Skip to main content

It's something trying to get out.

The Owl Service
(1969-70)

I may have caught a glimpse of Channel 4’s repeat of The Owl Service in 1987, but not enough to stick in the mind. My formative experience was Alan Garner’s novel, which was read several years earlier during English lessons. Garner’s tapestry of magical-mythical storytelling had an impact, with its possession theme and blending of legend with the here and now. Garner depicts a Britain where past and present are mutable, and where there is no safety net of objective reality; life becomes a strange waking dream. His fantasy landscapes are both attractive and disturbing; the uncanny reaching out from the corners of the attic.  But I have to admit that the themes of class and discrimination went virtually unnoticed in the wake of such high weirdness.


The other Garner books I read saw young protagonists transported to fantasy realms. The resonance of The Owl Service came from the fragmenting of the rural normal. When the author notes that he never wrote for children, I quite believe him. His lead characters may be youngsters, but there’s no hint of patronisation or tempering of material for the ease of susceptible young minds. That’s probably why children respond to his work so strongly (although it’s a chicken-and-egg thing if an author is consigned a genre label), and why some parents wonder if they aren’t slightly inappropriate without ever quite putting their fingers on why.  


The TV adaptation of The Owl Service, written by Garner and produced and directed by Peter Plummer only two years after the novel was published, may not have garnered the lasting acclaim of another mythical children’s series (Children of the Stones, produced nearly a decade later) - it’s a bit creaky in places, and shows it’s age - but it retains an enticing unconventionality. The lack of concessions to an inattentive audience (or, at least, one demanding a little more joining of the dots) resulted in a nervous Granada including expository recaps with each new episode (“So that’s what the was about!”) And, despite the slow pace, there’s only a limited attempt to spell things out in the episodes themselves. That, and the often-experimental direction, ensured the serial stood out from traditional children’s fare and attracted some criticism that it was unsuitable for kiddies.


Right from the title sequence, we’re being warned that this won’t be cosy Sunday evening family programming. The succession of images and sounds is choppy and unwelcoming. Discordant scratching and the revving of a motorbike punctuate the harp theme (Ton Alarch). We see minimalist animations of a flickering candle and a bird created by hand shadowing; be prepared for things to get weird.


Garner based his story on the Welsh legend of Mabinogion; the love triangle of the myth is re-enacted by the trio of kids (and, we learn, was re-enacted before by another trio; all of this is cyclic). After his mother curses Llew Llaw Gyffes to live without a human wife, wizards Gwydion and Math create a woman for him from flowers (nice sidestep). But Blodeuwedd (the flower girl) falls in love with lord Gronw Pebr and they hatch a plot to kill her husband. It seems that Llew can only be felled under extraordinarily convoluted circumstances, which probably explains why he transforms into an eagle (!) and escapes when Gronw attempts to spear him. As punishment, Gwydion and Math turn Blodeuwedd into an owl (a bird hated by all others, that doesn’t dare show its face by the light of day). Llew confronts Gronw, who pleads for mercy. Llew allows Gronw to position a large stone between himself and the spear point he’s due to receive; it’s all to nought, as the spear pitches through the stone and kills Gronw. A stone with a hole in remains, known as the Llech Ronw (this is the stone discovered by Roger).


Episode One

The first thing to discuss is the cast, who seem to provoke mixed responses. Some of the adults have a tendency to grandstand, while the youngsters (although none is less than 19) sometimes show their inexperience. Gillian Hills is note-perfect as Alison, however. She was 25 when The Owl Service was made, and had already taken a number of adult roles; she memorably disrobed in the previous year’s Blow-up. She’d do so again a couple of years later in A Clockwork Orange (so at least her stripping was in the aid of arty smut). Consequently, she carries herself as an extremely nubile teenager and Plummer plays up the sexually provocative side of Alison (whether she is supposed to be witting or not). When Roger walks in on her, as she trances out on her bed, her state suggests bacchic fevers; especially as it ends in violence (she scratches Roger’s cheek). Plummer also makes a point of capturing her shapely legs.


