not only was it REALLY UNNECESSARY, but the jokey/hyuk hyuk tone was unpleasant EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.

I haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaated the summaries. IA mentioned at the start of the book that they left them in the book cuz they'd been so well received when the story was posted on their site. I'm sure it worked when the chapters were released once a week. But seeing them in sequence was OBNOXIOUS AND REPETITIVE.

The other extras (2 round of descriptions of the contestants) were USELESS AND REDUNDANT. But, at least, those extras were at the end of the book and not interwoven into the story in an unavoidable way like the stupid-ass summaries were. (Yes, I hated them THAT MUCH.)

The book DOES END ON A SOFT CLIFFHANGER. And, per the little I know, it'll be a while before IA gets working on the next story. Such is life. I'll happily dive in whenever Book 6 drops, that's for sure.

In the end, this isn't my fave entry of the series but, at the same time, I can't deny I had a good time reading it, LOL. I gave it a 3.2 out of 5.


Good vibes all around

* Sweep with Me by Ilona Andrews Book 4.5 of the Innkeeper Chronicles (Urban Fantasy Romance) - Dina and Sean are ready to celebrate the holidays Innkeeper-style. They're hoping none of the guests end up killing each other . . .

Such a DELIGHTFUL NOVELLA!!! There are some neat surprises within the pages of this book. I also love how the A plot (Dina and Sean trying to host some ~interesting folks without having anyone kill each other) and the B plot (Dina processing the events in the previous book and how it affected her own magic) intertwined.

I was, once again, dissatisfied with how few scenes abt Dina/Sean's romance were included. *Pouts*

Also, I did get the sense that IA overstuffed the plot by a smidgen. I could almost tell a point where IA nearly lost control of the goings on. Thankfully, things got back on track and the story landed in the best way possible. I gave it a 4 out of 5.


Current fic tally

Have picked up 217 fics, DNF'd 101. Things are fine!


Some thoughts

Had an uneven reading experience. Going thru the rest of the published entries for the Innkeeper Chronicles was fun even with the stumbles here and there. The two mysteries were solid enough for me to not DNF'ing them. Bonus: I'm deffo OJO abt Darby Kane's other novels. Sadly, the M/M/F was a big fail. Alas.

Up next

Last time: I've got the last two published books for the Innkeeper Chronicles, an M/M/F fantasy romance, and I'm reading the first book in a female detective series. Dunno why, but my yays for reading horror have sort of gone to ground? I might end up reading something scary next month, IDK. 😅

I paused the female detective novel cuz I'd planned to do a quick Non-fiction November reading thing. But that stalled HARD.

My current reads include two biographies from separate queer ppl, the fist book in a female detective series, a book abt #MeToo, another Darby Kane novel, and mayyybe a kinky F/M romance.

Closing out NOIRVEMBER with a double feature! Both movies are not only based on the same story, but are from the same studio. I thought it'd be fun to do a comparison. :P


I Wake Up Screaming

A 1941 movie produced by 20th Century Fox and directed by H. Bruce Humberstone. It's based on the 1941 novel (of the same name) by Steve Fisher.

Frankie Christopher (played by Victor Mature) is a promoter/PR guy. One night, he's at a cafe with two male friends: a washed-up actor and a gossip columnist. All three are 😍😈🥴🤤 with Vicki (played by Carole Landis), their waitress.

While talking abt how beautiful Vicki is, Frankie starts to brag that he has the power to turn Vicki from a simple waitress and into a celebrity. The other guys are like PFFT, YOU WISH.

In any case, Frankie DOES manage to make Vicki v. popular, having her picture taken in society pages, etc. Along the way, he also meets Jill (played by THE Betty Grable), Vicki's sister. Jill and Frankie have a one-sided enmity (from Jill to Frankie.) She doesn't like how suave Frankie is, she doesn't trust them.

And then a murder occurs. . .

