Skip to main content

As if it were all planned.

Children of the Stones
4: Narrowing the Circle


We’ve seen a fair bit of Kevin (Darren Hatch) before now, but we have barely glimpsed his father, Dr Lyle (Richard Matthews). Their role in this fourth episode is essentially a repeat of Jimmo and Tom Browning in the third, but in a much more detailed form.

MargaretAs if it were all planned.
Dr LyleNo proof. Just unspecified reactions to unexplained data. Planned by who?


Set against the “surviving” villagers (six in total, excluding Dai and Hendrick), Lyle becomes the arch-sceptic and logician. Adam references “Happy Day-itis” as a condition they will succumb to in due course, and it is noted that families seem to change together. Lyle poo-poos this, and assumes the scientific approach that Adam previously extolled. There’s a nice moment where Lyle asks them why they don’t leave if they are so concerned, and the weight of the capitalist system provides an answer; they need their jobs. “So you are, in effect, trapped,” he responds. Is this The Prisoner-esque case the series is making? That we are all trapped in our own Milbury construct, impelled to become Happy Day pod people living out a pre-programmed existence?


MatthewI’m inside his head. I can read his mind.

Like pod people, the Happy Day villagers never get sick, (there are 55 patients in the village; before Adam and Matthew arrived there were 53, the same number as the stones). So Lyle is pleased to be called out of town to an old patient. The concept of psychometry (once again, Margaret does the explaining) is introduced, as Matthew discovers that the gloves Lyle has left behind are full of static. When he puts one on, he sees what Lyle sees, and announces that something has blocked his exit from the Milbury.  As per his flip-flop style, Adam is now called upon to be sceptical of his son’s experience. He is relieved when Lyle surfaces the next day and disavows Matthew’s account. In an inevitable, but no less satisfying for it, moment, Lyle exits with the farewell words “Happy Day to you”, so confirming Matthew’s thoughts.


This is further underlined by the behaviour of Kevin, who can best be described as right little shit. Dai is onto him being a wrong ‘un from the start, reluctant to allow him to enter his sanctuary (“What did you bring him for?”), which he has sealed up in a blind panic over what may be in store. And rightly so; the terrible oik demands Dai hand over the amulet. His casting of the bones has repeatedly revealed the shape of a serpent, and presumably it is this serpent, in the form of Kevin, that has now gained access. 



As a result, Dai’s protective amulet crumbles and he is doomed. It’s too late when Matthew and ever-so posh Sandra later suss out Kevin and disinvite his company (“No, it’s time you got to school”).  With all the speculation over how the not-we are turned, one begins to wonder if there’s something nasty in Mrs Crabtree’s chocolate cake.


The paralleling of Dai and Hendrick in Three is now verbalised in the recognition that neither has been affected by Happy Dayitis; Dai has been safe at the sanctuary, while Hendrick is protected at the centre of the ley lines. In this episode Hendrick puts me in mind of Christopher Lee’s Lord Summerisle, presiding over Summer Isle in The Wicker Man. Both are the educated gentlemen presiding over superstitious and impressionable locals. And there’s a burst of that 1976 sunshine as he, Adam and Margaret discuss local lore in the grounds of the church. Of course, he professes no knowledge of the protection granted to him at the manor, while simultaneously noting how fortunate it is that Margaret has answered “Milbury’s call”.


When Dai’s amulet is broken, it seems so is his spirit, and he goes ranging off over the hills. When Matthew sees him in the distance he gives pursuit. But, when he arrives, there is only a stone there, one that wasn’t present before. Margaret notes that this is where the Barber Surgeon was known to have died, but the stone was removed years before and there is nothing left now. 



When Matthew takes them back to the spot, Dai is found lying there all dead and bloodied. It’s an effective moment, as the disturbing voices intrude; the gap between past and present within the loop is blurring.  This is the first episode that really ups the stakes; not only have the remaining numbers of the free been sorely impacted, but the one in-the-know ally has been felled.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

There are times when I miss the darkness. It is hard to live always in the light.

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…

I had that Christopher Marlowe in my boat once.

Shakespeare in Love (1998)
(SPOILERS) You see? Sometimes Oscar can get it right. Not that the backlash post-announcement would have you crediting any such. No, Saving Private Ryan had the rug unscrupulously pulled from under it by Harvey Weinstein essentially buying Shakespeare in Love’s Best Picture through a lavish promotional campaign. So unfair! It is, of course, nothing of the sort. If the rest of Private Ryan were of the same quality as its opening sequence, the Spielberg camp might have had a reasonable beef, but Shakespeare in Love was simply in another league, quality wise, first and foremost thanks to a screenplay that sang like no other in recent memory. And secondly thanks to Gwyneth Paltrow, so good and pure, before she showered us with goop.

