| Glossary of Industry Terms |
|
|  |
| Customer Reviews: | | Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
 20 years later or more Oct 09, 2009
I first read this book when it came out in the 80's, this book introduced me to the careers of William Desmond Taylor and MMM, I already knew a little about Mabel. I loved the mystery surrounding the case and how it has never been solved. I bought the new book mainly because my original was pretty beat up and it's one of those books I like to bring out now and then and re read. There is a new intro from the author and the bio's at the back have been updated slightly, no new pics which would have been nice but all in all I love revisiting this story. Does it solve the mystery??? Depends on your views, everyone who knows of the case has their own opinion but I enjoyed the book and am glad to have it in my collection.
Intriguing Aug 14, 2009
I found the book to be very intriguing, not only because it explored a very interesting aspect of Hollywood history, now fading into legend, but because it gave insight into King Vidor himself. I never knew he was involved with Colleen Moore and I feel very sad that they never married. I also think that his conclusion is the correct one...the possible perpetrator would be very capable for doing it, I think.
1 of 1 found the following review helpful:
A Cast of Killers:The Twentieth Anniversary Edition Feb 16, 2008
"A Cast of Killers" holds a number of surprises. A true murder mystery that blends silent film stars,corrupt law enforcement,and sensational journalism into a unique cocktail of intrigue and deception. For plot it ranks with the best of classic mysteries and proves the cliche that "fact is truely stranger than fiction. A must read for film and mystery fans.
2 of 2 found the following review helpful:
5 Stars for entertaining story; 2-3 for veracity Aug 18, 2007
This book reads like an exciting Hollywood murder mystery (which it is), but after reading Robert Giroux's version (Deed of Death), I am inclined to believe that Kirkpatrick's version (based on research by Hollywood director King Vidor) has taken a few liberties and definitely put more weight in some of the juicy (but not necessarily true) anecdotes. Still, if you want a "can't put-down" book that talks about Hollywood of the Silent Era, you won't go wrong with this one. The subplot about Mary Miles Minter and her family is a little creepy, and at the end, somewhat sad as well.
5 of 5 found the following review helpful:
As Compelling as a Good Film, Which It Should Have Been Mar 27, 2006
A Cast of Killers is a once-in-a-lifetime read: a nonfiction tale told in the style of the best detective fiction, based on the memoir kept by the "private eye", moviemaker King Vidor, discovered by would-be Vidor biographer Sidney Kirkpatrick. Vidor didn't make the film he wanted to, based on the facts he uncovered and the conclusions to which they led, because some of the principals in the case were still around, and could have been hurt by the revelations (they also could have sued, forcing him to prove the allegations in the now forever-unmade film in court).
But Kirkpatrick wasn't under that kind of threat in 1986, and he told the story in book form much as I think Vidor might have told it on film--except that Vidor would have set the film in the 1920s when it all took place. The book follows Vidor's own investigation, undertaken in the late 1960s, and offers the conclusion he arrived at, not as the final word forever, but as the only possible conclusion given the information he'd uncovered.
The murder of prominent film director William Desmond Taylor in 1922 nearly destroyed Hollywood--or, at least, the resulting scandal nearly did. Two prominent stars, Mary Miles Minter and Mabel Normand, did have their already star-crossed careers destroyed by the revelations that came about as a result of the murder. Vidor's investigation gives reason to doubt some of those revelations, if not all of them.
What is obvious is that a murder investigation was tampered with, and quite possibly severely, by a number of the principals in the story, with the hoped-for (by the tamperers) result that the truth was never known, the most likely suspect never brought to trial. The way this all happened, as revealed by Kirkpatrick in true detective fiction style, is fascinating reading.
Then there is the matter of the movie studios' (specifically Paramount's) desperate need to do "damage control" after Taylor's murder to keep even bigger scandals from emerging, the kind that would have condemned the movie business for sure in the moral atmosphere of the 1920s, in which such a "sin" as drinking alcohol was forbidden by law. How and by what means this "damage control" was accomplished is another fascinating aspect of the story.
There have been and will be those who carp at the conclusions King Vidor (and Kirkpatrick) have reached as to the identity of William Desmond Taylor's murderer and said murderer's motive, citing this possible discrepancy and that not-fully-proven assertion. The credo of a great detective of popular fiction asserted: "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
To accomplish this, you have to be in possession of a great deal of information about the crime, and about everyone even only peripherally involved, as well as the intelligence to sort it all out. Vidor had this uniquely complete perspective, knew many of the people involved, and most importantly knew the Hollywood of the era in which it all happened.
I don't think we will ever get a better, or more surprising, or more satisfying take on one of the great unsolved crimes of the early 20th century. I'm personally sold on Vidor's conclusions. I wish he'd made it into the good film he'd have been capable of doing, though his reasons for not doing so are clear and compelling.
Most importantly for those who love detective stories, fiction or fact, this is a "fireplace and hot chocolate" kind of book, guaranteed to provide great recreation and something to think about. I loved it, I've read it through six times, I'll probably read it a few more!
|
| | |
|
|
