Skip to main content

This is Deadman's secret key: Smallwood, Ringwood, Gurney.


Doctor Who
The Smugglers: Episode One


The latter historicals, more exercises in pastiche than setting out to explore historical events, are some of my favourites, and tend to be rather neglected. That can’t just be laid at the door of their absence from the archives; The Massacre is generally held up as a lost masterpiece. Probably the lack of esteem for The Smugglers and The Highlanders is down to seeing them as lightweight and disposable. Certainly, there’s little in the way of depth or serious drama here. But for me it’s the sense of playfulness and energy that makes it so enjoyable.

To some extent, the here approach may be a follow-on from Donald Cotton and Dennis Spooner’s take on this Whosub-genre, but this is also Innes Lloyd and Gerry Davis adjusting the series’ format to their purposes. By Season Five it’s arguable that it’s been so honed it’s straight-jacketed. This one stank badly in the ratings, and seems to have only hastened the death-knell for the historical. I hadn’t realised that the story was made as part of Season Three; while it’s probably not the best choice of a season opener, it does feel like more a companion to The Highlandersand the shifting sands of Season Four than the more “out-there” third season.

The story takes as its starting point children’s adventure fiction, the likes of Moonfleet and Kidnapped (the latter more likely an inspiration for The Highlanders). As such, there’s a level self-awareness to the performances and dialogue, and that feeling is compounded by the outright disbelief of Ben and Polly (particularly Ben) that they have arrived in the seventeenth century. As the first episode progresses this shifts towards scepticism, then acceptance. This comes at about the same time that Brian Hayles introduces us to the MacGuffin that propels the crew’s interaction with the guest cast; Avery’s gold.


The opening scenes of the episode are fairly relaxed, easing us in to the dynamic between the Doctor and his new companions. It’s interesting to see how contrasting in nature the character of Ben is to the Doctor, both in etiquette and interaction. It would be difficult to conceive of Hartnell’s Doctor allowing him to come aboard the ship out of choice; a brash, uncouth sailor. But that air of slight tension makes for a relationship that feels new and different. Polly is fairly easygoing, of course, but these are “modern” characters who, by design, do not instantly “get” the Doctor (until he becomes a “modern” Doctor).

And, with Ben, his Cockernee crewman with a capital “C” can grate a bit at times. It’s probably just as well that many of the guest cast are also going for it with the over-egged accents. Wills and Craze have an evident easy rapport, and the mutual winding up that the companions engage in makes Ben’s “Cor blimey guvn’or pull the other one I got to get back to my ship” routine more tolerable. Polly is initially identified as more carefree, yippee-ing her way along the beach while Ben just has a moan. In that sense, he’s a prototype for Victoria.


At this point in the show, with a TARDIS that can’t be directed, there’s a sense of danger to the companions deciding to wander off on their own. They really could be stranded in this time if the Doctor didn’t tag along (“I can foresee oodles of trouble”). Nevertheless, the Doctor seems to be quite amused with himself, and at their refusal to believe he has a time machine/that they may not be in the twentieth century any longer. This means that there isn’t the same edge to proceedings that there was in, say, The Aztecs. But it also seems that this is by design; The Smugglers is very much a romp, and serious debates on morality and ethics are far from the agenda.


For the story to work, it has to throw obstacles in the way of a return to the TARDIS. So the tide comes in, for starters. The encounter with Joseph “Holy Joe” Longfoot is accompanied by some lovely moments. Ben and Polly aren’t yet convinced of the period, although it begins a running joke concerning Polly being mistaken for a lad (I mean, as if) while the Doctor is most definitely leading the way. He refuses brandy (“No, we don’t touch it”), but it’s unclear whether this is supposed to suggest a view towards abstinence or just a dislike of that particular spirit (more likely, as he accepts a drink in the next episode). He also wins Joe’s approval by relocating the churchwarden’s dislocated finger. Joe identifies himself as a Christian repeatedly during the episode, and is also a staunch drunk, the two no doubt linked by regret over past deeds. He trusts the Doctor with a mysterious message.

Holy Joe: If you should come this way again and find me gone, remember these words. This is Deadman's secret key: Smallwood, Ringwood, Gurney.

