Flicker: A Novel (Rediscovered Classics)

At the heart of this novel is the quest for the holy grail of cinema: the capacity to work on the audience in a purely cinematic way, that has nothing to do with literature or photography (i.e. nothing to do with plot or mise en scene). How is this allegedly possible? First and foremost by making use of the capacity to manipulate sequences of images through editing. But at its most basic level it is just the condition of film: that movement is an illusion created by stringing images together, each of which is screened for a split second (1/24th). To render this illusion possible, there must be an imperceptible gap between each image: a flicker. What if there was a way of employing the flicker to "say" something? To speak to the audience without words or story or even images (which of course have something in common with photography)?But this "holy grail" of cinema is only the pretense for what is in part a great story about what it was like to live as a movie buff before video, when it was an exclusive almost underground enterprise to watch films that weren't mainstream or big budget. It conveys some of the enthusiasm for film during the sixties in America, when European films were just beginning to be seen on college campuses and arthouses, when the American underground and avant-garde cinema had its heyday. It is also a mystery novel and in the end a grand conspiracy novel almost worthy of Phillip K. Dick.The story drags a bit here and there -- not when they are talking cinema, but because the grand conspiracy takes too much exposition to set up and then finishes in a less than satisfying and perhaps too predictable way. Still, these are not really complaints. It is not a perfect novel, but I couldn't put it down for the three or four days worth of free time and late nights that it took to read it.

Just finished re-reading this novel . . .GREAT as a study in dualism -- which I personally am trying to understand better. It reads as a good caper book too, with an end of the world villain/conspiracy/apocalyptic trajectory. Spoiler alert: the bad guys kinda win here, so be warned, this is a very depressing read. Our hero shows no heroism, and the one bright light -- the one voice which presents a healthy world view -- gets done in. If it's made into a movie I won't go see it. It'll be hard to make it as R-rated. I'd loved to know whether any of the Cathar historical references are accurate. It did get me watching some really great old movies for the first time. I'm grateful to Roszak and his book for shoring up a deeply held belief of mine: the real enemy is dualism.

In the same vein as “Night Film”. Once into it, becomes hard to put down. It is long but had me fascinated from start to finish.J William Hill

I'll keep this short and sweet. This is a must read for any film fan, from snobby elitists to geeked out horror kids. A dark and sinister storyline, cleverly written and artfully played out. It's just so, so much fun to read. You may see some connections to Val Lewton. But you really don't have to know all about film to enjoy it, just an insatiable interest. Hey! There's even a cameo by Orson Welles! And did I mention it's apocalyptic and crazy!? This is one of those books that not too many people know about, but everyone I've ever given it to loves (3 people as of now). I remember a few years ago David Fincher and Darren Aronofsky tried to get a film version off the ground and couldn't make it happen. I get that one would obviously think a novel about film would be suited FOR film but even with their talents, I don't think a movie version could really do it justice. So buy this book, and never look at film the same way again.

I was hesitant about getting into this novel. I have several of Rosnak's nonfiction works, but from what I'd read about Flicker, it sounded pretty trivial. It's not. The book covers a lot of ground both about films & the film industry & about our culture in general. It's a good introduction to several different approaches to film criticism, & in that way has made films a lot more interesting to me. But aside from that, it's a good, fast moving drama with a lot of suspense & interest, but very little or none of the usual drivel: murders, romance, etc. (There are some sex scenes, but not like any others I've ever read! I don't want to spoil it by trying to explain.) It's just a good thought-provoker that left me with more understanding of what goes on in movies & some good chuckles about the incredible foolishness that people seem to waste their lives on. It seems to me that Rszak did a great job of putting some of his ideas about society & technology into an exciting thriller of a novel.

I've read this book five times and everytime I come away with a different interpretation--from a dark, compelling history of the secret origins of the cinema and the conspiracy behind them to a satire about a a deluded bunch ofcult followers. No matter how many times I read it, it never fails to draw me in. On the dark side of the literary spectrum, it is my favorite book. And I can never head the song "Bye Bye Blackbird" without thinking about it secret origins buried in history. I too have loaned various copies never to see them again ( I don't loan my 1st edition hardcover). One I just gave as a gift to friend of mine who is both a clergyman and professor at a Lutheran university (and also a film buff) and he too fell in thrall to it after his initial reading. It's hard to put words to it but in this era of thrillers about ancient and medieval religion, this is a must-read.

THE SECRET HISTORY OF CINEMA! A mere synopsis does not really do it justice, since much of the pleasures come in incidental details, digressions into cinematic or religious arcana (the temple and the movie house being very much analogous here). As the fifties turn into the sixties, young film enthusiast Jonathan Gates is pulled into the orbit of the fanatically devoted cinema lovers who operate the Classic, a proto-arthouse/movie shrine based in a dingy Hollywood basement. Here, he first admires from a afar, then becomes intimately involved with Clare, who runs the Classic with assistance from her lumpen on/off boyfriend Sharkey, and whose passion for cinema is all-consuming, almost evangelical. The first section of the book reads like a New Wave version of Cinema Paradiso, with a joyful and optimistic evocation of unbridled joy in cinema, juxtaposed with the heady intoxication of a first love affair. Proceedings grow ever darker when Jonathan becomes aware of, and then increasingly obsessed by, the films of an almost forgotten auteur of the 1920s and '30s, the enigmatic Max Kastell. Over 600 pages, Jonathan is drawn into a byzantine, hideously paranoid world of conspiracy and arcane religion. At epic length, the book is a meditation on the power of the moving image to seduce us and alter the consciousness of individuals and societies. It is truly disquieting, and will change the way you watch films. It is unashamedly Roszak's personal take on the history of cinema, and where it al went wrong, with thinly fictionalised versions of real life figures sometimes rubbing shoulders with actual giants like Orson Welles. Much of the text consists of film criticism spouted by characters who are essentially mouthpieces. For example, Clare represents all that was great about film, whereas slobbish Sharkey stands for all that is vulgar, shallow and debased. A warning: if you are a fan of Cult cinema or punk rock you my be personally affronted by Roszak's characterisation of those genres as not only utterly moronic and without merit but actual harbingers of the apocalypse. As time passes, cast-off by Clare as if completing a remedial course, Jonathan becomes a professor of film, working on a magnum opus on Kastell. This leads him to Simon Dunkle, a freaky teenage director who is apparently the heir to Max Kastell. Albino, chocolate-scoffing Dunkle makes films that are something like Beneath The Planet of the Apes crossed with Mad Max directed by Harmony Korine at his most indulgent. The kind of thing Vice magazine would probably go ballistic over. The novel offers some very conservative points-of-view (at one point, via a priest character, even offering a justification for prohibiting contraception), but because the paranoid mindset is so persuasive and well rendered, they start to seem almost sensible. One can't help but see Simon Dunkle in any number of flavour of the month idiot-savant 'auteurs' who trade in empty shock spectacle and violence. It basically paints film as a poisonous influence and filmgoers as susceptible idiots. It is kind of the thinking person's version of Michael Medved's 'Hollywood Against America', but paranoia being order of the day, one is never quite sure who is supposed to be sympathetic - almost everyone is shrill at some point and, crucially, more absorbed in cinema then real life. Amidst all this, Jonathan is such a passive, hapless and ineffectual 'hero' (ultimately, his life's work serves to help the 'bad guys' case) that it is perhaps our hypnotised fascination with the dream machine is the real target, our aptitude to retreat into fantasy. Goodness knows what Roszak would have made of the internet. If you have an interest in cinema this book is required reading - whether you see it as an impassioned and virtuous tract on responsible dreaming or an old timers grumble, it is brilliantly argued and as seductive as cinema itself.

I have a new entry in my top 5 (fiction) books! Yes, I did think this was that good.First of all, the comparisons with Da Vinci Code are pointless. I would be more inclined to compare it to Umberto Eco's  Focault's Pendulum , which is (as slightly more complex) satire on conspiracy theories. This follows the same sort of lines, though I would say it's a little more accessible than Eco's book. I'm also pretty certain it's where Marisha Pessl got her inspoiration for  Night Film  from - there are a _lot_ of similarities there.The story revolves around a film buff (Jonathon Gates) - told in his own words - who gets drawn into the shadowy world of cult film-maker Max Castle, who somehow managed to affect his viewers in a way few other film makers could. The interest turns into an obsession, and Jonathon ends up investigating religious cults, Templar nights (note: this book was written before the Templars were a tired trope in literature, so bear that in mind), Nazi propoganda, tantric sex, Orson Welles and a whole lot more.There's a lot of "true" film history woven in here, and I had to keep looking up things to see if they were real or fictional.Any description I can give it though really isn't going to do it justice. I suggest you get hold of a copy for yourself if you think it sounds interesting - especially if you have an interest in film. Focault's PendulumNight Film

I liked the writing. The conspiracy elements were not as profound or crazy as I was expecting, but perhaps that was a good thing. I found this to be a well written and interesting book. It's on a higher level than Night Film or Syndrome E, which I have also read.

Hmmm. Just read all the other reviews, before starting my own.It's important to put this in the time it was written.It's kind of a paranoid's delight--nice to see someone other than (a) the Jews, and (b) the RC church taking a hit for running a millenia-long, world-wide conspiracy. But the Cathars take it in the neck...There are a number of actual events and movements that he weaves into his novel, and that's interesting.Makes me nuts that we have no idea how the manuscript got anyplace that it was then published.I think the most enduring aspect of this book is its bleak (and unbalanced) coverage of how society has become so enamoured of violence, and trash, and apathy, hopelessness, over the last decades--and how dangerous that is.That and his discussion of the flicker, visual persistence (I forget his term), which is fascinating, and which I now have to go investigate.

From underground film culture to the knights templar...this adventure leads to one of my favourite endings since Eco's FOUCAULT'S PENDULUM or Hesse's MAGISTER LUDI. Buy it, read it, now!