This is one of those movies that tends to pop up in Must-See Noirs lists. Funnily enough, I'd always thought I'd already watched it and had forgotten abt it. The ONLY reason why I watched it this time (which led me to realize that it was an actually brand new watching experience) is cuz I wanted to "refresh my (nonexistent) memory" before I watched Vicky.

IN ANY CASE, I was NOT READY for this movie. Oftentimes, when I'm watching a new-to-me noir, I'm having a good time. THIS MOVIE HAD ME ON THE EDGE OF MY SEAT! Between the twists, turns, and general WTF-ery from some of the characters . . . OOOF!

I also loved the cinematography by Edward Crongjager was CHEF'S KISS.

Victor Mature was SOLID. He does know how to play a "cool" type of guy. As the movie progresses, he finds himself getting cornered and it's really neat to see Mature's Frankie react and figure out what to do when the rules of the game go against him.

And then, there's Laird Cregar as Ed Cornell, a detective whose single-minded pursuit of Frankie is quite O__o.

The film's pacing is great too. Everyone brings their A game. Plus you know it's gonna be a good time when Elisha Cook Jr. is part of the cast as Harry, the front desk guy at the apartment building Jill and Vicky live at.


Do I have any criticisms?

There are two.

Carol Landis as Vicki was mehhhhh. I didn't find her presence (which is supposed to be alluring AF) convincing at all.

The other thing is that this movie uses two songs so many times that it might drive you bonkers: "Street Scene" and "Over the Rainbow." To date, I don't think anyone knows why the producing team thought the latter song was a great fit for this movie cuz it wasn't!

At some point, I began to tune it out/ignore it cuz they legit play it a lot!


Do I recommend it?

Yeah, this movie has plot, acting, cinematography, pacing, etc. Although it does goes a bit off the rails during the last third AND I was kinda meh abt Landis PLUS the overusage of those two song, it's deffo worth watching. It tends to pop up on Mubi, TCM, plus the usual places.

I'm giving it a 3.7 out of 5


Queerness level:

Low.

Laird Cregar's version of Ed Cornell is not-quite-straight. There's nothing abt him that reads as straight. In addition, he's v. obsessed with Frankie. And whenever they interact, Cornell is sorta flirting with him. FWIW, Frankie always rebuffs him to which Cornell tends to reply with a "ah, you'll come around". Just lots of double entendre type of things.

Adding to that there's Larid Cregar himself. Now, I didn't know this until AFTER I watched the movie, but I did find out that he had a "complicated" sexuality (per his biographers.) He did have relationships with women, but he also had boyfriends.

When I watched this movie, I was kinda sure I was imagining things cuz Cornell gave me queer vibes. Go figure.


Le Trailer

Watch on YouTube

Vicky

A 1953 film from 20th Century Fox that was directed by Harry Horner. The script is based on the novel I Wake Up Screaming by Steve Fisher.

Since this movie pretty much follows the same plot as the 1941 film, I'm skipping over the summary.

This time around, we've got Jean Peters as Vicky, Jeanne Crain as her sister Jill, and Elliott Reed as Steve (instead of "Frankie") Christopher as the PR guy.

IMO, this movie has some good points when compared to the other film. The majority of the acting is good (there's one actor I was meh abt). Unlike I Wake Up Screaming, the soundtrack has variety.

Also, this version has a much more organic rhythm when it came to its plot. Frex, the way that Vicky and Steve meet felt a lot more natural. I wonder how much casting influenced their simpatico in this movie vs. the 1941 one. There are also a lot more scenes of Vicky and Jill where their sisterly dynamic is explored a ton this time around. It was v. clear how much they cared abt each other.

Jeanne Crain- - who I only know from A Letter to Three Wives and Leave Her to Heaven- - does really well in her role as Jill. She is, in some ways, the heart of the film.

One quirky note is that this movie has a mini reunion of male actors who have been in Marily Monroe movies. Elliot Reid (who played Steve Christopher here) was Jane Russell's love interest in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. Meanwhile, Alexander D'arcy (who was Robin Ray in this movie) played one of Marilyn Monroe's suitors in How to Marry a Millionaire. He's the guy with the eyepatch (you'll know who I'm talking abt if you've watched the movie.)


