Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.74 AVERAGE
3.74 AVERAGE
there's the thing of reading a book and then seeing a movie based on the book. the reader can't help but bring expectations from the book to the screen. when i read responses to cinema from readers the translation from the page to the screen seems to disappoint many book lovers. i feel i've been able to sidestep those disappointments - a book is a book and a movie is a movie and they are different art forms with different practices and concerns. they will never be the same experience ... in most cases.
in this case, i saw both versions of the film made from landsay gresham's novel. i have to say for all the good acting and atmosphere of guillermo del toro's recent remake (2021), i think i prefer the original (1947) with tyronne power. maybe bradley cooper, who i can hardly stand to watch, has something to do with that. but maybe more importantly the impending and the onslaught of DOOM with a capital D in nearly every moment of the film might have more to do with it. it's a monochrome descent into hell.
which brings me to the book ... it starts out great - maybe fantastic - lindsay gresham uses multiple voices/perspectives to introduce the carny characters to great effect, and the stories of the crew fascinate. the carnival world where the plot devices are set in motion are appropriately nightmarish but the narrative doesn't descend into despair ... the language throughout is on par with some of my favorite books.
but once stanton carlisle and molly (our central characters) leave the carnival and go out on their own to take their newfound routine of using spiritualism to con audiences as a way of making small fortunes, the book flattens. molly goes from being a complex character to a victim in waiting and the reverend carlisle's ascent up the ladder of sleaze is rife with repetition.
this novel fits into the existentialist tradition set in motion by dostoevsky, but with the russian genius you get humor and every other imaginable aspect of life along with murder, despair and the fall of the human species from grace. there's a balance between despair and hope.
in NA, the only hope is the reverend's desire for money. he feels entitled to lie and trick those who have it into giving it to him for sleight of hand tricks involving summonsing spirits of the dead. he's despicable through and through - his declaration of love for molly fades without much ado and she becomes a pawn. the gender roles common in early post-war novels are predictable, boring, unimaginative.
i would give lindsay gresham a high five for literary inventiveness and slap him with my other hand for seeing very little hope in humanity. perhaps this sentence is really all the review i needed to write. and so, i fail as he has.
in this case, i saw both versions of the film made from landsay gresham's novel. i have to say for all the good acting and atmosphere of guillermo del toro's recent remake (2021), i think i prefer the original (1947) with tyronne power. maybe bradley cooper, who i can hardly stand to watch, has something to do with that. but maybe more importantly the impending and the onslaught of DOOM with a capital D in nearly every moment of the film might have more to do with it. it's a monochrome descent into hell.
which brings me to the book ... it starts out great - maybe fantastic - lindsay gresham uses multiple voices/perspectives to introduce the carny characters to great effect, and the stories of the crew fascinate. the carnival world where the plot devices are set in motion are appropriately nightmarish but the narrative doesn't descend into despair ... the language throughout is on par with some of my favorite books.
but once stanton carlisle and molly (our central characters) leave the carnival and go out on their own to take their newfound routine of using spiritualism to con audiences as a way of making small fortunes, the book flattens. molly goes from being a complex character to a victim in waiting and the reverend carlisle's ascent up the ladder of sleaze is rife with repetition.
this novel fits into the existentialist tradition set in motion by dostoevsky, but with the russian genius you get humor and every other imaginable aspect of life along with murder, despair and the fall of the human species from grace. there's a balance between despair and hope.
in NA, the only hope is the reverend's desire for money. he feels entitled to lie and trick those who have it into giving it to him for sleight of hand tricks involving summonsing spirits of the dead. he's despicable through and through - his declaration of love for molly fades without much ado and she becomes a pawn. the gender roles common in early post-war novels are predictable, boring, unimaginative.
i would give lindsay gresham a high five for literary inventiveness and slap him with my other hand for seeing very little hope in humanity. perhaps this sentence is really all the review i needed to write. and so, i fail as he has.
Finally got around to reading this.
Written over a 10 year period, and then in a flurry at the end, the structure holds together pretty well. The use of Tarot cards help, but do not add that much additional meaning to the plot. While Gresham wrote a few other books, this is what he is known for - and pretty much seems like the only one worth reading. Oh, and I did not know it was his wife Joy who left him to become so important in the life of C S Lewis.
Love the slang, and to be honest, it is a pretty "filthy" book - especially for its time.
Looking forward to both the movie versions of the novel, and know that the 1947 version will not do it justice. And, not even having watched it yet, Cate Blanchett in the 2021 version seems like perfect fit for the role of Dr Lilith Ritter.
I want to see if there is any scholarly bibliographic history of the novel. In his Intro Nick Tosches mentions different editions, and the censorship of some passages in earlier versions (his example - the line about society women with the clap and businessmen who like to take it up the ass....).
Throughout his life Gresham attached himself to a number of different beliefs and intellectual fads in the hope of giving his life meaning. He never found one that held - and he often takes his disappointment and anger out on them in this novel.
Rather an American Classic of realism, gritty life, and the carnie. And the Big Grift.
Kicks in for a fairly quick read soon into the novel, and is well worth the read.
Written over a 10 year period, and then in a flurry at the end, the structure holds together pretty well. The use of Tarot cards help, but do not add that much additional meaning to the plot. While Gresham wrote a few other books, this is what he is known for - and pretty much seems like the only one worth reading. Oh, and I did not know it was his wife Joy who left him to become so important in the life of C S Lewis.
