Sleeping with Strangers: How the Movies Shaped Desire

The title of this review would probably have made a more suitable secondary title for David Thomson's Sleeping with Strangers than "How the Movies Shaped Desire"--it would certainly have been more on point--although that title likely would have deterred homophobes from purchasing the book in the first place. Which would have deprived David Thomson and Vintage Books from taking their money, and that would have been a pity, indeed.Sleeping with Strangers is--for the most part--a history of gay representation in Hollywood films, albeit one that is far from comprehensive, and filled with anecdotes and innuendo that sometimes reminded me of Kenneth Anger's Hollywood Babylon. David Thomson is an excellent film critic and historian whose work I've enjoyed for a number of years, but Sleeping with Strangers is so meandering and unfocused that I wondered if an editor bothered to read it before it was published. On the plus side, I enjoyed reading Thomson's inciteful assessments of the determinedly male-centric works of John Ford and Howard Hawks, among others, and his peek into the private lives of Rudolph Valentino and Ramon Novarro, both of whom came to unfortunate ends 42 years apart.And, there's a point/counterpoint feel to the section on Cary Grant (was he or wasn't he?) provided by the actor's only daughter, and others who dispute his heterosexuality. I don't really know any more about Grant's sexuality than I did before reading Sleeping with Strangers, although that is all well and good: I really don't care. Are there really that many people around who still care about who these Golden Age performers slept with?The sections on Katherine Hepburn, Spencer Tracy and Clark Gable are more problematic, largely because Thomson relies on the "memoirs" of notorious Hollywood hustler and pimp, Scotty Bowers (Full Service, Grove Press) for some of his speculation. For me, this is when the book veers into Hollywood Babylon territory, and that's a problem. Is it even possible, so many years after most of the principal movie stars (in this book) have died, to unearth an accurate gay history of the film industry? Especially given the confines of the closet many, if not most, of Hollywood's gay movie workers were forced to inhabit. It's admirable that David Thomson made the attempt to chronicle the huge contribution gays have made in the film industry but it's a bit too all-over-the-board for me. To be honest, while I normally enjoy Thomson's writing, I struggled to finish this book. It's probably best suited to open-minded TCM fans who don't mind reading in fits and starts.

I loved this book so much. Thomson once again gives new insights into familiar classics. His essays about Katharine Hepburn and Cary Grant are so excellent. At times you think he may be stretching a point or two but then you think about it, and you know he isn't. His understanding of the studio system is second to none. Thomson has dedicated this book to his great friend Kieran Hickey. If there were a time machine, I would love to go back and join Kieran and Dave at the movies. What a delight that would have been. Dave, thanks for a wonderful read. You've done it again.

I loved this book. Thomson gives powerful insights into film history in this look into the role of desire in shaping the movies and of the movies in shaping desire.

I have read all of Thomson's books and look forward to his next. He is the best writer on Hollywood period. I enjoyed his "The Whole Equation" three times. THAT SAID... this is atrocious celebrity tail-sniffing junk that I could not finish. Its thesis is literally Everyone in Hollywood was and is Gay... and if not, they should be... Nonsense of the first water. It is also punctuated with political rants (to a captive audience), a sure sign of a writer in decline. Sorry, David.

I heard a good piece of advice, that there are so many great books out there and so little time so if you come across a book you don’t get anything out of, move on to a different book. Unfortunately that was the case with this book. I felt the title of this book was misleading. I picked it up because I wanted a discourse on how movies shaped desire. I wanted to know how the people on the screen affected society and vice versa. I wanted to know the science of desire, the changing appetites of the audience, etc. I wanted to know ‘how’. I got about 60 pages in and didn’t feel like the author was really scratching at the question of how desire is shaped or influenced by the movies at all. I don’t mind the topic of homosexuality in the films, I actually think it’s an important and beautiful discussion to have, but if your premise is going to be that narrow then put that up front. Moreover, the book felt like a walk through history, like someone remembering the sexiness of old movies, but it didn’t feel like it really got into the ‘how’ of that sexuality or it’s influence on desire. It was a story remembered not a topic explained… at least by page 60 that’s how it felt.

I really have only one complaint about this book, but it is an important one. It deliberately misleads. Though it claims to be about “how the movies shaped desire”, it is really about “how gays in Hollywood had meant so much for our movies and for our culture”. Of course, Mr. Thomson doesn’t admit this directly until p. 271, even if it’s become pretty obvious by then.It’s too bad because I went into this book expecting a wide-ranging discussion. Instead, the theme here is quite narrow and I believe Mr. Thomson could have done much more. He clearly loves the movies, he is clearly knowledgeable about them, and he clearly has seen many more movies than I have. Once I got myself oriented to his purpose, I was able to enjoy myself much more.Like many people who have a big point to drive home, Mr. Thomson overreaches. Reading this book, one might come to believe that homosexuality is the entire driving force in the movies. I find this a bit hard to believe. He speculates about the sexuality of a number of people that is not very convincing. On the other hand, he when he guides us through the influence of people who are admittedly gay, he makes a good case for the importance of that influence.In the end, there is much to enjoy in this book. Mr. Thomson is an excellent storyteller and he wears his knowledge lightly, allowing the reader in. I would only suggest that the reader go into this with eyes wide open for a better experience.

I have read many books by the author and respect his opinion and his sensibility but this is a really crude piece of writing, recirculating prurient speculations and gossip about people in the movie industry to then either dismiss them or say the equivalent of 'so what'. Anything that relies on scurrilous sources like Scotty Bowers can hardly be given serious consideration. The 'revelation' about Spencer Tracy' is particularly tacky as are those about Jean Harlow and serve no purpose at all other than to ask 'Why?' But this can be said for much of this over intellectualised 'National Enquirer' muck raking. I struggle to know what the author is actually saying that really needed to be said or hasn't been said more eloquently elsewhere. In fact, the book leaves me feeling pained, the same as Clark Gable did after a visit to the aforementioned Ms Harlow.