Skip to main content

We’re both claiming to be Number Six, are we not?


The Prisoner
5. The Schizoid Man

We want information.

Number Six is helping Number 24 with her mind-reading skills, using a pack of Zener cards. Later, Six is drugged and subjected to an aversion therapy treatment (as a result of which he becomes left-handed). His appearance is also altered. He is ushered to see Number Two who refers to him as Number 12, an old friend, and requests his aid in a plan to discover why the “real” Number Six resigned (the real 12 is now masquerading as our hero). “12” has a makeover; now he looks like Six (or rather, like himself again) and a series of confrontations ensue. At first the sparring is sporting (Six loses as he has he tries to respond with his left hand), then Six is unable to prove his physical identity (his wrist mole has gone, his fingerprints don’t match). Finally 12 beats Six at the mindreading game with 24. Six appears to be cracking but he notices a nail he bruised before the switcheroo, and he recalls the brainwashing techniques used. He electrocutes his left hand to return dexterity to his right. Then he beats up 12, who reveals the password (Schizoid Man) before being killed by a Rover. Six pretends that the “real” Six is dead, and attempts to leave as 12. But Two has deduced that he really is Six (he did not know that 12’s wife had died the year before) and brings him back to the Village.

So how do you like it?

If that plot summary sounds convoluted, it’s decidedly less so on screen. The Schizoid Mangenerally seems to be one of the best regarded episodes of the series, but it has never really captured my imagination. Patrick McGoohan is superb in his dual roles, but I can’t see why anyone in the Village thought this idea would work. Less still why Six would ever come close to falling for it. Lest that sounds like I’m missing the point of a fantasy series where logic is not always a foremost, I should emphasise that the (in some respects) not dissimilar A. B. & C. ranks as one of my favourites.


Two: You have a unique physical advantage.
Six: Physical advantage of GROWING A MOUSTACHE OVERNIGHT?

Maybe it’s partly because doppelganger stories are so commonplace; something fairly extraordinary needs to be done for the results not to seem a tad predictable. There’s no point during The Schizoid Man where we are in doubt over who the real Six and the real 12 are. There’s no mystery here at any point, as we follow the process of Six’s treatment. And, since only Six’s body (and his memory of the procedure itself) has been affected, it seems like a huge stretch that he would gradually become discombobulated. His sense of identity is, after all, overwhelming. This is why he’s so hard to break. They got into his subconscious and manipulated his dreams, and still he came out trumping his captors. Are we really supposed to believe the old double ploy would catch him off guard?


Two: Once he begins to doubt his own identity, he’ll crack. What do you think of the idea?
Six: I think it has fascinating possibilities, but you’ll have an awful job convincing me that I am not your Number Six. 

Terence Feely may be partially aware of this, as he has Six consciously go along with Two (and Two consciously going along with Six consciously going along with him) when asked to masquerade as “Six”. If everyone is so self-aware, perhaps Feely intends to do something clever with the trajectory? Not a chance. Six should know that the cosmetic is easily alterable, and he’s had enough experience of weekly totty proving duplicitous that he should have seen that one coming. Much more likely, if he were true to form, he would display lofty boredom at this latest silly scheme.


Perhaps it’s appropriate then that the best reversal involves not Six but his double. Interrogated by the genuine article and Two, Twelve finds himself in exactly the scenario Six has been, and be will again, subjected to. As in the previous episode, the grilling is visualised as focussing on his third eye (this time with a spot of light on his forehead) as Twelve exclaims desperately:


Twelve: I am Number Six. I… am… Number Six. Number Six! Six! Six! Six! Six!

Perhaps if we’d seen Six take a bit too much pleasure in becoming the interrogator, there’d have been a more effective blurring of lines. Even Six is impressed at Twelve’s rigour, a bit (“Hmm! Your… boy is dedicated to his work”).


That’s not to say the episode isn’t entertaining. But it doesn’t dazzle. I can’t see why Two (Anton Rodgers) would be so willing to pursue the idea either. Rodgers makes little impression as Two, ever-pleasant but lacking in substance. We’re told at the end that this was the General’s idea (whom we meet in the next episode). I guess that should have been a warning sign over “his” fallibility, coming up with something that is at once complex and also utterly daft. If there’s one undeniably good thing that comes out of The Schizoid Man, it’s the episode title. Highly evocative, it suggests the sort of dark, antic behaviour that we never actually get to witness.


Supervisor: In Haiti, we’d say he has stolen his soul.

I’m sure some valiant fellow can (and has) compared The Schizoid Man to the theories proposed by Otto Rank’s The Double; as he tells it, the double represents the ego as a symbol of immortality, and this is inverted when said double is removed. However, the fate of 12 restores Six to his indomitability. The plot is too literal too tease much substance from the theme; by telling Six there is a plan at the outset he is forearmed against any encounters with the uncanny. Also, Rank was in part concerned with spotlighting the states of authors who explored such ideas; what was on Feely’s mind, I wouldn’t seek to speculate. Nevertheless, “primal narcissism” sounds like just the sort of behaviour you could level at Six.


