One of these is like Amelie for adults (yj) with a steampunk theme running through - but 1000 times better than that sounds (including experimental visual and colour effects) and loads of very funny nudity. The other is a not especially complex ghost story/or a portrayal of psychosis starring Tilda Rice Swinton (don't they all?) which is surprisingly good.

You might find this of interest: https://archive.is/K3vRf (NYT article about the book Poor Things is based on).

I feel ashamed that I've known his name for years and never read a thing by him.

Incidentally, I "reviewed" the two films together because I watched them back to back - more or less. Poor Things is the pick if I had to choose.

Ooof.

Alasdair Gray is a bit local hero in my neck of the woods - most of the people I know who've studied English at Scottish Universities have some kind of entertaining/heartwarming story about him. I get an, well, I'd say "unquenchable" if getting about three quarters of the way through didn't quench it, so, um, I get a quenchable urge to read Lanark every couple of years.

I've read Poor Things once (my dad's copy - my mother adjudged it "too weird" for her when he passed it over), but not seen the film yet. My mate who's a proper Gray aficionado (and former student of his) was horrified by it, which is either a good thing or a bad thing.

So, essentially, you've succeeded in making my shame in never having read anything by him even more profound.

On the other hand, he is simply another name in the long list of great and influential figures who have written stuff that I should have read but have failed to do. 

What did you think of it? Your mate who was horrified by it: did he say why, or do you know why? I haven't really ever been horrified by a book. I started to read Atlas Shrugged but gave up because it's stunningly boring and badly written, full of contrived situations and wooden characters. I suppose I'm horrified that so many people consider it a great work of literature. I didn't enjoy American Psycho much, largely because the author's relish for the pornographic ultra-violence (mainly directed at women) was a bit too apparent. 
 

My wording was unclear - my mate was horrified that the film stripped the book of the Gray-ian Glaswegian elements and plunked it iin a twee, whimsical steampunk-eqsue world.

TBH, I can't remember much about the book, it as a while ago. In terms of being horrified by books by Scottish Authors, I'll point you in the direction of Iain Bank's Wasp Factory and Complicity as ones which I've struggled with because of the violence.

Ah, I see. I can understand why that might be horrifying. On the other hand, a book is one thing and a film another. And sometimes (not saying this time) the film is better than the book. Any film based on the writing of Dan Brown springs to mind. I try not to think of a film as being the book in another form, but it is difficult, and annoying sometimes.