This book was actually not that bad. It had an interesting storyline, and the trademarks of a noir novel. The problem, for me, was only that it was supposed to be a Philip Marlowe novel. Not because I expected something different (I did, but I have no problem changing my standards), but because the bad parts of the book are the parts that are supposed to link it to Marlowe.
Starting with the time placement: the novel is supposed to be set during the 1940s. Nothing wrong with that. But the language the author uses is very different from the language you'd see in Raymond Chandler's books. It's kind of a modern language. To compensate for that, the author shoves time references into the story in every available opportunity, referring to actresses of the time, products, movies... It feels fake, especially if you've just read Marlowe by Chandler.
Marlowe's character, in itself, feels fake. It feels like somebody else pretending to be him. In essence, that's exactly what it is, so I don't know how much I should complain about that...
Maybe realizing his shortcomings, the author decided to make references to previous Marlowe books almost constantly. This book is very much a sequel to [b:Playback|153590|Playback|Raymond Chandler|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1388450886s/153590.jpg|2504821]. I would have to problem with that per se, even though Chandler's books were always very episodic and made minimal, if any, references to each other, but the constant repetition gets grating after a while. (And by "a while", I mean "right after the first two chapters".)
I am not sorry I have read it, the story really was interesting and well developed. It was what a noir book is supposed to be, if you can overlook the other problems.