Skip to main content

It doesn’t matter which side runs the Village.


The Prisoner
2. The Chimes of Big Ben

We want information.

Number Six agrees to collaborate; if Number Two agrees to halt the interrogation of new arrival Number Eight. Six enters the Village Arts and Crafts Competition, but this is a cover for an escape bid he is planning with Eight. Six’s art cdoubles as a sailing boat, and he and Eight travel to London. Meeting with his bosses, Six is on the verge of discussing his resignation, but realises he is still in the Village when the chimes of Big Ben match the time on his watch; there should be an hour’s difference. It is revealed that Eight is working for the Village.

So how do you like it?

I’m prone to conflate The Chimes of Big Ben with Many Happy Returns, and neither quite work for me. At the root of this may be that Number Six actually escapes the Village in both (well, kind of in this one); battles of wits are reduced to more standard adventuring territory. The conflict becomes externalised.


It’s an episode that could be a typical example of what the series has to offer, if there were typical episodes. Number Six meets a new (female) villager, conspires with her, makes an escape attempt, fails, and it is revealed that she was on the side of the Village all along. What lifts it is Number Two, in the first of Leo McKern’s appearances; it’s little wonder McGoohan used him three times, as the two actors contrast with each other most effectively (even if McKern had a very difficult time of it with the star). In addition, the Village Arts and Crafts Competition provides for some amusing swipes at modern art and art criticism. Indeed, the actual “escape” only takes up the last fifteen minutes of the episode, and the twist is a neat one (albeit familiar to anyone who has seen The Ipcress File).


Chimes was the fifth episode produced, and many of the faithful suggest it should hold a similar position in any “proper” viewing schedule. The thought is that Number Six is clearly settled in at this point; he’s quite chatty with Number Two, and he takes on the mantle of tour guide for the newly arrived Number Eight (Nadia). I’m not sure I buy into the idea that such an attitude results from being worn down by previous failed bids for freedom. One could argue that Six, ever resourceful, tries a new tactic with his jailers after the failure of Arrival.


It isclear that time has passed since Arrival, but Six assuming Two’s role makes for an effective mirroring of the opener. His trust in Nadia certainly becomes less viable for me the further down the running order you put the episode. There is also an effective announcement of the hopelessness of his situation if his bids for freedom are undercut in such a pronounced way so early on. Won’t theyalways get the better of him?


The return of Christopher Benjamin (this time as Two’s direct assistant, it seems) also provides a direct bridge with Arrival and further suggests it is reasonably happy here. Additionally, showing McKern’s Two so early in the run makes his encore for the last two episodes all the more effective; there’s a symmetry to his bookending presence. Against this is an episode such as Checkmate, where Six enacts a more primitive escape bid.


I readily admit, however, that as far as The Prisoner goes I am a creature of habit. The broadcast order is what I’m used to and so it’s how I see the series as evolving, despite the inconsistencies this throws up (A. B. and C. and The Generalare much cited in this regard). I’m not dedicated enough to the idea that the series needs to show a clear progression (aside from its start and finish) to want to rearrange it accordingly.

Number Two: He can make even the act of putting on his dressing gown appear as a gesture of defiance.


McKern’s exhuberant Two is an infectiously likeable presence. Even though you know Six is deceiving him, or thinks he is. He is apparently unguarded and full of jollity, while Six is the opposite; reserved, curt and antagonistic.


Their first scene together shows that Six is only apparently compliant, as he takes pleasure in contrarily putting two lumps of sugar in his tea (instead of the predicted one); his rebellion against the apparently omniscient Village apparatus. Prior to this he shut the speaker playing the annoying Village muzak in his fridge to silence it; at this point he is showing not rage but efficient ways of counteracting predictable control mechanisms. 


When he chats to Two he informally sits on the latter’s desk, a test of how far he can challenge authority without a response. But he also nonchalantly instructs a delighted Two that he will “Escape, come back and wipe this place off the face of the Earth, obliterate it, and you with it”. He continues to ask the same questions, but in a more rhetorical way now; he’s no longer expecting an answer:

Six: Who are these people? Why are they here?
Two: Why are you?

Yet Two actually offers a politically challenging response to Six’s polarised mindset.


Two: It doesn’t matter which side runs the Village.
Six: It’s run by one side or the other.
Two: Oh, certainly. But both sides are becoming identical. What in fact has been created? An international community, a perfect blue print for world order. When the sides facing each other suddenly realise that they’re looking into a mirror, they’ll perceive that this is the pattern for the future.
Six: The whole Earth as the Village.
Two: Yes. That is my hope. What’s yours?
Six: I’d like to be the first man on the Moon.

This is a very similar view to the one expressed by Soviet spy Kropotkin in the 1967 satire The President’s Analyst:

Kropotkin: This isn't a case of a world struggle between two divergent ideologies, of different economic systems. Every day your country becomes more socialistic and mine becomes more capitalistic. Pretty soon we will meet in the middle and join hands.


