I read David Thomson's books, not because I am particularly interested in movies - I am not, I haven't been to a cinema in years - but because he writes with such fluidity, such grace, such waspishness, and such a natural feel for language, that his books are nearly unputdownable. The themes and narratives may well be spurious, or at least highly contentious, but that doesn't matter. He spins an artful and beguiling web.

And don't' be fooled by the title either; this is not about how movies shaped desire, or at least, not principally. It is at least to some degree about how movies have depicted desire, and how that depiction has pretty much been from the view of the male, American, heterosexual, superiority perspective. But what its really about is how gay themes, and gay actors / directors / designers / writers have subverted these themes to interesting effect, but without any real attempt to portray gay relationships or lifestyles as what they are - utterly everyday and banal

Or at least, thats about three quarters of the book. Its sharp, vivid and often very funny. From the outset, Thomson claims on several occasions that he has no interest in outing anyone - and then proceeds to do exactly that, on virtually every page. He reveals gay themes in a large number of films that you may not have viewed in that way. Bonnie and Clyde? Thats the first one on the list

And then, the book takes a turn, and not for the better. It is as though, whilst writing it, the various scandals that emerged in 2017 surrounding Harvey Weinstein and others and their abusive treatment of aspiring female actors, broke and he felt compelled to discuss it, in a book that after all, focuses on desire. The problem is that he doesn't do it very well

That doesn't mean that Thomson isn't on the side of the abused/ exploited, but he seems to flounder for words and to struggle to make whatever points he has. Yes , its probably true that on the whole, movies have portrayed sex in terms of male power, and the relatively few attempts to turn the tables have been controversial at best. Yes, its undoubtedly true that this happened in Hollywood for years, and that everyone knew about it. Yes, it may well be the case that in some cases female actors have used sexual favors to their advantage, and you don't really need Natalie Wood as an example. But that doesn't mean that the whole genre of cinema is intrinsically to blame, as Thomson seems to suggest. People exploit other people in many other walks of life - it just doesn't make the front pages if victims or perpetrators aren't well known - see Jeffery Epstein

So the book struggles here - there is a chapter on Jim Toback which seems to have nothing to do with the general theme of the book - and in the end Thomson seems to suggest that movies have run their course. Which seems extreme - people will always need somewhere dark to go on date night. In that way perhaps movies have shaped desire

PS - minus half a star for the pages in this edition not having been cut properly. Frustrating! ( )