Do I have any criticisms?

The tension (as far as finding out the murderer's identity) is way lower in this one. IMO, it has to do with two specific characters. Primarily Richard Boone as Det. Ed Cornell.

Whereas the Ed in the 1941 movie has a PRESENCE, someone who is tremendously good as a detective but also a Grade A WEIRDO, Boone's Ed never achieves the kind of brilliance and creepiness that's needed for that role. All that's shown is Boone's flat demeanor with random moments where he yells at ppl. He simply does not give out the same menacing vibes. *Hands* Because this is the first time I've ever seen that actor in anything, I can't tell if the fault lies on him OR on the direction he was given.

The other thing that made the movie lose momentum was when, right around the halfway point, the pacing just glides on. It's almost as if the plot didn't care abt building up any suspense.

Finally, in total opposition to how I felt during the last 20 mins of the 1941 film, the last 20 mins of Vicky went into full cheese, IDK.


Do I recommend it?

Not really? If you happen to catch a screening of it or find it somewhere, sure, maybe watch it. But it's not worth making any huge effort to experience it. OTOH, I don't regret watching it, BUT I liked having the chance to compare both films. I'm giving it a 2 out of 5.


Queerness level:

Nada.


Le Trailer

Watch on YouTube

Blind Spot

A 1947 film from Columbia Pictures. Directed by Robert Gordon.

This is the story of Jeffrey Andrews (played by Chester Morris), a prolific crime novelist who, nevertheless, is not financially successful. At the start of the movie, he lives in a run-down, basement apartment in NYC and has become a working alcoholic.

One day, after getting some "liquid courage", he marches to his publisher's office and demands to talk to Henry Small (played by William Forrest), the actual!publisher. Jeffrey demands a substantial advance cuz he's THAT broke. Henry shakes his head no and brings up that the publishing company has maintained the guidelines described in Jeffrey's contract. They go back and forth.

Watching all this unfold is Lloyd Harrison (played by Steven Geray), a fellow crime author signed to the same publisher.

Desperate for money, Jeffrey proposes telling Henry a full story that he (Henry) can then have someone else ghostwrite in exchange for a few hundred dollars. Jeffrey starts telling the story. The next scene has him leaving Henry's office.

Next thing he knows, Jeffrey is being accused of MURDERING HENRY. Unfortch for Jeffrey, he was totally blotto and can't remember a lot of what happened after he left Henry's office. So now he has to retrace his steps and figure out who had it out for Henry. Along the way, he teams up with Evelyn Green (played by Constance Dowling), Henry's former secretary.

At an hour and 4 minutes, this is another one of those super short movies. It's got great pacing, good dialogue, and is well acted, tho.


Do I have any criticisms?

Due to the time constraints, certain connections happen a little too fast for my taste (such as the one between Evelyn and Jeffrey). Keeping in mind that, at the start of the movie, Jeffrey himself makes a remark abt how Evelyn is the latest secretary that Henry's got. Only for the two of them having several PASSIONATE kisses the v. next day. O___o?!

I'm meh abt the ending, but *hands*


Do I recommend it?

Yeah? There are copies floating around online, but those have potato-recording levels of quality. IF you want to watch a pristine version, you either have to rent it OR hope that it'll run on TCM. I'm giving it a 2.6 out of 5.


Queerness level:
Medium.

The character of Lloyd is effete and has the type of dialogue peppered with tons of bon mots that read like a queer-coded character. Also, the way he reacts whenever Evelyn is present also adds weight to my guesstimation.

Sleep, My Love

A 1948 film from Triangle Productions that was directed by Douglas Sirk. It's based on a novel by Leo Rosten.

Allison (played by Claudette Colrbet) wakes up in a train headed to Boston. Her confusion turns into panic. Last night, she'd gone to bed in her home in NYC. Now she's going somewhere with no idea how she got on the train or WHY her husband's gun is in her possession.