I found Francis Wallis’ rather stuffy public school lad Roger, old before his time, quite amusing. He comes on like a young Christopher Barrie, priggish and very-un ‘60s (although he has some interesting ties). Poor Wallis is also stuck wearing a pair of short shorts that would make even Graeme Garden in The Goodies’ Scoutrageous blanche. Michael Holden as Gwyn (the youngest cast member) is less successful, but even he never plummets to Matthew Waterhouse levels of amateurishness (it’s just very apparent that, when he shares scenes with Hills, she’s out of his league as a performer).


Heading up the adults, Edwin Richfield is an instantly recognisable face and it’s not much of a stretch to see a family resemblance with son Roger (Clive has recently married Alison’s mother, and they are staying in Alison’s house, left to her by an uncle to avoid death duties). Clive’s role is to be the essentially well-meaning but unperceptive parent (there must be a rational explanation somewhere). Richfield has a number of genre credits to his name, including The Avengers (six episodes, no less), UFOAdam Adamant Lives!, the film version of Quatermass and the Pit and Doctor Who (The Sea Devils and, less auspiciously, Mestor the giant slug in The Twin Dilemma).



Raymond Llewellyn, as touched gardener Huw “half-baked” Halfbacon lives under the influence of past traumas. One foot is firmly rooted in the Mabinogion. Llewellyn appeared in one of Doctor Who’s first explorations of the possession theme two years earlier (The Abominable Snowmen). Rounding out the cast is Dorothy Edwards’ Nancy (Gwyn’s mum and the housekeeper). She’s the stock character given to oblique doom mongering, as she too was involved in the events that so affect Huw (“You been up in that roof, boy?”) Alison’s mother Margaret remains unseen, an “’Er indoors” spectral version of Arthur Daley’s missus.


The mesmeric qualities of the plates are the key inspiration on Garner’s part; the hows or whys of The Owl Service are unclear (who made them, if Nancy is so fearful of them why didn’t she destroy them?) but this is to the benefit of an episode shot through with odd and unsettling developments. There’s the scratching in the attic, the disappearing motif on the plates (as Alison traces the owls, so the plates are left unadorned) and Alison’s extreme reaction to anyone interfering with her paper owls (“Don’t do that! Don’t touch her!”) Plummer doesn’t always hit the bull’s-eye with his direction, but his choices are usually interesting (in particular Roger’s discovery of the hole in the stone, paralleled with the discovery of the plates).

Popular posts from this blog

This risotto is shmackin’, dude.

Stranger Things Season 4: Volume 1 (SPOILERS) I haven’t had cause, or the urge, to revisit earlier seasons of Stranger Things , but I’m fairly certain my (relatively) positive takes on the first two sequel seasons would adjust down somewhat if I did (a Soviet base under Hawkins? DUMB soft disclosure or not, it’s pretty dumb). In my Season Three review, I called the show “ Netflix’s best-packaged junk food. It knows not to outstay its welcome, doesn’t cause bloat and is disposable in mostly good ways ” I fairly certain the Duffer’s weren’t reading, but it’s as if they decided, as a rebuke, that bloat was the only way to go for Season Four. Hence episodes approaching (or exceeding) twice the standard length. So while the other points – that it wouldn’t stray from its cosy identity and seasons tend to merge in the memory – hold fast, you can feel the ambition of an expansive canvas faltering at the hurdle of Stranger Things ’ essential, curated, nostalgia-appeal inconsequentiality.

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

Is this supposed to be me? It’s grotesque.

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (2022) (SPOILERS) I didn’t hold out much hope for The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent being more than moderately tolerable. Not so much because its relatively untested director and his co-writer are mostly known in the TV sphere (and not so much for anything anyone is raving about). Although, it has to be admitted, the finished movie flourishes a degree of digital flatness typical of small-screen productions (it’s fine, but nothing more). Rather, due to the already over-tapped meta-strain of celebs showing they’re good sports about themselves. When Spike Jonze did it with John Malkovich, it was weird and different. By the time we had JCVD , not so much. And both of them are pre-dated by Arnie in Last Action Hero (“ You brought me nothing but pain ” he is told by Jack Slater). Plus, it isn’t as if Tom Gormican and Kevin Etten have much in the way of an angle on Nic; the movie’s basically there to glorify “him”, give or take a few foibles, do

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much

Whacking. I'm hell at whacking.