And we move from church to inn, where there’s more of Polly being mistaken for a boy (“You would think it funny. You and your bell-bottomed sense of humour”, she says to Ben). Although the Doctor seems to join in chuckling, he draws the line at Ben calling her a “dolly locker duchess” (I think that’s what he says, anyway) and asks him to “Watch your tongue dear boy”.  By this point Ben seems to have accepted he’s not in his time, and has none of the Doctor’s reservations regarding booze (“I bet the beer’s better than what they serve nowadays”).

There are lots of “We don’t like strangers round ‘ere” clichés being thrown about, but I like the way that our new companions are asked to accept as real a scenario that comes straight out of the pages of adventure fiction.


Joe’s encounter with Cherub provides a fairly significant info-dump, sketching out the basics of the plot proper. Cherub is played by George A Cooper (Mr Griffiths in Grange Hill) with an accent verging on Eccles from The Goon Show. We learn that Joe was a mate in the Black Albatross, under Captain Pike, and that the crew are after Avery’s gold. And then Joe gets a knife in his back (a surviving sequence), with Cherub off to find the Doctor (having observed Joe whispering to him earlier). Despite his accent, Cooper is effectively menacing as Cherub. But his encounter with the Doctor provides more fun with Billy playing against Cherub’s uncivil behaviour (“Don’t you come the gentleman with me, matey!”) He also refers to him as “Sawbones” on learning he’s a doctor, before bundling him off to the Black Albatross, and it pretty much becomes the Doctor’s nickname throughout.


The Squire (portly Paul Whitsun-Jones) is so willing to accuse Ben and Polly of the murder of Joe that you just know he’ll be revealed to be up to no good later. They are knaves and rogues of highly suspicious intent.

The introduction of Pike, and the episode cliffhanger, is fairly underwhelming, both in terms of the non-threatening air that Pike has about him and the hackneyed dialogue that identifies him (“Well, by thunder, he’ll talk to me. Or my name’s not Samuel Pike!”).


An enjoyable opener, taking its time to let the plot kick in as it follows a young couple who happen uninvited aboard the TARDIS only to take a journey back through time. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

Must the duck be here?

The Favourite (2018)
(SPOILERS) In my review of The Killing of a Sacred Deer, I suggested The Favourite might be a Yorgos Lanthimos movie for those who don’t like Yorgos Lanthimos movies. At least, that’s what I’d heard. And certainly, it’s more accessible than either of his previous pictures, the first two thirds resembling a kind of Carry On Up the Greenaway, but despite these broader, more slapstick elements and abundant caustic humour, there’s a prevailing detachment on the part of the director, a distancing oversight that rather suggests he doesn’t feel very much for his subjects, no matter how much they emote, suffer or connive. Or pratfall.

Whoever comes, I'll kill them. I'll kill them all.

John Wick: Chapter 2 (2017)
(SPOILERS) There’s no guessing he’s back. John Wick’s return is most definite and demonstrable, in a sequel that does what sequels ought in all the right ways, upping the ante while never losing sight of the ingredients that made the original so formidable. John Wick: Chapter 2 finds the minimalist, stripped-back vehicle and character of the first instalment furnished with an elaborate colour palette and even more idiosyncrasies around the fringes, rather like Mad Max in that sense, and director Chad Stahleski (this time without the collaboration of David Leitch, but to no discernible deficit) ensures the action is filled to overflowing, but with an even stronger narrative drive that makes the most of changes of gear, scenery and motivation.

The result is a giddily hilarious, edge-of-the-seat thrill ride (don’t believe The New York Times review: it is not “altogether more solemn” I can only guess Jeannette Catsoulis didn’t revisit the original in the interven…

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.

I don’t know if what is happening is fair, but it’s the only thing I can think of that’s close to justice.

The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017)
(SPOILERS) I think I knew I wasn’t going to like The Killing of a Sacred Deer in the first five minutes. And that was without the unedifying sight of open-heart surgery that takes up the first four. Yorgos Lanthimos is something of a Marmite director, and my responses to this and his previous The Lobster (which I merely thought was “okay” after exhausting its thin premise) haven’t induced me to check out his earlier work. Of course, he has now come out with a film that, reputedly, even his naysayers will like, awards-darling The Favourite

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …