Skip to main content

Well, he's certainly not normal, not even for Blake.


Blake's 7
2.10: Voice from the Past


The best thing that can probably be said about this one is that it isn’t dull. Ridiculous, yes. Treats its characters with complete disrespect, yes. Prone to unintentional hilarity, yes. But it can’t plumb Hostage depths of banality. This is Roger Parkes’ debut script, and he shows Allan Prior’s flair for lumpen plotting and making the crew act like idiots. George Spenton-Foster did decent enough work on Killer and Pressure Point, but here it seems he can’t be arsed, and you can’t really blame him.


Blake starts acting all strained in the Liberator exercise room, as if he’s constipated but hasn’t quite grasped it yet. This is the sort of introductory sequence they tried in Horizon with the Space Fatigue (yes, it’s back again) and Cally again as the unofficial Dr McCoy, and it works as badly here. Cally’s got them all doing exercises. Yes. At least Avon’s sarcastic. 


Blake may be under the influence of as yet unknown forces, but he’s acting just like the prick he does every week when he wants to throw a tantrum at the Federation. He instructs a change of course to asteroid PK-118 (instead of the relaxing Del Ten).

Blake: I command the ship.
Avon: Do you, indeed?
Jenna: You lead. We don’t take commands.


In practice, they pretty much do what he tells them. And he’s become such a self-righteous arsehole that I’m not sure the series could have taken another full season of him.
Avon: He’s used a number of ploys to get his own way, but “Just try trusting me”? That’s weak even by his standards.


Thomas is dependable playing a distressed Blake, and even better at playing a wanker one, so from that point of view it’s a fun episode for him. Just not for the viewer.  It’s realised that he’s re-experiencing the brainwashing of his recent past and that the frequency he’s hearing is one used by Federation crimino-therapists (I know, I know).  


Orac, who’s had bugger all to do this season since Shadow (such that the events of that story are referred to here), is giving most of the advice in this one although hooking Jenna up to Blake doesn’t do much good.


So far it’s all been mildly intriguing, but with Blake restrained Avon tells Vila to look after him. 


Which means Vila has to become a total moron (at least his cowardice is reasonably logical; here he’s got a single digit IQ). Blake manages to convince him that Avon and Cally have paired up and have mutual affinities and Vila should let him go and set course again for the asteroid. It’s terribly lazy writing, but then most of this episode is.


Once Blake’s teleported down to the asteroid (having locked Avon, Jenna and Cally in a cabin) he encounters some CSO-d backdrops that would make Captain Zep ashamed. 


If a story sets up a situation where the hero looks like he’s walking into a trap, the events have to be intriguing enough for the audience not to get exasperated with his behaviour. 


We can buy that Blake is under the influence so not at his best, but not so much what he encounters on the planet. About the only surprising thing about this story is that Ven Glynd doesn’t turn out to be a bad guy, as it looks from the off that this is the clumsiest set-up ever.  


Who could the bandaged man with the chronic Italian accent be? Is he really the rebel Shivan, with a fake eye sticking through his bandages (is it supposed to look like a fake eye? I’m not really sure)? Or could it be someone else with one eye who’s prone to over-acting? To that extent, it’s also the point where Travis finally turns into the Master, since his character so far only really lacked a penchant for disguises.


It’s also a problem that Avon and Cally (and Jenna) are convinced foul play is afoot throughout but never get it together to do anything about it. Down on the asteroid, they comply with Blake’s demand to take Shivan and Glynd with them to Governor Le Grand. 


Le Grand will present the case against Servalan at the Federation’s Annual Governors’ Conference (sounds like quite a bash). But they know it’s all bollocks and it’s this kind of lack of motivation undermines what had potential as a premise (if it had maintained a level of never quite knowing what was going on/who’s up to what).


At least the appearance of Servalan (although, really, I’m beginning to tire of her inevitably arriving to hatch an inevitably thwarted plan every other episode) casts a little doubt over the precise nature of the scenario – we can only be certain that she has it in for Governor Le Grand.


Blake’s refusal of “Shivan’s” gift of necklace is a bit confusing in retrospect; I assumed it was a control device, but that’s the bloody great box Avon destroys later. 


Orac’s positively effusive throughout, more chirrupy than crotchety. He advises Avon and Cally that they should look for the control device.

Avon: Locate and destroy it.
Orac: And restore Blake to his senses.
Avon: The two don’t necessarily follow.

Avon’s “Oh, well done Orac!” is Baker-esque in quality; perhaps he thought he had his very own K9?

In order to make Vila an even bigger cock, Parkes has him hoisted by his own petard at the thought of being ranked Deputy Leader to Blake, and puffed with the importance of bringing Le Grand to the ship. Croucher continues to his Italian Inspector Clouseau impression as plans for Blake’s anointing as leader of the new order proceed.


By the time Blake takes Orac’s key, and still Avon and co are standing around like lemons because the plot requires them to, you want to start throwing things at the TV. 


And why does Travis suddenly reveal his true identity, other than the episode is getting on a bit? He confirms that Le Grand and Glynd are traitors. But why on earth does he want to teleport down to the conference? He’s got the Liberator! What a dickhead.


There’s actually a decent bit of intercutting, as Servalan’s mouth appears in close-up on the screen in the conference hall, telling the two Gs they’re rumbled as they get shot down. 


What follows is as idiotic as everything else in the episode; Jenna farcically struggles to get Blake to put his bracelet on while a wounded Glynd goes for beardy Travis. 


Fortunately Avon smashing the control box puts an end to at least some of this. Biggest unintentional laugh award goes to Travis again (he’s stacking them up with this and Hostage) as Federation guards burst in and he gives them an “Easy lads!” look. I almost like Croucher for that moment. Almost.