Twelve: We’re both claiming to be Number Six, are we not?
Six: I am Number Six, you are doing the claiming.

There was so much potential here, particularly of the kind that could have woven into the series’ integral themes. If, in the end, we (or our egos) are our own worst enemy, so how does our appearance inform that? Are we more than surface details and habitual behaviour? If we follow the line of the plot clearly we are, as Six is never swayed by his frustrating inability to throw a punch or a magically disappearing mole. There may be the suggestion that our relationships with others tell us most about who we are, since Six’s failure to recreate his simpatico experience with 24 does the most to dash his self-belief (and will presumably reinforce his loner approach, as if he didn’t already have good enough reason to shun other Villagers). The problem is, again, that he’s never really tested; he just becomes a bit disorientated by a rather silly ruse. It’s an exercise in over-complicated but underwhelming plotting and so has no greater resonance. If nothing else though, the overlords of the Village succeed in manipulating Six into defining himself as a number at last, something that was anathema a precious few episodes previously.


The Schizoid Man was filmed seventh, made following a decidedly more intense brain-frying episode (Once Upon a Time). It generally finds itself positioned in a similar running order no matter whose system is followed (fifth is the earliest, eighth the latest).  It certainly makes considerable sense to have it directly preceding The General, as the initial screening order has it.


There’s some curiously atypical behaviour on the part of Six here. Why is he so willing to help out 24? In the screening order so far we’ve seen him betrayed by Nine (Arrival), then by Nadia (The Chimes of Big Ben) and then another woman has shown herself to be a right schemer (Free For All). All three preceded The Schizoid Man in production order. He should be thoroughly unconvinced by the fairer sex at this point, less still becoming uncharacteristically chummy with a fellow inmate. It’s a peculiarly paternalistic rapport that he has struck up, and the lack of restless pacing doesn’t quite fit with him. It’s no surprise when 24 betrays him, and the reluctant turncoat character is familiar from the opening episode. Jane Merrow, who appeared in a host of TV roles including The Avengers, UFO, Danger Man and The Saint (and then a raft of US TV roles during the ‘70s and ‘80s) shows a winning earnestness as 24, so Six’s mentoring at least fits with that. But as someone for Six to pass the time with, she has been introduced purely to add substance to the later test scenario.


As for what her abilities are supposed to say about extra-sensory perception, the episode appears to be quite credulous. It is clear that we are supposed to believe that there is a psychic link between Six and 24; any possibility that there was some trickery during the opening stages is negated by the later scene in which Six lights her raised cigarette synchronously as they discuss synchronicity (“… little things, sudden coincidences that aren’t really coincidences”). Then, this is a series that is quite comfortable with the expanding possibilities of the mind, be it manipulation of dreams, brainwashing or the illusory nature of “reality”; it is ever an undiscovered country.


Does the drug treatment and aversion therapy “repeatment” convince? Not even closely. Quite apart from failing to address what happens when Six is called on to write something with his left hand, we’re asked to believe it’s taken effect in the time it takes him to grow a stylish tache? As for flapjacks versus bacon, would the refrain “Flapjacks are my favourite dish” really prevent him from tucking into some bacon? Maybe if “Bacon makes me puke” was included, but that doesn’t seem to be in the mix.


Undoubtedly the episode is a technical triumph. We’re often more aware of McGoohan’s stunt double at work in other episodes than we are here, and the star never fails to convince us that he’s playing two different people. The split screen is generally successful, with only the occasional sense that something isn’t quite right with an eye line. The fights are tightly cut, as you’d expect, although it helps when you have a fencing competition complete with visors.


Breaking with the standard, there’s no chase this time out. Perhaps it was thought that the fisticuffs were enough. There’s a moment where the music strikes up and you think one’s about to kick off, but it’s a false alarm.


Six: Yes, yes – I am Number 12. But sometimes in my dreams I’m… somebody else.
Twelve: Who?
Six: I don’t know. Sometimes in my dreams I resign from my job.

If Six’s slight cowing by this latest plot is hard to swallow, it’s no more so than Curtis (12’s real name) giving up very easily when Six sets to work on him. Two earlier extolled his virtues as an agent, so you’d expect him to be able to hold out and not admit to the Top Secret password after a minute or two of fist work. His demise is a first too; Rovers tend to immobilise their victims and Two is visibly shocked that this one has overstepped the mark (perhaps they have a form of vague sentience and have developed a dislike of Six?)


I suppose some credit should be due to Two for figuring out Six’s deception at the climax. Except that any self-respecting Two would have been alert to the potential confusion of double Sixes anyway. Indeed, surely a full physical examination would be a prerequisite before letting Twelve loose on the world again? It doesn’t help Rodgers’ case for being a compelling Two, and he’s the least impressive so far.


