Skip to main content

He’s a yobbo. A clever yobbo.

The Owl Service
Episode Six

The helpful recap establishes that Nancy was gifted the plates by Bertram (if this was stated earlier, I missed it). Should the adult themes of the serial have failed induce parental qualms over its suitability, then the strong language of this episode probably decided the case. Gwyn tells Nancy, “Drop dead, you miserable cow!” to which she replies “Is that what they teach you at the grammar?” Later he’s even more disrespectful, referring to Alison’s mother as a “Dirty minded bitch!” It’s enough to make you choke on your Rich Tea! This might be construed as evidence enough that he is the “yob” Roger now refers to him as. 



The threats of an existence behind the counter at the Co-op are ever present as Nancy’s now had her fill and given 48 hours notice (due to Clive harping on about the locked stable door). To be honest, and I know it’s a central theme, the class stuff does get a bit repetitive. At times a show not tell approach might be more effective; there’s an awful lot of telling going on, right down to Gwyn’s attempt to flee the valley at the climax, scrambling up a slate hill with “I told you, he’s a yob” echoing through his mind.


Much of this episode’s impact comes from Roger being a frightful stinker to Gwyn. His disgust at the latter crying on the stairs is another moment where Wallis successfully carries across the emotions of the previous episode. He refers to Gwyn’s public display as “absolutely embarrassing”. Because no one saw him blubbing the previous week, he’s able to lie to Alison that he hasn’t shed tears since he was a child. Their argument effectively character assassinates each other’s parent. She snobbily notes his “rough diamond dad” and he lays into her “bank book mum”. 



Roger has now retreated so much from the unexplained phenomena theory that he refers to earlier events as a “put-up job”. And, like any teenager on the defensive, he picks on Gwyn’s most painful insecurity and launches an offensive; his class. He’s learnt to be a horrible snob from his father, of course, and with the lines now drawn he’s free (after tentatively showing friendship for Gwyn in the early episodes) to mock him.


RogerHe’s not one of us. He never will be. He’s a yobbo. A clever yobbo.

He considers that the house will be better without “those two weirdos” and dismisses Gwyn’s future life with “He’ll become a teacher or something equally wet”. But again, these are his own insecurities coming out; he has a job lined up in the family firm that serves no vocational purpose. As Alison says, he should become a photographer (but he has a thousand and one reasons why he would fail at it). Later, he brings up the elocution lessons, which Alison mentioned sympathetically, to ridicule Gwyn (“How now, brown cow”). 



And there he is again, framed between Alison and Gwyn. The problem is, as I’ve mentioned before, that Wallis is a much better cad than Holden is a wayward hero. Cruel as Roger is, Gwyn comes off with so little nuance that we don’t really feel for him; or not nearly enough. And the streak of wit Wallis lends Roger occasionally lights up the screen. He does a great comedy accent, and his “Or is it the very nerve centre of the illicit Welsh whisky trade look you” is very funny, whatever Alison says to the contrary.


Alison is found blowing in the wind (“I’m one person for mummy and another with you. I can’t argue”) but in spite of generally coming across as more sympathetic (less judgemental) than Roger and Gwyn her shallowness is highlighted when she admits why she stopped meeting Gwyn (the threat of leaving the choir and the tennis club).


Plummer pulls some interesting visual choices in the scene where Gwyn comes across Alison sketching. Her reaction is from his point of view, lending the proceedings a threatening quality. Later he pulls a reverse of this, with Alison putting her hand in front of her (the camera’s) face when she asks Gwyn to “stop looking at me like that!


After the meandering narrative of the last two episodes, this one is blessed with meaty dramatic fireworks. The fantasy element remains subdued, even though Huw has a more substantial role. He continues to preside over the re-enactment of the legend, distracting Clive from discovering Gwyn and Alison (“Do you like my bonny-fire?”), leading Clive to reminisce over his working class roots (baking potatoes over an open fire).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Maybe he had one too many peanut butter and fried banana sandwiches.

3000 Miles to Graceland (2001) (SPOILERS) The kind of movie that makes your average Tarantino knockoff look classy, 3000 Miles to Graceland is both aggressively unpleasant and acutely absent any virtues, either as a script or a stylistic exercise. The most baffling thing about it is how it attracted Kevin Costner and Kurt Russell, particularly since both ought to have been extra choosy at this point, having toplined expensive bombs in the previous half decade that made them significantly less bankable names. And if you’re wondering how this managed to cost the $62m reported on Wiki, it didn’t; Franchise Pictures, one of the backers, was in the business of fraudulently inflating budgets .

We’re looking into a possible pattern of nationwide anti-Catholic hate crimes.

Vampires aka John Carpenter’s Vampires (1998) (SPOILERS) John Carpenter limps less-than-boldly onward, his desiccated cadaver no longer attentive to the filmic basics of quality, taste, discernment, rhyme or reason. Apparently, he made his pre-penultimate picture to see if his enthusiasm for the process truly had drained away, and he only went and discovered he really enjoyed himself. It doesn’t show. Vampires is as flat, lifeless, shoddily shot, framed and edited as the majority of his ’90s output, only with a repellent veneer of macho bombast spread on top to boot.

I dreamed about a guy in a dirty red and green sweater.

