Skip to main content

I believe I shall be very happy here.

Children of the Stones
7: Full Circle


And so, the finale. This flip-flopping of characters in order to provide sufficient exposition is occasionally a little too evident (Matthew feels the need to reaffirm that cycles are repeating themselves to his father, who is well aware of this, or was the previous episode) but there’s a nice line in philosophical clarification during the opening section.


Earlier I noted how pagan beliefs were seemingly cast in a negative light, in favour of Christianity as a bastion that wards off such spells. Now, the balance is redressed. The goings-on in Milbury are cast as an aberration. It may be something of a token gesture, since any kid watching will think “Ohh scary nasty pagans” but it’s an important distinction to make (interesting too that, like Mr. Magister in The Daemons, Hendrick sets up operations of evil in the basement of the local church; the corruption of all that is on the surface sacrosanct).


AdamPerhaps it had some sort of benign power. But then, when the supernova became a black hole, the power was reversed.

It’s the sort of thing John Carpenter, with his anti-god of Prince of Darkness, would love. There are some curiously Christian riffing lines too. “In the beginning was the star… and the star was some sort of God” recalls “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God”; by its nature the echoing suggests a corruption of purity, which has occurred in the form of the black hole.


Adam also qualifies the possible takes on Hendrick and the priest; that when the power of the implosion was harnessed, he perhaps thought the process was for the villagers’ own good (yet Hendrick absolves himself from the conditioning undergone by the people). Hendrick’s concept of evil, we are led to believe, is “the capacity to do wrong”. He refers to the ritual as a method of “purging the community of sin” (one might see the happy day zombies as a metaphor for “Born Again” Christians), and Adam again accuses him of assuming the role of a priest

HendrickYour sin is my sin. Your guilt is my guilt. You are free. Happy day indeed. My flock is cleansed, my task is done.


A mention of the day-for-night filming we’ve seen throughout. Often I’ve found such a device distracting but I think it works in this serial, adding to the pervading sense of the uncanny.


Adam’s plan to set the clocks five minutes fast is simple but effective; there’s a tension to their work, with the constant background chanting heard outside. And the decision to set them fast rather than slow turns out to have the added bonus of ensnaring Hendrick, who is still at the table when the alignment with the Great Bear (Ursa Major) occurs. When the beam captures Hendrick, we see him as the ancient seer he once was.


Prior to this, Adam does his best to disparage the airs and graces of Hendrick’s room, referring to it as “exactly the sort of thing I would have expected of a man of your conceit to have chosen”. Presumably the piercing beam of light is partially subjective, as even with his chair turned Hendrick would notice that no such impact occurred this time round. 



LinkMaster! They are still impure! The circle is broken. Your protection is gone!

Link’s words are all we really need to explain what takes place. I mean, why exactly the villagers turn to stone is not clarified (only calcified). A realisation of the ages this has played out over? If the number of stones represent the number of people, it nevertheless cannot mean they are one and the same, as these people turn to stone (additional stones). Then again, presumably these new stones vanish with the reset?


The escape is especially dramatic, with shades of Lot’s wife, as Adam instructs Margaret “Don’t look back”. It isn’t just adults who succumb; we see young Bob stonified. So, as with the painting, villagers are turning to stone as two travellers flee the site to the safety of the sanctuary.


As noted, the specifics of the reset that occur remain elusive. Dai is not only reconstituted, but when Adam and Matthew awake his sanctuary is redressed; now it appears that he is a sharpener of knives and of a disgruntled disposition, uttering that he is no friend to Adam. Yet the telltale bones in the shape of a serpent that Dai cast some days earlier are still there. 



The villagers are back to normal, and unlike Dai they recognise Adam and Matthew. The distinction in this process is unclear, although it allows for a suggestion of unrequited potential between Adam and Margaret.


MargaretAre you still determined to leave?
AdamIf we can.
MargaretI’m glad we’ve got such a hold on you. It’s been nice.
AdamFor me too.

Aw, that’s quite sad. Still, I’m sure they’ll meet again…


MatthewDid it happen, or didn’t it?
AdamI don’t know, Matt. I just don’t know.
MatthewPerhaps there was another circle besides the stones. Time. Perhaps that’s circular too.
AdamYou mean. It might all happen again one day.
MatthewIt may already be happening. To the people inside the time trap.