The Schizoid Man is an agreeable but unremarkable episode. We’re treated to a fine showcase for McGoohan, who delivers a dual tour de force. But in general this is too faintly familiar, the convolutions of the plot failing to coalesce into a genuinely intriguing narrative. 









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…

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…

Something something trident.

Aquaman (2018)
(SPOILERS) If Aquaman has a problem – although it actually has two – it’s the problem of the bloated blockbuster. There's just too much of it. And the more-more-more element eventual becomes wearing, even when most of that more-more-more is, on a scene-by-scene basis, terrifically executed. If there's one thing this movie proves above all else, it's that you can let director James Wan loose in any given sandpit and he’ll make an above-and-beyond castle out of it. Aquaman isn't a classic, but it isn’t for want of his trying.

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.

You look like an angry lizard!

Bohemian Rhapsody (2018)
(SPOILERS) I can quite see a Queen fan begrudging this latest musical biopic for failing to adhere to the facts of their illustrious career – but then, what biopic does steer a straight and true course? – making it ironic that they're the main fuel for Bohemian Rhapsody's box office success. Most other criticisms – and they're legitimate, on the whole – fall away in the face of a hugely charismatic star turn from Rami Malek as the band's frontman. He's the difference between a standard-issue, episodic, join-the-dots narrative and one that occasionally touches greatness, and most importantly, carries emotional heft.

The wolves are running. Perhaps you would do something to stop their bite?

The Box of Delights (1984)
If you were at a formative age when it was first broadcast, a festive viewing of The Box of Delights may well have become an annual ritual. The BBC adaptation of John Masefield’s 1935 novel is perhaps the ultimate cosy yuletide treat. On a TV screen, at any rate. To an extent, this is exactly the kind of unashamedly middle class-orientated bread-and-butter period production the corporation now thinks twice about; ever so posh kids having jolly adventures in a nostalgic netherworld of Interwar Britannia. Fortunately, there’s more to it than that. There is something genuinely evocative about Box’s mythic landscape, a place where dream and reality and time and place are unfixed and where Christmas is guaranteed a blanket of thick snow. Key to this is the atmosphere instilled by director Renny Rye. Most BBC fantasy fare doe not age well but The Box of Delights is blessed with a sinister-yet-familiar charm, such that even the creakier production decisions may be vi…

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 …

I take Quaaludes 10-15 times a day for my "back pain", Adderall to stay focused, Xanax to take the edge off, part to mellow me out, cocaine to wake me back up again, and morphine... Well, because it's awesome.

The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)
Along with Pain & Gain and The Great Gatsby, The Wolf of Wall Street might be viewed as the completion of a loose 2013 trilogy on the subject of success and excess; the American Dream gone awry. It’s the superior picture to its fellows, by turns enthralling, absurd, outrageous and hilarious. This is the fieriest, most deliriously vibrant picture from the director since the millennium turned. Nevertheless, stood in the company of Goodfellas, the Martin Scorsese film from which The Wolf of Wall Street consciously takes many of its cues, it is found wanting.

I was vaguely familiar with the title, not because I knew much about Jordan Belfort but because the script had been in development for such a long time (Ridley Scott was attached at one time). So part of the pleasure of the film is discovering how widely the story diverges from the Wall Street template. “The Wolf of Wall Street” suggests one who towers over the city like a behemoth, rather than a guy …

I am so sick of Scotland!

Outlaw/King (2018)
(SPOILERS) Proof that it isn't enough just to want to make a historical epic, you have to have some level of vision for it as well. Say what you like about Mel's Braveheart – and it isn't a very good film – it's got sensibility in spades. He knew what he was setting out to achieve, and the audience duly responded. What does David Mackenzie want from Outlaw/King (it's shown with a forward slash on the titles, so I'm going with it)? Ostensibly, and unsurprisingly, to restore the stature of Robert the Bruce after it was rather tarnished by Braveheart, but he has singularly failed to do so. More than that, it isn’t an "idea", something you can recognise or get behind even if you don’t care about the guy. You’ll never forget Mel's Wallace, for better or worse, but the most singular aspect of Chris Pine's Bruce hasn’t been his rousing speeches or heroic valour. No, it's been his kingly winky.

Mountains are old, but they're still green.

Roma (2018)
(SPOILERS) Roma is a critics' darling and a shoe-in for Best Foreign Film Oscar, with the potential to take the big prize to boot, but it left me profoundly indifferent, its elusive majesty remaining determinedly out of reach. Perhaps that's down to generally spurning autobiographical nostalgia fests – complete with 65mm widescreen black and white, so it's quite clear to viewers that the director’s childhood reverie equates to the classics of old – or maybe the elliptical characterisation just didn't grab me, but Alfonso Cuarón's latest amounts to little more than a sliver of substance beneath all that style.