At the same time, her husband Richard (played by Don Ameche) has called the police to report Allison missing. But, just before the investigation gets going, she calls Richard from the train station. He sends her a plane ticket for her to return home . . .

I'm gonna be vague in order to keep the mystery of the plot under wraps.

FWIW, I'm not super familiar with Colbert's work outside of It Happened One Night, so my impression of her when I started watching this movie was v. incomplete. Like the rest of the cast, she does a decent job in her role as a devoted wife of a rich architect. To my utter lack of shock, I liked Robert Cummings as Bruce, a friend of a friend of Allison's. He rocks it in his role.

A special shoutout goes to Hazel Brooks as Daphne. First of all, she's gorgeous. Secondly, her voice is surprisingly deep. And that, combined with her glamourpuss aesthetic elevates her dialogue to a deliciously campy level. EVERY LINE SHE SAYS has this undercurrent of vampiness that I LOVED. I do wished the movie had been from her point of view cuz she was a lot of a lot.

This next thing is something that really surprised me abt the movie. Because there was a moment where Bruce and Allison go to Bruce's brother's wedding. His brother, Jimmie (played by Keye Luke) is Chinese American. The wedding is fully Chinese. As far as I could tell, I didn't see anyone in yellowface. FTR, I'm not Chinese, so take my lack of squickiness because I didn't pick up on any blatant or oblique racism against Chinese folks with a tiny grain of salt.

Douglas Sirk and Joseph A. Valentine, his cinematographer, KNEW what kind of movie they wanted to shoot. The majority of the film takes place in Allison and Richard's 3-story brownstone that has a gorgeous terrace. Throughout the movie, there's excellent use of SPACE. Frex, there were scenes where characters would be looking for someone who happened to be hiding up on the 3rd floor. Also some scenes of ppl going up and down the stairs that truly worked. There's a good sense of how tall and expansive the home is (which includes a conservatory.)

The story is okay. It's watchable.


Do I have any criticisms?

I have 3, but two of them are SPOILERS.

Again, keep in mind that I'm gonna spoil HUGE THINGS abt this film

SPOILER 1

By the end of the first 10 minutes, it was super clear that the main plot was one of intense gaslighting. NGL, that made me lose some interest in the movie a little.

SPOILER 2

The potential romance between Allison and Bruce was poorly handled.

OK, so iMO, Allison did love her husband, but it was more of the kind of love someone has for a friend. However, she'd only known Bruce for abt a week. And yet they not only had excellent chemistry but, whenever they talked, Allison would GLOW. She'd come alive regardless of the conversation topic. It legit didn't matter if it was the weather, food, his friends, etc cuz it was their INTERACTIONS that livens her up.

OFC, since she's married, though, the movie gets as close to the edge of the line that she'd have to cross into infidelity as it can get. By the end, Allison and Bruce as holding each other and it's super clear that they'll be together, but they had so much sparkage that it drove me nuts that they never kissed. END OF SPOILERS

The third one has to do with Det. Sgt. Strake (played by Raymond Burr). As soon as he showed up, I perked the F up because he's one of my faves. Unfortch, he's deffo a background character who only pops up in two scenes. :|


Do I recommend it?

I do . . . if you have an hour and a half to kill? Some of the romantic aspects are much subtler than I'd generally liked and the mood was a bit uneven. It's online. I give it a 2.4 out of 5.


Queerness level

Zip.

Dead Reckoning

A 1947 movie from Columbia Pictures. Directed by John Cromwell. Script was by Stve Fisher and Oliver H.P. Garret from a story by Gerald Drayson Adams and Sidney Bidell.

Captain Warren "Rip" Murdock (played by Humphrey Bogart) and his bestie Sergeant Johnny Drake (played by William Prince) are enroute to Washington, D.C. from Paris under some mystery orders. Soon enough, though, they find out that Johnny will be awarded the Medal of Honor while Murdock will get the Distinguished Service Cross. Murdock is elated while Johnny is not quite vibing with all of that.