If you remove the “illusory” notion of ideologically clashing power blocs, if all nations operate to the same template, what are you left with? The struggle of the individual for individuality, in a world village where everyone behaves in the same way, dresses the same way and conforms without challenge. Ultimately McGoohan pushes the series a stage further than this, whereby the one state is also insubstantial when set next to the shackles of one’s own mind and ego. But solid philosophical groundwork is laid here for later developments.


Six: I’ll make you a handle for this door.

I think part of my problem with this episode is that I’m reluctant to accept Six being swayed by trickery he should be expecting, and still more by a damsel in distress. As I say, I would have even more difficulty buying into this if it were later in the run. As the initial tour guide Six is cryptic and concise, but he is not overtly antagonistic (he offers her non-alcoholic whiskey or vodka).


We’re reminded of the more science fictional/surreal elements of the show in Nadia’s apprehension by Rovers and her subsequent interrogation, but such aspects are very much in retreat this time out (perhaps because the trick played on Six is so plausible, it was considered appropriate not to emphasise the heightened milieu. It’s her apparent suicide attempt that convinces Six she is genuinely a prisoner (“Let her go and I’ll collaborate”).


In a traditional series, Nadia would be the hero’s love interest but this is one of the instances where McGoohan reportedly nixed such notions (scripter Vincent Tilsely was critical of the star’s changes in this regard). There’s a scene of faked canoodling where McGoohan apparently had his daughter stand in for Nadia Gray, such were his scruples. But if he were that disapproving, wouldn’t he have restaged the scene entirely.

Six: Abstract art is basically primitive. I’ve… I’ve made my own tools.


We visit the woods set for the first time as Six shows he’s a bit of a D.I.Y. genius; not only can he fashion a boat, but he can manufacture the tools with which to hew it too! The sequences showing his preparations for the competition are sustained by Two’s surveillance and involvement. Tilsley and returning director Don Chaffey (his final contribution to the series) do a reasonably a reasonable job of making it seem as if Six is hoodwinking his slave masters, but that’s down to the engaging the satire of pretentious artistry. We don’t dwell too much on how Two seems all too encouraging of Six bending the rules for his entry and is apparently oblivious to the possible uses for his creation because the show distracts us (an earlier draft made Two’s awareness of what was going on clear).


Man: We’re not quite sure what it means.
Six: It means what it is.

The sight of every entry (except Six’s) paying tribute to the image of Number Two is most amusing, from a watercolour portrait, to a tapestry, to a chess set. But Six titling his entry “Escape” is a little on-the-nose if his intention is to fool Two (unless he considers drawing attention to such thoughts will put him off the scent; a double bluff). There’s a hint of a cute comparison of his art to organised religion (a church door) but, whether or not this was cut by McGoohan because of his sensibilities, I think Six’s nebulous non-explanation of what his piece means works best, along with his insincere gratitude for first prize (“Um, my work is its own satisfaction”).


Man: Why the crosspiece?
Six: Why not?

It’s lucky that Number 38 produced a piece that could provide a sail for his boat, and I’m afraid I don’t find Six’s lack of interrogation of Nadia or the ease of his escape route especially convincing. He never gets a clear confirmation of whom she works for, and the terribly convenient chap waiting for them at the shore should have rung alarm bells.


Six: I resigned… because… for a very long time I…

Six’s realisation that this is a ruse, before he has given the game away, is much needed (well, obviously, or the series would have blown its wad), but there’s a nagging sense that he should have sussed out that something was amiss before then. It’s only that this is so early in the broadcast run that lefts him off the hook.


Eight: Don’t worry. It was a good idea and you did your best. I’ll stress it in my report.

Eight’s parting comments emphasise that Two is just a cog in a wheel; she has the influence to bring about reprimands for him if it is considered appropriate. As an undercover operative she echoes Cobb in Arrival, while the lenient attitude to Two’s failure suggests the plans for breaking Six are still at a formative stage; later Two will come under greater pressure, with punitive measures threatened.


I like Chimes, but it doesn’t grab me the way the top tier of episodes do. McKern is its greatest asset, but Grey is saddled with a rather one-note character who only has an extra dimension in retrospect (even then, repeat viewings don’t really reward this knowledge). It’s neatly constructed and tidily resolved, but lacks that extra spark.









Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I added sixty on, and now you’re a genius.

The Avengers 4.3: The Master Minds
The Master Minds hitches its wagon to the not uncommon Avengers trope of dark deeds done under the veil of night. We previously encountered it in The Town of No Return, but Robert Banks Stewart (best known for Bergerac, but best known genre-wise for his two Tom Baker Doctor Who stories; likewise, he also penned only two teleplays for The Avengers) makes this episode more distinctive, with its mind control and spycraft, while Peter Graham Scott, in his third contribution to the show on the trot, pulls out all the stops, particularly with a highly creative climactic fight sequence that avoids the usual issue of overly-evident stunt doubles.