And as if on cue, a car goes past containing Iain Cuthbertson, this time with slicked back hair and sporting a bow tie. He drives up to the manor and is greeted by Link; there is “For Sale” sign outside (that was… quick), and we are told that he, Sir Joshua Lytton, is retiring here from London (“I believe I shall be very happy here”). Link now has a moustache.


It’s unclear, if this is an instant reset, how many times has this happened over thousands of years. And did Joshua Litten just wink fully formed into existence? Should Margaret and Sandra have been reconstituted in the village (the time trap) since they arrived as outsiders? While Litten’s arrival works for dramatic purposes, and we see similar resets with Dai and Link, it resists being nailed down. After all, if Litten is there to begin his work all over again, won’t Adam and Matthew have to return to defeat him once more? Which won’t really work if they know in advance what they must do. Perhaps the outsiders incarnate differently each time? Or perhaps Litten is not set to achieve the things that Hendrick did. Maybe such cycles of achievement are sporadic, within longer ones that remain dormant (what happened during the cycle before Hendrick arrived)?


Overall:


Children of the Stones isn’t a serial that really demands such extensive probing; it’s success is in immediate impact and whispered remembrance, so it is all the more rewarding that it withstands repeat viewings. And let’s face it, time travel/loop stories never tie things up in a wholly consistent way; the holes are intrinsic to the construction. The effects of the passage of time on the show have been mainly cosmetic. It still fires the imagination and should continue to inspire generations to come.


Wikipedia provides a useful guide to the different time periods explored in the series.

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…

What we sell are hidden truths. Our territory is the mind. Our merchandise is fear.

The Avengers 5.1: The Fear Merchants
The colour era doesn't get off to such a great start with The Fear Merchants, an Avengers episode content to provide unstinting averageness. About the most notable opinion you’re likely to come away with is that Patrick Cargill rocks some magnificent shades.

Just make love to that wall, pervert!

Seinfeld 2.10: The Statue
The Premise
Jerry employs a cleaner, the boyfriend of an author whose book Elaine is editing. He leaves the apartment spotless, but Jerry is convinced he has made off with a statue.

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.

There’s still one man out here some place.

Sole Survivor (1970)
(SPOILERS) I’m one for whom Sole Survivor remained a half-remembered, muddled dream of ‘70s television viewing. I see (from this site) the BBC showed it both in 1979 and 1981 but, like many it seems, in my veiled memory it was a black and white picture, probably made in the 1950s and probably turning up on a Saturday afternoon on BBC2. Since no other picture readily fits that bill, and my movie apparition shares the salient plot points, I’ve had to conclude Sole Survivor is indeed the hitherto nameless picture; a TV movie first broadcast by the ABC network in 1970 (a more famous ABC Movie of the Week was Spielberg’s Duel). Survivor may turn out to be no more than a classic of the mind, but it’s nevertheless an effective little piece, one that could quite happily function on the stage and which features several strong performances and a signature last scene that accounts for its haunting reputation.

Directed by TV guy Paul Stanley and written by Guerdon Trueblood (The…

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 …

It’s all Bertie Wooster’s fault!

Jeeves and Wooster 3.4: Right Ho, Jeeves  (aka Bertie Takes Gussie's Place at Deverill Hall)
A classic set-up of crossed identities as Bertie pretends to be Gussie and Gussie pretends to be Bertie. The only failing is that the actor pretending to be Gussie isn’t a patch on the original actor pretending to be Gussie. Although, the actress pretending to be Madeline is significantly superior than her predecessor(s).

Do not run a job in a job.

Ocean’s 8 (2018)
(SPOILERS) There’s nothing wrong with the gender-swapped property per se, any more than a reboot, remake or standard sequel exploiting an original’s commercial potential (read: milking it dry). As with those more common instances, however, unless it ekes out its own distinctive territory, gives itself a clear reason to be, it’s only ever going to be greeted with an air of cynicism (whatever the current fashion for proclaiming it valid simply because it's gender swapped may suggest to the contrary).  The Ocean's series was pretty cynical to start with, of course – Soderbergh wanted a sure-fire hit, the rest of the collected stars wanted the kudos of working with Soderbergh on a "classy" crowd pleaser, the whole concept of remaking the '60s movie was fairly lazy, and by the third one there was little reason to be other than smug self-satisfaction – so Ocean's 8 can’t be accused of letting any side down. It also gives itself distinctively – stereo…

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 …

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…