When their train makes a stop, Johnny uses the opportunity to run away. Murdock tells the army that he's gonna go after his BFF and bring him back. He decides to head on over to Gulf City, Johnny's hometown, and ends up getting a message from Johnny that they gotta talk. But Johnny never contacts him again . . .

Released a whole year after the triumph that was The Big Sleep, this is a pretty solid B-movie.

OFC, Bogart is THE star: he brings a realistic combination of world-weariness and hope for a better future that, combined with the superb dialogue, makes the film snap and crackle with energy. Most of the cast is really good as well.

The plot is convoluted enough to make it interesting w/o becoming too labyrinthine.


Do I have any criticisms?

Even though I think she's a good actress in most things, I couldn't quite rally behind Lizabeth Scott as Coral Chandler. Thing is, I'm not sure even Scott knew HOW to play her character. And so she was both femme fatale and heroine without making up her mind. Which makes me think that the role would've been a much better fit for someone else.

Interestingly enough, this seems to be the general sentiment as folks (even going back to 1947) felt, at best, lukewarm with her performance. *Hands*


Do I recommend it?

I do! Again, it's no The Big Sleep and Lizabeth Scott is no Lauren Baccall, but I was entertained. This movie is available for streaming on YouTube for FREE NINETY-NINE for the month of November. Also, IF you've got YT Premium, you'll be able to watch it w/o ads. I give it a 3.5 out of 5.


Queerness level:

There's a v. OJO line that Murdock tells another character abt his bond with Johnny that falls along the line of "he's the person I've loved the most."

Now, I wouldn't go as far as to say that the slash vibes are strong, BUT Murdock's devotion (in a manner of speaking) to Johnny does ring a little queer. IDK.


Le trailer

Watch on YouTube

The Amazing Mr. X (YouTube)

A 1948 horror noir from Eagle-Lion Films.

Christine (played by Lynn Bari) is a rich widow who believes that someone from the great beyond is trying to contact her. Janet, her sister (played by Cathy O'Donnell) repeatedly tells Christine that she's imagining things. They live in a big house by a cliff and the combination of the waves from the sea below and the wind results in strange noises.

However, Christine is not convinced. One night, she's walking down the beach, on her way to her boyfriend Martin's house (played by Richard Carlson) for dinner. She begins to hear the voices again. It puts her in a weird emotional moment. Just as she's starting to get a hold of herself, she runs into a guy named Alexis (played by Turhan Bey). This dude tells her that his powers led him to her and that he wants to help. He drops a few details abt her and her husband that he shouldn't know cuz he and Christine had never met before.

Afterwards, she asks Martin for a raincheck. After she calms down, he proposes to her. Once Martin leaves for his home, she begins to see and hear more stuff. She sits down with Janet and they agree to visit Alexis to see what he can do to help them.

A seance occurs…

This is an interesting movie in that it's half gothic horror and half film noir. There's the supernatural aspect including ghosts, seances, the idea of a love that goes beyond life and death, etc. Meanwhile, for the film noir, the main themes are obsession and fate. The cinematography (by John Alton) is moody AF.

All of the actors were fine (tho no one stood out for me.)


Do I have any criticisms?

Yeppers. I do feel that the story has uneven pacing after Christine and Alexis meet. Sometimes things take forever to happen, others things seem to speed up.

Even though this is mostly built as a film noir, IMO, it's more a gothic suspense movie. So I'm v. ??? as to why ppl keep bringing this movie up whenever someone asks for film noir recs. YMMV.

SPOILERS FOR THE ENDING

Perhaps I'm overthinking this, but I was disappointed by some aspects of the ending.

So the first half of the movie is abt Christine. But then, the plot jumps lanes and the focus shifts to another character all the way to the end. Which is odd. I wish the movie had been abt the other character to begin with.

