Skip to main content

That was the best fruitcake I’ve ever tasted.

The Prisoner
7. Many Happy Returns


We want information.

Number Six awakes in a deserted Village. Fashioning a raft, he sets out to sea. After several weeks of sailing, Six encounters some gunrunners. He overpowers them but when they break free, Six flees their vessel and washes up on a beach. He encounters some gypsies and, despite the fact that they don’t speak English, it soon becomes clear that he is in Britain. Avoiding a police roadblock, he climbs in the back of a truck and eventually arrives in London. Returning to his house, he finds that it is now occupied by Mrs Butterworth, who has also taken possession of his car. She provides him with food and clean clothes and he sets off to see his former superiors. Informing them of the Village and detailing his journey, he is initially met with scepticism until the facts are independently confirmed. Six boards a jet to scout for possible locations of the Village, but he is unaware that a Village operative has replaced the pilot. Ejected, Six parachutes back into the Village. It is still deserted, and he returns to his house where the appliances switch on as if by magic. Mrs Butterworth, revealed as Number Two, walks in holding a birthday cake. She greets him with “Many happy returns”.


So how do you like it?

The problem with Many Happy Returns is that it isn’t particularly inspired. We’ve already seen Six escape the Village, in the second episode no less, and this repeat performance is very linear in form, pedestrian even. Whilst the episode is action-heavy (Six doesn’t even speak until 23 minutes in), it fails to grip as a story. The Number Six we see here is no wiser regarding his lot, allowing himself to be willingly led by the nose and expecting the audience to follow suit. We know going in that this is an elaborate ruse of some kind, but the inconsequentiality of it all comes as something of a, not too welcome, surprise. Perhaps if Many Happy Returns possessed a modicum of wit the shrug of the bad taste joke ending would be more effective.


George Markstein, the self-styled co-creator of the show, thought a lot of this episode, the thirteenth shot (the last one in the first production block and the also the final one he was involved in). He also rated the (superior) Chimes of Big Ben, and thought they both showed neat storytelling. Which is very telling, as this is the kind of unimaginative spy fare that could show up in any old series. There’s an overriding feeling of “So what?” to the piece. What was even the point of the powers-that-be of the Village laying on this scheme? Anthony Skene penned the episode and, given that his previous form delivered two of the best, A. B. and C. and Dance of the Dead, the lack of verve here is even more disappointing.



The powers-that-be of the Village aren’t depicted pursuing the usual “Why did you resign?” information. If the final scene tells it correctly, Two cooked the whole thing up as a twisted birthday present. Which in itself doesn’t make any sense, as the Village would have to know exactly how long it would take Six and his hand-made raft to reach London. There are far too many variables at play, including Six possibly drowning en route, being disposed of by the gun runners (unless they are Village operatives adding a touch of verisimilitude to Six’s escapade) or being blown off course. There’s not even any telling that he would have gone by sea. His initial recce shows the Village surrounded by mountains, and it’s a toss-up between which is more dangerous, a spot of climbing or seafaring.


Now, there’s an argument to be had that none of this is really pertinent; requiring the story to align itself too closely with thorough logic misses the point that there is no release for Six anywhere. He can go back to London, speak to his heads, and still he can’t escape the clutches of the Village. This is also the episode that bears the legend “1” on the door of Six’s house, an announcement of the existential crisis of its protagonist. I could accept the case for a metaphorical reading of Six’s return if there was anything more than that to get one’s teeth into. But the whole exercise (and it does feel like an exercise, especially the stripped-down first 20 minutes) is so stragihtforward and unexceptional, it’s difficult to really mount a defence.



The lustre of the opening scenes in the deserted Village soon wears off; there are some very pretty shots (Six up the bell tower) and some nice touches (the black cat, who will return the following week). On the plus side, since we’re used to seeing his double on location shoots, McGoohan is in pretty much every frame. Less surprisingly so when you realise that he also directed the thing, under the pseudonym Joseph Serf. As a visual exercise, Serf’s work can’t be faulted. It’s the material he is working with that doesn’t stand up.



Because there’s so little intrigue (this is an action travelogue, really) the mind is set to wander and the resulting questions that arise can only lead to dissatisfaction. Since we aren’t privy to Six’s doubts, we assume he’s a bit of a doofus to go along with things. One might have expected a Six who had been trapped in the Village this long to call his guards’ bluff and sit tight until they showed their hand. Anything that comes to easy is sure to lead to failure.




Six: Where is this?

Still, there are a number of nicely judged scenes along the way. The fake-out with the gypsies, suggesting this is a foreign land, is quite clever. And there’s an amusing bit of action prior to this where you realise that having a bedraggled Patrick McGoohan pursuing you down a quiet country path would be a rather unnerving experience. There’s a wonderful editing flourish when Six, stirring in the back of the truck in which he has secreted himself, hears loud noises and leaps out. McGoohan’s reveal, that he is on a busy London street, is outstanding.


Six: Tomorrow’s my birthday.