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) (SPOILERS) I first saw A Nightmare on Elm Street a little under a decade after its release, and I was distinctly underwhelmed five or so sequels and all the hype. Not that it didn’t have its moments, but there was an “It’ll do” quality that reflects most of the Wes Craven movies I’ve seen. Aside from the postmodern tease of A New Nightmare – like Last Action Hero , unfairly maligned – I’d never bothered with the rest of the series, in part because I’m just not that big a horror buff, but also because the rule that the first is usually the best in any series, irrespective of genre, tends to hold out more often than not. So now I’m finally getting round to them, and it seemed only fair to start by giving Freddy’s first another shot. My initial reaction holds true.

Remember. Decision. Consequence.

Day Break (2006) (SPOILERS) Day Break is the rare series that was lucky to get cancelled. And not in a mercy-killing way. It got to tell its story. Sure, apparently there were other stories. Other days to break. But would it have justified going there? Or would it have proved tantalising/reticent about the elusive reason its protagonist has to keep stirring and repeating? You bet it would. Offering occasional crumbs, and then, when it finally comes time to wrap things up, giving an explanation that satisfies no one/is a cop out/offers a hint at some nebulous existential mission better left to the viewer to conjure up on their own. Best that it didn’t even try to go there.

I must remind you that the scanning experience is usually a painful one.

Scanners (1981) (SPOILERS) David Cronenberg has made a career – albeit, he may have “matured” a little over the past few decades, so it is now somewhat less foregrounded – from sticking up for the less edifying notions of evolution and modern scientific thought. The idea that regress is, in fact, a form of progress, and unpropitious developments are less dead ends than a means to a state or states as yet unappreciated. He began this path with some squeam-worthy body horrors, before genre hopping to more explicit science fiction with Scanners , and with it, greater critical acclaim and a wider audience. And it remains a good movie, even as it suffers from an unprepossessing lead and rather fumbles the last furlong, cutting to the chase when a more measured, considered approach would have paid dividends.

You seem particularly triggered right now. Can you tell me what happened?

Trailers The Matrix Resurrections   The Matrix A woke n ? If nothing else, the arrival of The Matrix Resurrections trailer has yielded much retrospective back and forth on the extent to which the original trilogy shat the bed. That probably isn’t its most significant legacy, of course, in terms of a series that has informed, subconsciously or otherwise, intentionally or otherwise, much of the way in which twenty-first century conspiracy theory has been framed and discussed. It is however, uncontested that a first movie that was officially the “best thing ever”, that aesthetically and stylistically reinvigorated mainstream blockbuster cinema in a manner unseen again until Fury Road , squandered all that good will with astonishing speed by the time 2003 was over.

We got two honkies out there dressed like Hassidic diamond merchants.

The Blues Brothers (1980) (SPOILERS) I had limited awareness of John Belushi’s immense mythos before  The Blues Brothers arrived on retail video in the UK (so 1991?) My familiarity with SNL performers really began with Ghostbusters ’ release, which meant picking up the trail of Jake and Elwood was very much a retrospective deal. I knew Animal House , knew Belushi’s impact there, knew 1941 (the Jaws parody was the best bit), knew Wired was a biopic better avoided. But the minor renaissance he, and they, underwent in the UK in the early ’90s seemed to have been initiated by Jive Bunny and the Mastermixers, of all things; Everybody Needs Somebody was part of their That Sounds Good to Me medley, the first of their hits not to make No.1, and Everybody ’s subsequent single release then just missed the Top Ten. Perhaps it was this that hastened CIC/Universal to putting the comedy out on video. Had the movie done the rounds on UK TV in the 80s? If so, it managed to pass me by. Even bef

Maybe I’m a heel who hates guys who hate heels.

Crimewave (1985) (SPOILERS) A movie’s makers’ disowning it doesn’t necessarily mean there’s nothing of worth therein, just that they don’t find anything of worth in it. Or the whole process of making it too painful to contemplate. Sam Raimi’s had a few of those, experiencing traumas with Darkman a few years after Crimewave . But I, blissfully unaware of such issues, was bowled over by it when I caught it a few years after its release (I’d hazard it was BBC2’s American Wave 2 season in 1988). This was my first Sam Raimi movie, and I was instantly a fan of whoever it was managed to translate the energy and visual acumen of a cartoon to the realm of live action. The picture is not without its problems – and at least some of them directly correspond to why it’s so rueful for Raimi – but that initial flair I recognised still lifts it.

I admit it. I live in a highly excited state of overstimulation.

Videodrome (1983) (SPOILERS) I’m one of those who thinks Cronenberg’s version of Total Recall would have been much more satisfying than the one we got (which is pretty good, but flawed; I’m referring to the Arnie movie, of course, not the Farrell). The counter is that Videodrome makes a Cronenberg Philip K Dick adaptation largely redundant. It makes his later Existenz largely redundant too. Videodrome remains a strikingly potent achievement, taking the directors thematic obsessions to the next level, one as fixated on warping the mind as the body. Like many Cronenbergs, it isn’t quite there, but it exerts a hold on the viewer not dissimilar to the one slowly entwining its protagonist Max Renn (James Woods).

White nights getting to you?

Insomnia (2002) (SPOILERS) I’ve never been mad keen on Insomnia . It’s well made, well-acted, the screenplay is solid and it fits in neatly with Christopher Nolan’s abiding thematic interests, but it’s… There’s something entirely adequateabout it. It isn’t pushing any kind of envelope. It’s happy to be the genre-bound crime study it is and nothing more, something emphasised by Pacino’s umpteenth turn as an under-pressure cop.