Especially cuz I wanted some more info on Christine as the movie came into a close. She's been put thru the wringer psychologically speaking AND survives a truly dark moment. It's also hinted at (some 15-20 mins before the movie ends) that she's having suicidal ideations too. The rest of the characters don't seem concerned abt that? Given everything that happens to her, I don't see Christine having a happy ending.

IDK. It was unnerving cuz there's no closure to her character one way or another.

Do I recommend it?

#Unsure. It's not a bad movie, but I can't rec it as a full noir. So, I'm giving it a 2.1 out of 5.

Queerness level:

*Shakes head no*



Le trailer

Watch on YouTube

Farewell, My Lovely

A 1975 adaptation of Dashiell Hammett's novel by the same name.

Just like with The Big Sleep, I read that novel some 20 yrs ago. I've watched (and own in physical format) the 1944 movie that was originally titled Murder, My Sweet. That movie starred Dick Powell and Claire Trevor.

Out of the two versions, the 1944 adaptation is the more faithful one to the novel. So, when compared to the 1975 film, there are some differences, but the overall storyline remained mostly the same. Acting and plot are good in both.

In this movie, Philip Marlowe (played by Robert Mitchum here and Dick Powell in the 1944 movie) is a private detective in 1941. He's not doing great, but he's deffo busy. The bulk of his cases tend to be abt cheating spouses or (like it happens at the start of the movie) finding missing people.

As soon as he returns a teenage runaway girl to her parents, he gets 'hired' by Moose Malloy (a thug who has just been released from prison for robbing $80k from a bank 7 yrs prior.) Malloy orders Marlowe to find his sweetheart, a woman named Velma, who was a dancer at a seedy bar. So Marlowe starts snooping around. The more he works the case, the wilder the search becomes until he senses that there's a bigger thing happening he hasn't quite connected the dots yet.

This is a REALLY GOOD movie. Extremely classic noir featuring Mitchum's Marlowe who has a frenemies situation with the police chief and Charlotte Rampling--who, at that time, was 29 y.o.--as Helen. She's a v. sensual, rich, and bored housewife. It's interesting that everything from her styling to her affectation and her voice is v., reminiscent of 1940s Lauren Baccall. Rampling does a good job as the femme fatale. (For context, the fabulous Claire Trevor, who played the same role in the 1944 movie, was slightly better, but I digress.) Rampling and Mitchum have a slow-burning intensity that works well considering Rampling's doing the most she can to embody the 1940s vamp and Mitchum (who was in his late 50s) starred in a lot of those 1940s noirs. I liked their interactions. Even though Helen was a little too much at times. Girl was horny, lordy lorde. XD

There are 2 differences between the 1944 and 1975 versions.

1. Because this movie was filmed after the Code was struck down, ppl curse, there are plenty of boobs (such as a scene in which Marlowe opens doors while searching for someone and finds different groups of ppl in which all of the women are topless), and the violence is more graphic (again, bullet wounds, blood, ppl getting punched and slapped.).

2. Also certain details: a character got genderswapped, two characters never show up (they were main characters), and two new characters were created for the movie. It was a bit confusing, but it worked for me. Oh, and out of nowhere, a v., v. young Sylvester Stallone shows up as a secondary character that's a thug dude. It was hilarious to see baby!Stallone, IDK.

It's not a perfect movie. There was one character that had a connection to the Big Bad, but I didn't quite understand how this partnership worked.

Do I recommend it? YES! If you're a fan of film noir or crime movies in general, this one will be a treat for sure. Content Warning for a lot of racial slurs in some scenes, on-screen violence against women, and some graphic stuff. I'm giving it a 4.5 out of 5.

Queerness level

There's a female character who is v. explicitly a lesbian. However, she's also an abuser and overall terrible person.


