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

The Bible never said anything about amphetamines.

The Color of Money (1986) (SPOILERS) I tend to think it’s evident when Scorsese isn’t truly exercised by material. He can still invest every ounce of the technical acumen at his fingertips, and the results can dazzle on that level, but you don’t really feel the filmmaker in the film. Which, for one of his pictures to truly carry a wallop, you need to do. We’ve seen quite a few in such deficit in recent years, most often teaming with Leo. The Color of Money , however, is the first where it was out-and-out evident the subject matter wasn’t Marty’s bag. He needed it, desperately, to come off, but in the manner a tradesman who wants to keep getting jobs. This sequel to The Hustler doesn’t linger in the mind, however good it may be, moment by moment.

I said I had no family. I didn’t say I had an empty apartment.

The Apartment (1960) (SPOILERS) Billy Wilder’s romcom delivered the genre that rare Best Picture Oscar winner. Albeit, The Apartment amounts to a rather grim (now) PG-rated scenario, one rife with adultery, attempted suicide, prostitution of the soul and subjective thereof of the body. And yet, it’s also, finally, rather sweet, so salving the darker passages and evidencing the director’s expertly judged balancing act. Time Out ’s Tom Milne suggested the ending was a cop out (“ boy forgives girl and all’s well ”). But really, what other ending did the audience or central characters deserve?

Listen to the goddamn qualified scientists!

Don’t Look Up (2021) (SPOILERS) It’s testament to Don’t Look Up ’s “quality” that critics who would normally lap up this kind of liberal-causes messaging couldn’t find it within themselves to grant it a free pass. Adam McKay has attempted to refashion himself as a satirist since jettisoning former collaborator Will Ferrell, but as a Hollywood player and an inevitably socio-politically partisan one, he simply falls in line with the most obvious, fatuous propagandising.

Your desecration of reality will not go unpunished.

2021-22 Best-of, Worst-of and Everything Else Besides The movies might be the most visible example of attempts to cling onto cultural remnants as the previous societal template clatters down the drain. It takes something people really want – unlike a Bond movie where he kicks the can – to suggest the model of yesteryear, one where a billion-dollar grosser was like sneezing. You can argue Spider-Man: No Way Home is replete with agendas of one sort or another, and that’s undoubtedly the case (that’s Hollywood), but crowding out any such extraneous elements (and they often are) is simply a consummate crowd-pleaser that taps into tangible nostalgia through its multiverse take. Of course, nostalgia for a mere seven years ago, for something you didn’t like anyway, is a symptom of how fraught these times have become.

Doctors make the worst patients.

Coma (1978) (SPOILERS) Michael Crichton’s sophomore big-screen feature, and by some distance his best. Perhaps it’s simply that this a milieu known to him, or perhaps it’s that it’s very much aligned to the there-and-now and present, but Coma , despite the occasional lapse in this adaptation of colleague Robin Cook’s novel, is an effective, creepy, resonant thriller and then some. Crichton knows his subject, and it shows – the picture is confident and verisimilitudinous in a way none of his other directorial efforts are – and his low-key – some might say clinical – approach pays dividends. You might also call it prescient, but that would be to suggest its subject matter wasn’t immediately relevant then too.

You ruined every suck-my-silky-ass thing!

The Matrix Resurrections (2021) (SPOILERS) Warner Bros has been here before. Déjà vu? What happens when you let a filmmaker do whatever they want? And I don’t mean in the manner of Netflix. No, in the sequel sense. You get a Gremlins 2: The New Batch (a classic, obviously, but not one that financially furthered a franchise). And conversely, when you simply cash in on a brand, consequences be damned? Exorcist II: The Heretic speaks for itself. So in the case of The Matrix Resurrections – not far from as meta as The New Batch , but much less irreverent – when Thomas “Tom” Anderson, designer of globally successful gaming trilogy The Matrix , is told “ Our beloved company, Warner Bros, has decided to make a sequel to the trilogy ” and it’s going ahead “with or without us”, you can be fairly sure this is the gospel. That Lana, now going it alone, decided it was better to “make the best of it” than let her baby be sullied. Of course, quite what that amounts to in the case of a movie(s) tha

You just threw a donut in the hot zone!

Den of Thieves (2018) (SPOILERS) I'd heard this was a shameless  Heat  rip-off, and the presence of Gerard Butler seemed to confirm it would be passable-at-best B-heist hokum, so maybe it was just middling expectations, even having heard how enthused certain pockets of the Internet were, but  Den of Thieves  is a surprisingly very satisfying entry in the genre. I can't even fault it for attempting to Keyser Soze the whole shebang at the last moment – add a head in a box and you have three 1995 classics in one movie – even if that particular conceit doesn’t quite come together.

Abandon selective targeting. Shoot everything.

28 Weeks Later (2007) (SPOILERS) The first five minutes of 28 Weeks Later are far and away the best part of this sequel, offering in quick succession a devastating moral quandary and a waking nightmare, immortalised on the screen. After that, while significantly more polished, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo reveals his concept to be altogether inferior to Danny Boyle and Alex Garland’s, falling back on the crutches of gore, nihilism, and disengaging and limiting shifts of focus between characters in whom one has little investment in the first place.

It’s always possible to find a good moral reason for killing anybody.

The Assassination Bureau (1969) (SPOILERS) The Assassination Bureau ought to be a great movie. You can see its influence on those who either think it is a great movie, or want to produce something that fulfils its potential. Alan Moore and The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen . The just-released (and just-flopped) The King’s Men . It inhabits a post-Avengers, self-consciously benign rehearsal of, and ambivalence towards, Empire manners and attitudes, something that could previously be seen that decade in Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines (and sequel Monte Carlo or Bust , also 1969), Adam Adamant Lives! , and even earlier with Kind Hearts and Coronets , whilst also feeding into that “Peacock Revolution” of Edwardian/Victorian fashion refurbishment. Unfortunately, though, it lacks the pop-stylistic savvy that made, say, The President’s Analyst so vivacious.

This guy’s armed with a hairdryer.

An Innocent Man (1989) (SPOILERS) Was it a chicken-and-egg thing with Tom Selleck and movies? Did he consistently end up in ropey pictures because other, bigger big-screen stars had first dibs on the good stuff? Or was it because he was a resolutely small-screen guy with limited range and zero good taste? Selleck had about half-a-dozen cinema outings during the 1980s, one of which, the very TV, very Touchstone Three Men and a Baby was a hit, but couldn’t be put wholly down to him. The final one was An Innocent Man , where he attempted to show some grit and mettle, as nice-guy Tom is framed and has to get tough to survive. Unfortunately, it’s another big-screen TV movie.