Exit bear, pursued by an actor.

Paddington 2 (2017)
(SPOILERS) Paddington 2 is every bit as upbeat and well-meaning as its predecessor. It also has more money thrown at it, a much better villain (an infinitely better villain) and, in terms of plotting, is more developed, offering greater variety and a more satisfying structure. Additionally, crucially, it succeeds in offering continued emotional heft and heart to the Peruvian bear’s further adventures. It isn’t, however, quite as funny.

Even suggesting such a thing sounds curmudgeonly, given the universal applause greeting the movie, but I say that having revisited the original a couple of days prior and found myself enjoying it even more than on first viewing. Writer-director Paul King and co-writer Simon Farnaby introduce a highly impressive array of set-ups with huge potential to milk their absurdity to comic ends, but don’t so much squander as frequently leave them undertapped.

Paddington’s succession of odd jobs don’t quite escalate as uproariously as they migh…

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…

Where is the voice that said altered carbon would free us from the cells of our flesh?

Altered Carbon Season One
(SPOILERS) Well, it looks good, even if the visuals are absurdly indebted to Blade Runner. Ultimately, though, Altered Carbon is a disappointment. The adaption of Richard Morgan’s novel comes armed with a string of well-packaged concepts and futuristic vernacular (sleeves, stacks, cross-sleeves, slagged stacks, Neo-Cs), but there’s a void at its core. It singularly fails use the dependable detective story framework to explore the philosophical ramifications of its universe – except in lip service – a future where death is impermanent, and even botches the essential goal of creating interesting lead characters (the peripheral ones, however, are at least more fortunate).

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.

Like an antelope in the headlights.

Black Panther (2018)
(SPOILERS) Like last year’s Wonder Woman, the hype for what it represents has quickly become conflated with Black Panther’s perceived quality. Can 92% and 97% of critics respectively really not be wrong, per Rotten Tomatoes, or are they – Armond White aside – afraid that finding fault in either will make open them to charges of being politically regressive, insufficiently woke or all-round, ever-so-slightly objectionable? As with Wonder Woman, Black Panther’s very existence means something special, but little about the movie itself actually is. Not the acting, not the directing, and definitely not the over-emphatic, laboured screenplay. As such, the picture is a passable two-plus hours’ entertainment, but under-finessed enough that one could easily mistake it for an early entry in the Marvel cycle, rather than arriving when they’re hard-pressed to put a serious foot wrong.

Yeah, keep walking, you lanky prick!

Mute (2018)
(SPOILERS) Duncan Jones was never entirely convincing when talking up his reasons for Mute’s futuristic setting, and now it’s easy to see why. What’s more difficult to discern is his passion for the project in the first place. If the picture’s first hour is torpid in pace and singularly fails to muster interest, the second is more engaging, but that’s more down to the unappetising activities of Paul Rudd and Justin Theroux’s supporting surgeons than the quest undertaken by Alex Skarsgård’s lead. Which isn’t such a compliment, really.

You’re never the same man twice.

The Man Who Haunted Himself (1970)
(SPOILERS) Roger Moore playing dual roles? It sounds like an unintentionally amusing prospect for audiences accustomed to the actor’s “Raise an eyebrow” method of acting. Consequently, this post-Saint pre-Bond role (in which he does offer some notable eyebrow acting) is more of a curiosity for the quality of Sir Rog’s performance than the out-there premise that can’t quite sustain the picture’s running time. It is telling that the same story was adapted for an episode of Alfred Hitchcock Presents 15 years earlier, since the uncanny idea at its core feels like a much better fit for a trim 50 minute anthology series.

Basil Dearden directs, and co-adapted the screenplay from Anthony Armstrong’s novel The Strange Case of Mr Pelham. Dearden started out with Ealing, helming several Will Hay pictures and a segment of Dead of Night (one might imagine a shortened version of this tale ending up there, or in any of the portmanteau horrors that arrived in the year…

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…

You think I contaminated myself, you think I did that?

Silkwood (1983)
Mike Nichol’s film about union activist Karen Silkwood, who died under suspicious circumstances in a car accident in 1974, remains a powerful piece of work; even more so in the wake of Fukushima. If we transpose the microcosm of employees of a nuclear plant, who would rather look the other way in favour of a pay cheque, to the macrocosm of a world dependent on an energy source that could spell our destruction (just don’t think about it and, if you do, be reassured by the pronouncements of “experts” on how safe it all is; and if that doesn’t persuade you be under no illusion that we need this power now, future generations be damned!) it is just as relevant.