P.S.: One funny thing abt this movie being filmed in 1975 but depicting 1941 is that it'd be as if a movie coming out in 2025 that was set in 1990. I was a teenager in 1991! WHAT IS TIME?! O__o


Le trailer

Watch on YouTube

OMG, I'VE COMPLETED THE FANNISH 50 FOR A THIRD TIME!!!!. NGL, I tried to make sure to have some stuff to talk abt BUT, at the same time, I wasn't fully sure it'd be enough to reach the finish line. 😅😅😅

In any case, I do plan to keep posting. At the v. least continue Noirvember and then a couple of posts for December. Woo-hoo to me, tho! 🥳

Suspense (YouTube)

A 1946 Monumental Pictures film that stars Barry Sulivan as Joe Morgan, Belita as Roberta Leonard, Albert Dekker as Robert Leornard, Eugene Palette as Harry Wheeler, and Bonita Grenville as Ronnie.

It begins with Joe, a drifter from the East Coast, who is now looking for work in Los Angeles. One guy tells him to talk to Mr. Leonard, the owner of an ice capade-type of show. Joe gets a job as a peanut seller. He's kinda 'meh' abt but, whatever. That is until Roberta (Mr. Leonard's wife) does her floor show. Suddenly, Joe is MESMERIZED, TAKEN, DROOLING, GAGA OVER THE HEAD with her. Afterwards, he begins to insinuate himself a little both with Roberta (i.e. pursing her romantically) and with Mr. Leonard (by showing him that he's got what it takes to be the general manager of the show).

After a promotion as Assistant Stage Manager, Joe redoubles his efforts to woo Roberta. Meanwhile, there's a woman named Ronnie who shows up back in Joe's life. It seems they have some history; Ronnie's DETERMINED to try to win him back, I guess?

Despite sounding like some melodrama, this is a 100% noir film. It deffo has the beats (questionable pasts for several characters, business that might or might not be on the level, Roberta AND Ronnie being femme fatales, Joe's obsession with Roberta, and the cinematography presenting the whole mess in fascinating shots.).

HOWEVER, the thing that makes this movie stand out from other noirs is that Belita (the actress portraying Roberta) was an ex-Olympic ice skater. So there are a lot of scenes where she's doing her thing on ice. And, like, at first, it sounds v. gimmicky. How the hell is noir gonna mix with someone skating on an ice rink? IDK what to tell you other that it all works really well, LOL.

The acting, lighting, and dialogue are all good!

I liked Barry Sullivan the most out of the cast. His portrayal of Joe as a guy who is dark in a way that is obnoxious but intriguing. Belita's Roberta is such a mystery. IHNI what her game was until near the end.


Do I have any criticisms?

Out of the 7 ice skating sequences, there were two scenes that I was v. meh abt. I kinda wish they'd been cut from the final edit.


Do I recommend it?

Yes! I know it's a weird premise, but the movie has a tight plot. I'm giving it a 4 out of 5. I think the only place it's currently available is YT right now.


Queerness level:

Non-existent, maybe? I'm kinda 🤔at Mr. Leonard cuz there are some vibes I picked up abt him and Joe that made me go "HMMMMMMMMMM".

And so, we arrive at November and the first of several posts abt film noirs I've watched.


Niagara (Hoopla)

From 1953, this film is a surprisingly intense movie.

Ray (Casey Adams) and Polly (Jean Peters) are a married couple who are enjoying their honeymoon some three years after their wedding. The plan is to spend a longish weekend at Niagara Falls AND for Ray to also do a bit of networking with the main boss of his company. ANYWAYS, once they get to the lodge place, they find out that there's another couple staying in the cabin they'd reserved.

Rose (Marilyn Monroe) manages to convince everyone to allow them stay a bit longer in the cabin because George (Joseph Cotten), her husband, is recovering from something after leaving the hospital. FWIW, there's a lot of tension between them. It's not clear how long they've been married, but George is not okay. Meanwhile, Rose treats him with a lot of contempt. The rest of the time, she likes to poke at his jealousy for funsies? Their dynamic is v. odd.