Move away from the jams.

Aladdin (2019)
(SPOILERS) I was never overly enamoured by the early ‘90s renaissance of Disney animation, so the raves over Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin left me fairly unphased. On the plus side, that means I came to this live action version fairly fresh (prince); not quite a whole new world but sufficiently unversed in the legend to appreciate it as its own thing. And for the most part, Aladdin can be considered a moderate success. There may not be a whole lot of competition for that crown (I’d give the prize to Pete’s Dragon, except that it was always part-live action), but this one sits fairly comfortably in the lead.

What you do is very baller. You're very anarchist.

Lady Bird (2017)
(SPOILERS) You can see the Noah Baumbach influence on Lady Bird, Greta Gerwig’s directorial debut, with whom she collaborated on Frances Ha; an intimate, lo-fi, post-Woody Allen (as in, post-feted, respected Woody Allen) dramedy canvas that has traditionally been the New Yorker’s milieu. But as an adopted, spiritual New Yorker, I suspect Gerwig honourably qualifies, even as Lady Bird is a love letter/ nostalgia trip to her home city of Sacramento.

The Statue of Liberty is kaput.

Saving Private Ryan (1998)
(SPOILERS) William Goldman said of Saving Private Ryan, referencing the film’s titular objective in Which Lie Did I Tell? that it “becomes, once he is found, a disgrace”. “Hollywood horseshit” he emphasised, lest you were in doubt as to his feelings. While I had my misgivings about the picture on first viewing, I was mostly, as many were, impacted by its visceral prowess (which is really what it is, brandishing it like only a director who’s just seen Starship Troopers but took away none of its intent could). So I thought, yeah Goldman’s onto something here, if possibly slightly exaggerating for effect. But no, he’s actually spot-on. If Saving Private Ryan had been a twenty-minute short, it would rightly muster all due praise for its war-porn aesthetic, but unfortunately there’s a phoney, sentimental, hokey tale attached to that opening, replete with clichéd characters, horribly earnest, honorific music and “exciting!” action to engage your interest. There are…

Why would I turn into a filing cabinet?

Captain Marvel (2019)
(SPOILERS) All superhero movies are formulaic to a greater or lesser degree. Mostly greater. The key to an actually great one – or just a pretty good one – is making that a virtue, rather than something you’re conscious of limiting the whole exercise. The irony of the last two stand-alone MCU pictures is that, while attempting to bring somewhat down-the-line progressive cachet to the series, they’ve delivered rather pedestrian results. Of course, that didn’t dim Black Panther’s cultural cachet (and what do I know, swathes of people also profess to loving it), and Captain Marvel has hit half a billion in its first few days – it seems that, unless you’re poor unloved Ant-Man, an easy $1bn is the new $700m for the MCU – but neither’s protagonist really made that all-important iconic impact.

I’m the spoiled toff who lives in the manor.

Robin Hood (2018)
(SPOILERS) Good grief. I took the disdain that greeted Otto Bathurst’s big screen debut with a pinch of salt, on the basis that Guy Ritchie’s similarly-inclined lads-in-duds retelling of King Arthur was also lambasted, and that one turned out to be pretty good fun for the most part. But a passing resemblance is as close as these two would-be franchises get (that, and both singularly failed to start their respective franchises). Robin Hood could, but it definitely didn’t.

I should have mailed it to the Marx Brothers.

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
When your hero(es) ride off into the sunset at the end of a film, it’s usually a pretty clear indication that a line is being drawn under their adventures. Sure, rumours surfaced during the ‘90s of various prospective screenplays for a fourth outing for the whip-cracking archeologist. But I’m dubious anyone really expected it to happen. There seemed to be a natural finality to Last Crusade that made the announcement of his 2007 return nostalgically welcome but otherwise unwarranted. That it turned out so tepid merely seemed like confirmation of what we already knew; Indy’s time was past.

It’s the Mount Everest of haunted houses.

The Legend of Hell House (1973)
(SPOILERS) In retrospect, 1973 looks like a banner year for the changing face of the horror movie. The writing was on the wall for Hammer, which had ruled the roost in Britain for so long, and in the US the release of The Exorcist completed a transformation of the genre that had begun with Polanski’s Rosemary’s Baby; the realistic horror film, where the terror was to be found in the everyday (the home, the family). Then there was Don’t Look Now, which refracted horror tropes through a typically Nic Roeg eye, fracturing time and vision in a meditative exploration of death and grief. The Wicker Man, meanwhile, would gather its reputation over the passing years. It stands as a kind of anti-horror movie, eschewing standard scares and shock tactics for a dawning realisation of the starkness of opposing belief systems and the fragility of faith.

In comparison to this trio, The Legend of Hell House is something of a throwback; its slightly stagey tone, and cobweb…