Love the slang, and to be honest, it is a pretty "filthy" book - especially for its time.
Looking forward to both the movie versions of the novel, and know that the 1947 version will not do it justice. And, not even having watched it yet, Cate Blanchett in the 2021 version seems like perfect fit for the role of Dr Lilith Ritter.
I want to see if there is any scholarly bibliographic history of the novel. In his Intro Nick Tosches mentions different editions, and the censorship of some passages in earlier versions (his example - the line about society women with the clap and businessmen who like to take it up the ass....).
Throughout his life Gresham attached himself to a number of different beliefs and intellectual fads in the hope of giving his life meaning. He never found one that held - and he often takes his disappointment and anger out on them in this novel.
Rather an American Classic of realism, gritty life, and the carnie. And the Big Grift.
Kicks in for a fairly quick read soon into the novel, and is well worth the read.
dark
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
One of my favorite books ever now. Dark, cynical, unapologetic. Read if you're angry at the world, or maybe don't.
challenging
dark
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Interesting pulp. Makes me curious about the film. The first 6 chapters are the best, describing the start of the protagonist's career as a mentalist in a carnival. It would seem to me the beautiful HBO series Carnivale definitely took some inspiration from these chapters. Although in the end, Gresham takes the other tack: whereas Carnivale was a fantasy story about supernatural powers, Nightmare Alley is all about deceit and trickery, it describes the Werdegang of a con man. Its outlook is rather bleak and cynical. (All the more surprising to read in the short biography that its author never stopped looking for spiritual solace in Buddhism and other, more marginal religions and cults.)
One of the highlights is the character of an evil psychologist who turns out to be an even more deceitful manipulator than the mentalist himself. Gresham seems to be making the point that psychoanalysis is just another form of mentalism (read: fraud).
It makes me curious about the 1947 film. The book reads like a 40s film -- except that it's sexually more explicit than those films tend to be. In fact, sexual frustration (and a rather simplistic Freudian sexual childhood trauma) are at the heart of the narrative. Striking to see how much less prudish the popular literature at the time appears to be than the films of that era.
[Edit: I have since seen the 1947 film, and it's terrific. By all accounts, the later remake is too.]
One of the highlights is the character of an evil psychologist who turns out to be an even more deceitful manipulator than the mentalist himself. Gresham seems to be making the point that psychoanalysis is just another form of mentalism (read: fraud).
It makes me curious about the 1947 film. The book reads like a 40s film -- except that it's sexually more explicit than those films tend to be. In fact, sexual frustration (and a rather simplistic Freudian sexual childhood trauma) are at the heart of the narrative. Striking to see how much less prudish the popular literature at the time appears to be than the films of that era.
[Edit: I have since seen the 1947 film, and it's terrific. By all accounts, the later remake is too.]
A fevered tale of a con artist always trying for the big swindle that will make him enough money to quit and live the big life. He goes from carnival fortune teller to spiritual medium. His memories and his constant need for other distractions haunt him constantly. Each chapter is named for a card in the tarot deck, foretelling the spirit of what approaches.
Started this before the movie landed, and failed to finish before library due date. It is tight even when it rambles, like a carnival barker.
Started this before the movie landed, and failed to finish before library due date. It is tight even when it rambles, like a carnival barker.
Gritty, depressing, and desperate. I mostly loved this strange, twisted journey. The first few chapters and last few chapters really make this book; the middle section is a touch more focused on plot and getting the reader from point A to point B in a way that is not quite as sharp as the rest.
A fun little carny noir, if ever there was one. Here you have solid characters, each working their own angle to get what they want. The carnival life really can bring out really interesting, if truly desperate, people which leads to compelling arcs and on the whole they worked and I enjoyed them. Definitely recommend this solid book.
Fascinating to finally sit down with this after having seen both adaptations of it (and in advance of watching the "Vision in Darkness and Light" version). Many of the changes made in both adaptation are wise excisions, even if they're absolutely dynamite on the page, and the Del Toro one in particular adds some extremely clever shadings to the climactic portion of the narrative (specifically the Ezra Grindle stuff).
Gresham's writing is drenched in a haunting kind of bone-deep despair that makes it easy to see why this novel has captured the imaginations of so many over the years. There's a wisdom in everything here to a certain extent, even if the fatalism can become occasionally overbearing. I did enjoy the way Gresham worked to incorporate the perspectives of several non-Stanton characters throughout, and it's one of the few undeniable advantages to experiencing the story in this particular format.
Mostly, though, I have a newfound appreciation for the 2021 film, which I honestly haven't been able to stop thinking about since I saw it last December.
Gresham's writing is drenched in a haunting kind of bone-deep despair that makes it easy to see why this novel has captured the imaginations of so many over the years. There's a wisdom in everything here to a certain extent, even if the fatalism can become occasionally overbearing. I did enjoy the way Gresham worked to incorporate the perspectives of several non-Stanton characters throughout, and it's one of the few undeniable advantages to experiencing the story in this particular format.
Mostly, though, I have a newfound appreciation for the 2021 film, which I honestly haven't been able to stop thinking about since I saw it last December.