Witness (1985) (SPOILERS) Witness saw the advent of a relatively brief period – just over half a decade –during which Harrison Ford was willing to use his star power in an attempt to branch out. The results were mixed, and abruptly concluded when his typically too late to go where Daniel Day Lewis, Dustin Hoffman and Robert De Niro had gone before (with at bare minimum Oscar-nominated results) – but not “ full retard ” – ended in derision with Regarding Henry . He retreated to the world of Tom Clancy, and it’s the point where his cachet began to crumble. There had always been a stolid quality beneath even his more colourful characters, but now it came to the fore. You can see something of that as John Book in Witness – despite his sole Oscar nom, it might be one of Ford’s least interesting performances of the 80s – but it scarcely matters, or that the screenplay (which won) is by turns nostalgic, reactionary, wistful and formulaic, as director Peter Weir, in his Hollywood debu

The Illumi-what-i?

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) (SPOILERS) In which Sam Raimi proves that he can stand proudly with the best – or worst – of them as a good little foot soldier of the woke apocalypse. You’d expect the wilfully anarchic – and Republican – Raimi to choke on the woke, but instead, he’s sucked it up, grinned and bore it. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is so slavishly a production-line Marvel movie, both in plotting and character, and in nu-Feige progressive sensibilities, there was no chance of Sam staggering out from beneath its suffocating demands with anything more than a few scraps of stylistic flourish intact.

If that small woman is small enough, she could fit behind a small tree.

Stranger Things Season 4: Volume 2 (SPOILERS) I can’t quite find it within myself to perform the rapturous somersaults that seem to be the prevailing response to this fourth run of the show. I’ve outlined some of my thematic issues in the Volume 1 review, largely borne out here, but the greater concern is one I’ve held since Season Two began – and this is the best run since Season One, at least as far my failing memory can account for – and that’s the purpose-built formula dictated by the Duffer Brothers. It’s there in each new Big Bad, obviously, even to the extent that this is the Big-Bad-who-binds-them-all (except the Upside Down was always there, right?) And it’s there with the resurgent emotional beats, partings, reunions and plaintively stirring music cues. I have to be really on board with a movie or show to embrace such flagrantly shameless manipulation, season after season, and I find myself increasingly immune.

Get away from my burro!

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) (SPOILERS) The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is beloved by so many of the cinematic firmament’s luminaries – Stanley Kubrick, Sam Raimi, , Paul Thomas Anderson and who knows maybe also WS, Vince Gilligan, Spike Lee, Daniel Day Lewis; Oliver Stone was going to remake it – not to mention those anteriorly influential Stone Roses, that it seems foolhardy to suggest it isn’t quite all that. There’s no faulting the performances – a career best Humphrey Bogart, with director John Huston’s dad Walter stealing the movie from under him – but the greed-is-bad theme is laid on a little thick, just in case you were a bit too dim to get it yourself the first time, and Huston’s direction may be right there were it counts for the dramatics, but it’s a little too relaxed when it comes to showing the seams between Mexican location and studio.

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls… dyin’ time’s here!

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985) Time was kind to Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome . As in, it was such a long time since I’d seen the “final chapter” of the trilogy, it had dwindled in my memory to the status of an “alright but not great” sequel. I’d half-expected to have positive things to say along the lines of it being misunderstood, or being able to see what it was trying for but perhaps failing to quite achieve. Instead, I re-discovered a massive turkey that is really a Mad Max movie in name only (appropriately, since Max was an afterthought). This is the kind of picture fans of beloved series tend to loathe; when a favourite character returns but without the qualities or tone that made them adored in the first place (see Indiana Jones in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull , or John McClane in the last two Die Hard s). Thunderdome stinks even more than the methane fuelling Bartertown. I hadn’t been aware of the origins of Thunderdome until recently, mainly because I was