Ray and Polly do the tourist-y things, generally having a good time. During one of the excursions, Polly happens to find out that Rose is stepping out on George with someone else…

It had been at least 15 yrs since I first watched this movie. In all truth, I don't think I paid that much attention the first time around since I only had the vaguest of memories abt the plot this time around. The more I watched, the more I started to remember.

This is a FANTASTIC MOVIE FROM BEGINNING TO END. It's extreeeeeeeeeeeeemely noir: v. suspenseful, and gorgeously photographed. Marilyn Monroe was at the height of her power as a sex symbol. However, her role in this movie is the opposite of her happy-go-lucky, coquettish and ditzy persona. Rose is manipulative and will do whatever she needs to do to get ahead. So, if you're someone whose exposure to her filmography has only been the comedies (The Seven-Year Itch, How To Marry a Millionaire, etc), this is a movie that shows the depth of her acting talent.

OFC, Joseph Cotten NEVER made a bad movie. George is super complex yet easy to feel sympathy for.

The MVP is Jean Peters as Polly. She is a character who is kind and smart. At times, she shows lets some of her steeliness/backbone show and I applauded her for that. Especially at times when she's repeatedly dismissed by people (including her husband Ray who should've known better.) That said, it is because of her kindness that she's able to persevere. Peters was soo good that I want to check out other movies she's in.

As for the rest of the cast, everyone's fine?

Again, since the movie was filmed in Technicolor, the cinematography is AMAZING. Everything just pops off the screen. The movie itself is so engaging that, even when there are long scenes with little to no dialogue, viewers can't take your eyes off the screen. It's THAT good.


Do I have any criticisms?

There's a B plot abt Ray's boss (Mr. Kettering) who was obnoxious AF. Kudos to Don Wilson (the actor who portrayed him) for getting on my nerves, I guess. LOL. I think my annoyance was compounded by the fact that I really didn't care abt Ray. He was SUCH a loser.

I also don't know how I feel abt some parts of the ending (specifically the climax.)


Do I recommend it?

Hell fucking yeah! This movie has everything working so well that even the Mr. Kettering scenes weren't enough to deter me. I'm giving it a 4 out of 5.


Queerness level:

It's so low that one would have to jump thru many logic loops to come up with crumbs. :(


Le Trailer

IHNI WHY the trailer is in B&W given that the actual!film is a technicolor paradise, but there we are!

Watch on YouTube

Underskin is MY kind of beauty channel: in that they (I don't know what kind of pronouns the person running it uses, so I'm defaulting to "they") look at the creativity, business, and popularity angles. Everything is well-reseached, so even if the titles might be a tad clickbait-y, there's v. little (if any) room for weird/doubtful claims.

They've got videos on a lot of brands (from Fenty to Max Factor, r.e.m beauty, and more.) Here are some of my faves:

Watch on YouTube

This is one is super fascinating to me. Particularly cuz I was a teenager when The Body Shop was considered a good-to-upscale indication at USA malls. In addition to that was the marketing (appealing to cruelty-free and environmentally-centered products at a time where such labels were only a few years from total hippie-dom.) In any case, I love how deep of a look Underskin takes into the implosion of this once super popular brand.

Watch on YouTube

I do consider this video part 1 of why Pat McGrath as a brand has fallen out of favor within the beauty product world. Personally, I've liked some of their earlier products, but (v. mild spoiler for the video essay) I do agree with Underskin in that there's been a v. sad/unfortunate decline on the launches.

One thing I appreciate is how the video focuses on the brand itself and NOT Pat McGrath herself. She remains a v. talented MUA.

Watch on YouTube

And this is what I consider part 2. As the theme has to do with the Louis Vuitton x Pat McGrath collabo (launched back in late August this year. A controversial line that included $160 lipsticks. And there's the (alleged) shared PR packaging which FUCKING YIKES.

Watch on YouTube

I don't want to end this post on a downer/ragebait-y note, so I'm posting abt this cosmetic brand instead. It's also interesting in seeing a brand bounce back after a rather ho-hum, sort-of-plateau moment.