His interaction with “Mrs Butterworth” (Georgina Cookson, who also appeared in one of the dream sequences in A. B. and C.; make of that what you will) is engaging, and it’s fun to see Six (or Peter Smith, as he introduces himself) viewed almost as a bit of a toy boy by the frisky Cookson. There’s a nice little sign of the times aside too when, in response to Six suggesting she must think he’s crazy, she replies “Who isn’t these days?” Six demolishing a plate of sandwiches is one of the few overtly humorous moments in Many Happy Returns, and that might also be part of the reason the episode as whole fails; it lacks the panache and flourish of the series at its best.


Six: I also have a problem. I’m not sure which side runs this Village.
Colonel: A mutual problem.
Six: Which I’m going to solve.


It’s nice to see Six in his car, driving through London “for real” and not just as part of the opening credits, but what follows feels like we’ve seen it all before. Because we have. The difference between the “try to convince your superiors” here and in Chimes of Big Ben is that it isn’t (as far as we know; it might be) a ruse. At any rate, it isn’t a ruse designed to extract information. Patrick Cargill’s Thorpe (Cargill appeared as Two in the episode shot prior to this one, but broadcast three down the line, Hammer into Anvil) takes a line of suspicion, while Donald Sinden’s Colonel has a more benevolent air (Sinden and Cargill are disappointingly underused, given their calibre).


At least the expected issues they have with him (it looks dodgy that Six resigned, disappeared and then returned) are not reduced to the old interrogation routine, which is something. Another positive is the intentional ambiguity over whether or not the Colonel and Thorpe are in on the plot. We are shown that their checks on Six’s story are actually carried out, but this doesn’t necessarily protest their innocence. Six’s doubt over who runs the Village (“A place with many means of breaking a man”) is never resolved. We assume the Village agent infiltrated British Intelligence and bopped the actual pilot on the head, but he may just have been given the nod to step in.


Colonel: He’s an old friend. Who never gives up.


The pilot’s parting shot to Six as he is ejected (“Be seeing you”) is suitably flippant, and Six’s impassivity at his return is appropriate (but again, surely Six would know better than to unguardedly get into a plane destined for his former prison – doesn’t he realise that’s asking for trouble?) 



Unless we’ve been fed a line, this episode appears to resolve where the Village is located; somewhere off the coast of Morocco, southwest of Portugal and Spain. But with the flora and skies of North Wales.


Many Happy Returns falls resoundingly short in terms of wit and invention. If this was Markstein’s ideal vision of the show then it’s a blessed relief he flounced off. When the best scene of an episode involves Six eating some sandwiches, you know you’re in trouble. Whilst Many Happy Returnsis not actually bad (only one episode of the series gets two thumbs down), it’s quite close to being banal.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mondo bizarro. No offence man, but you’re in way over your head.

The X-Files 8.7: Via Negativa I wasn’t as down on the last couple of seasons of The X-Files as most seemed to be. For me, the mythology arc walked off a cliff somewhere around the first movie, with only the occasional glimmer of something worthwhile after that. So the fact that the show was tripping over itself with super soldiers and Mulder’s abduction/his and Scully’s baby (although we all now know it wasn’t, sheesh ), anything to stretch itself beyond breaking point in the vain hope viewers would carry on dangling, didn’t really make much odds. Of course, it finally snapped with the wretched main arc when the show returned, although the writing was truly on the wall with Season 9 finale The Truth . For the most part, though, I found 8 and 9 more watchable than, say 5 or 7. They came up with their fair share of engaging standalones, one of which I remembered to be Via Negativa .

Isn’t it true, it’s easier to be a holy man on the top of a mountain?

The Razor’s Edge (1984) (SPOILERS) I’d hadn’t so much a hankering as an idle interest in finally getting round to seeing Bill Murray’s passion project. Partly because it seemed like such an odd fit. And partly because passion isn’t something you tend to associate with any Murray movie project, involving as it usually does laidback deadpan. Murray, at nigh-on peak fame – only cemented by the movie he agreed to make to make this movie – embarks on a serious-acting-chops dramatic project, an adaptation of W Somerset Maugham’s story of one man’s journey of spiritual self-discovery. It should at least be interesting, shouldn’t it? A real curio? Alas, not. The Razor’s Edge is desperately turgid.

You have done well to keep so much hair, when so many’s after it.

Jeremiah Johnson (1972) (SPOILERS) Hitherto, I was most familiar with Jeremiah Johnson in the form of a popular animated gif of beardy Robert Redford smiling and nodding in slow zoom close up (a moment that is every bit as cheesy in the film as it is in the gif). For whatever reason, I hadn’t mustered the enthusiasm to check out the 1970s’ The Revenant until now (well, beard-wise, at any rate). It’s easy to distinguish the different personalities at work in the movie. The John Milius one – the (mythic) man against the mythic landscape; the likeably accentuated, semi-poetic dialogue – versus the more naturalistic approach favoured by director Sydney Pollack and star Redford. The fusion of the two makes for a very watchable, if undeniably languorous picture. It was evidently an influence on Dances with Wolves in some respects, although that Best Picture Oscar winner is at greater pains to summon a more sensitive portrayal of Native Americans (and thus, perversely, at times a more patr

Schnell, you stinkers! Come on, raus!

