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

We live in a twilight world.

Tenet (2020)
(SPOILERS) I’ve endured a fair few confusingly-executed action sequences in movies – more than enough, actually – but I don’t think I’ve previously had the odd experience of being on the edge of my seat during one while simultaneously failing to understand its objectives and how those objectives are being attempted. Which happened a few times during Tenet. If I stroll over to the Wiki page and read the plot synopsis, it is fairly explicable (fairly) but as a first dive into this Christopher Nolan film, I frequently found it, if not impenetrable, then most definitely opaque.

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds. Juno and the Paycock, set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.

James Bond. You appear with the tedious inevitability of an unloved season.

Moonraker (1979)
Depending upon your disposition, and quite possibly age, Moonraker is either the Bond film that finally jumped the shark or the one that is most gloriously redolent of Roger Moore’s knowing take on the character. Many Bond aficionados will no doubt utter its name with thinly disguised contempt, just as they will extol with gravity how Timothy Dalton represented a masterful return to the core values of the series. If you regard For Your Eyes Only as a refreshing return to basics after the excesses of the previous two entries, and particularly the space opera grandstanding of this one, it’s probably fair to say you don’t much like Roger Moore’s take on Bond.

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…

I mean, I am just a dumb bunny, but, we are good at multiplying.

Zootropolis (2016)
(SPOILERS) The key to Zootropolis’ creative success isn’t so much the conceit of its much-vaunted allegory regarding prejudice and equality, or – conversely – the fun to be had riffing on animal stereotypes (simultaneously clever and obvious), or even the appealing central duo voiced by Ginnifier Goodwin (as first rabbit cop Judy Hopps) and Jason Bateman (fox hustler Nick Wilde). Rather, it’s coming armed with that rarity for an animation; a well-sustained plot that doesn’t devolve into overblown set pieces or rest on the easy laurels of musical numbers and montages.

Anything can happen in Little Storping. Anything at all.

The Avengers 2.22: Murdersville
Brian Clemens' witty take on village life gone bad is one of the highlights of the fifth season. Inspired by Bad Day at Black Rock, one wonders how much Murdersville's premise of unsettling impulses lurking beneath an idyllic surface were set to influence both Straw Dogs and The Wicker Mana few years later (one could also suggest it premeditates the brand of backwoods horrors soon to be found in American cinema from the likes of Wes Craven and Tobe Hooper).

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991)
(SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989)
(SPOILERS) There’s Jaws, there’s Star Wars, and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy, to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “mainly boring”.

Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the system when Burton did it (even…