And it’s back to Blake being himself again; a complete tool. I’m itching for him to get lost in the melee on Star One now. Fortunately Avon’s on form (“Why don’t you just say thank you nicely”). I think part of the problem I have with Blake is that Thomas isn’t charismatic enough to sell the character’s wankerishness.

Avon: I am sorry to inform you that he is himself all right.



Abysmal, so bad it occasionally becomes giddily entertaining but unfortunately only rarely. With this and Hostage, Season Two isn’t showing the consistency of Season One. Worse, with the incessant Servalan/Travis encounters it’s beginning to feel a little tired.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

They'll think I've lost control again and put it all down to evolution.

Time Bandits (1981) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam had co-directed previously, and his solo debut had visual flourish on its side, but it was with Time Bandits that Gilliam the auteur was born. The first part of his Trilogy of Imagination, it remains a dazzling work – as well as being one of his most successful – rich in theme and overflowing with ideas while resolutely aimed at a wide (family, if you like) audience. Indeed, most impressive about Time Bandits is that there’s no evidence of self-censoring here, of attempting to make it fit a certain formula, format or palatable template.

I never strangled a chicken in my life!

Rope (1948) (SPOILERS) Rope doesn’t initially appear to have been one of the most venerated of Hitchcocks, but it has gone through something of a rehabilitation over the years, certainly since it came back into circulation during the 80s. I’ve always rated it highly; yes, the seams of it being, essentially, a formal experiment on the director’s part, are evident, but it’s also an expert piece of writing that uses our immediate knowledge of the crime to create tension throughout; what we/the killers know is juxtaposed with the polite dinner party they’ve thrown in order to wallow in their superiority.

Oh, you got me right in the pantaloons, partner.

The Party (1968) (SPOILERS) Blake Edwards’ semi-improvisational reunion with Peter Sellers is now probably best known for – I was going to use an elephant-in-the-room gag, but at least one person already went there – Sellers’ “brown face”. And it isn’t a decision one can really defend, even by citing The Party ’s influence on Bollywood. Satyajit Ray had also reportedly been considering working with Sellers… and then he saw the film. One can only assume he’d missed similar performances in The Millionairess and The Road to Hong Kong ; in the latter case, entirely understandable, if not advisable. Nevertheless, for all the flagrant stereotyping, Sellers’ bungling Hrundi V Bakshi is a very likeable character, and indeed, it’s the piece’s good-natured, soft centre – his fledgling romance with Claudine Longet’s Michele – that sees The Party through in spite of its patchy, hit-and-miss quality.

I'm an old ruin, but she certainly brings my pulse up a beat or two.

The Paradine Case (1947) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock wasn’t very positive about The Paradine Case , his second collaboration with Gregory Peck, but I think he’s a little harsh on a picture that, if it doesn’t quite come together dramatically, nevertheless maintains interest on the basis of its skewed take on the courtroom drama. Peck’s defence counsel falls for his client, Alida Valli’s accused (of murder), while wife Ann Todd wilts dependably and masochistically on the side-lines.

You must have hopes, wishes, dreams.

Brazil (1985) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam didn’t consider Brazil the embodiment of a totalitarian nightmare it is often labelled as. His 1984½ (one of the film’s Fellini-riffing working titles) was “ the Nineteen Eighty-Four for 1984 ”, in contrast to Michael Anderson’s Nineteen Eighty-Four from 1948. This despite Gilliam famously boasting never to have read the Orwell’s novel: “ The thing that intrigues me about certain books is that you know them even though you’ve never read them. I guess the images are archetypal ”. Or as Pauline Kael observed, Brazil is to Nineteen Eighty-Four as “ if you’d just heard about it over the years and it had seeped into your visual imagination ”. Gilliam’s suffocating system isn’t unflinchingly cruel and malevolently intolerant of individuality; it is, in his vision of a nightmare “future”, one of evils spawned by the mechanisms of an out-of-control behemoth: a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. And yet, that is not really, despite how indulgently and glee

A herbal enema should fix you up.

Never Say Never Again (1983) (SPOILERS) There are plenty of sub-par Bond s in the official (Eon) franchise, several of them even weaker than this opportunistic remake of Thunderball , but they do still feel like Bond movies. Never Say Never Again , despite – or possibly because he’s part of it – featuring the much-vaunted, title-referencing return of the Sean Connery to the lead role, only ever feels like a cheap imitation. And yet, reputedly, it cost more than the same year’s Rog outing Octopussy .

Miss Livingstone, I presume.

Stage Fright (1950) (SPOILERS) This one has traditionally taken a bit of a bruising, for committing a cardinal crime – lying to the audience. More specifically, lying via a flashback, through which it is implicitly assumed the truth is always relayed. As Richard Schickel commented, though, the egregiousness of the action depends largely on whether you see it as a flaw or a brilliant act of daring: an innovation. I don’t think it’s quite that – not in Stage Fright ’s case anyway; the plot is too ordinary – but I do think it’s a picture that rewards revisiting knowing the twist, since there’s much else to enjoy it for besides.

Do you know the world is a foul sty? Do you know, if you ripped the fronts off houses, you'd find swine? The world's a hell. What does it matter what happens in it?

Shadow of a Doubt (1943) (SPOILERS) I’m not sure you could really classify Shadow of a Doubt as underrated, as some have. Not when it’s widely reported as Hitchcock’s favourite of his films. Underseen might be a more apt sobriquet, since it rarely trips off the lips in the manner of his best-known pictures. Regardless of the best way to categorise it, it’s very easy to see why the director should have been so quick to recognise Shadow of a Doubt 's qualities, even if some of those qualities are somewhat atypical.

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019) (SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds . Juno and the Paycock , set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.