Private’s Progress (1956) (SPOILERS) Truth be told, there’s good reason sequel I’m Alright Jack reaps the raves – it is, after all, razor sharp and entirely focussed in its satire – but Private’s Progress is no slouch either. In some respects, it makes for an easy bedfellow with such wartime larks as Norman Wisdom’s The Square Peg (one of the slapstick funny man’s better vehicles). But it’s also, typically of the Boulting Brothers’ unsentimental disposition, utterly remorseless in rebuffing any notions of romantic wartime heroism, nobility and fighting the good fight. Everyone in the British Army is entirely cynical, or terrified, or an idiot.

My Doggett would have called that crazy.

The X-Files 9.4: 4-D I get the impression no one much liked Agent Monica Reyes (Annabeth Gish), but I felt, for all the sub-Counsellor Troi, empath twiddling that dogged her characterisation, she was a mostly positive addition to the series’ last two years (of its main run). Undoubtedly, pairing her with Doggett, in anticipation of Gillian Anderson exiting just as David Duchovny had – you rewatch these seasons and you wonder where her head was at in hanging on – made for aggressively facile gender-swapped conflict positions on any given assignment. And generally, I’d have been more interested in seeing how two individuals sympathetic to the cause – her and Mulder – might have got on. Nevertheless, in an episode like 4-D you get her character, and Doggett’s, at probably their best mutual showing.

It’s not as if she were a… maniac, a raving thing.

Psycho (1960) (SPOILERS) One of cinema’s most feted and most studied texts, and for good reason. Even if the worthier and more literate psycho movie of that year is Michael Powell’s Peeping Tom . One effectively ended a prolific director’s career and the other made its maker more in demand than ever, even if he too would discover he had peaked with his populist fear flick. Pretty much all the criticism and praise of Psycho is entirely valid. It remains a marvellously effective low-budget shocker, one peppered with superb performances and masterful staging. It’s also fairly rudimentary in tone, character and psychology. But those negative elements remain irrelevant to its overall power.

You’re a disgrace, sir... Weren’t you at Harrow?

Our Man in Marrakesh aka Bang! Bang! You’re Dead (1966) (SPOILERS) I hadn’t seen this one in more than three decades, and I had in mind that it was a decent spy spoof, well populated with a selection of stalwart British character actors in supporting roles. Well, I had the last bit right. I wasn’t aware this came from the stable of producer Harry Alan Towers, less still of his pedigree, or lack thereof, as a sort of British Roger Corman (he tried his hand at Star Wars with The Shape of Things to Come and Conan the Barbarian with Gor , for example). More legitimately, if you wish to call it that, he was responsible for the Christopher Lee Fu Manchu flicks. Our Man in Marrakesh – riffing overtly on Graham Greene’s Our Man in Havana in title – seems to have in mind the then popular spy genre and its burgeoning spoofs, but it’s unsure which it is; too lightweight to work as a thriller and too light on laughs to elicit a chuckle.

I tell you, it saw me! The hanged man’s asphyx saw me!

The Asphyx (1972) (SPOILERS) There was such a welter of British horror from the mid 60s to mid 70s, even leaving aside the Hammers and Amicuses, that it’s easy to lose track of them in the shuffle. This one, the sole directorial effort of Peter Newbrook (a cameraman for David Lean, then a cinematographer), has a strong premise and a decent cast, but it stumbles somewhat when it comes to taking that premise any place interesting. On the plus side, it largely eschews the grue. On the minus, directing clearly wasn’t Newbrook’s forte, and even aided by industry stalwart cinematographer Freddie Young (also a go-to for Lean), The Aspyhx is stylistically rather flat.

The best thing in the world for the inside of a man or a woman is the outside of a horse.

Marnie (1964) (SPOILERS) Hitch in a creative ditch. If you’ve read my Vertigo review, you’ll know I admired rather than really liked the picture many fete as his greatest work. Marnie is, in many ways, a redux, in the way De Palma kept repeating himself in the early 80s only significantly less delirious and… well, compelling. While Marnie succeeds in commanding the attention fitfully, it’s usually for the wrong reasons. And Hitch, digging his heels in as he strives to fashion a star against public disinterest – he failed to persuade Grace Kelly out of retirement for Marnie Rutland – comes entirely adrift with his leads.

You know what I sometimes wish? I sometimes wish I were ordinary like you. Ordinary and dead like all the others.

Séance on a Wet Afternoon (1964) (SPOILERS) Bryan Forbes’ adaptation of Mark McShane’s 1961’s novel has been much acclaimed. It boasts a distinctive storyline and effective performances from its leads, accompanied by effective black-and-white cinematography from Gerry Turpin and a suitably atmospheric score from John Barry. I’m not sure Forbes makes the most of the material, however, as he underlines Séance on a Wet Afternoon ’s inherently theatrical qualities at the expense of its filmic potential.