Skip to main content

Some of us are normal, but the rest are happy ones.

Children of the Stones
3: Serpent in the Circle


The third episode is as replete with discussion as before, but there’s a shift in balance too. If the opening duo laid the groundwork and built the mystery, the third and fourth make clear that there is a very real threat. Accordingly, it’s a bit of an embarrassment (but a common trait of such fare; see Dana Scully) that for all his general acceptance of strangeness Adam continues to show reticence in certain areas (I’ll come onto this more next episode); when Matthew relates his experiences he is inclined to dismiss it with “What you saw is probably part of some traditional local ceremony”. If there’s a fault here, it’s that his disposition varies according to the requirements of a scene (if it needs an argument for or a counterpoint).


SandraSome of us are normal, but the rest are happy ones.

The threat is straight out of Invasion of the Body Snatchers, and the sense of the uncanny plays somewhere between the 1956 original and the remake that would follow a year after Stones’ first screening. A sense of full-on claustrophobia has not yet taken hold, but the whittling down of the non-happy-day residents of Milbury is brought sharply in focus. First there is Jimmo (Gary Lock), one of Matthew’s classmates, who shows his true pod colours when he correctly solves an equation on the blackboard. Then, the cliffhanger reveals that Jimmo’s father, Tom Browning (Hubert Tucker) has also been happified. Previously dismissive of village traditions, he is seen fully integrated as he indulges in some May Pole dancing. Doctor Who also suggested a sinister side to such innocuous behaviour in The Daemons, but the glassy-eyed possession theme gives it added import here.


It appears that Dai led Matthew to the rite as a form of shock treatment, to waken him to the seriousness of the situation. And it’s Dai who brought him home also. The kid and dad fleeing in the picture now takes on the dimensions of Adam and his son, particularly as Matthew compares his experience to the painting coming to life. The immediate aftermath finds Adam afraid of Mrs Crabtree, who was out there chanting (the chant is the same as the ominous babbling soundtrack we hear on the credits, which is a nice cost saving), and ups the idea that there is danger at every turn (as per the body snatchers, just a slightly less imminent threat). This is emphasised later when she takes the letter from America to Adam, having delivered it to Hendrick first.


Margaret, ever the Mulder, instantly sees the potential in the painting as a depiction of Milbury (“It’s like some terrible nightmare”). But again, the needs of conversation make Adam open this time (“Oh, I don’t know. There’s a lot we don’t understand” he says in response to a comment on how they are lucky to live in the 20th century). It becomes clear that the fewer stones depicted are because those chanting are in the process of being calcified.


There are also, like The Daemons, stirrings of a pagan/Christian debate. The church has been deconsecrated, and gifted to the Manor, so Hendrick is effectively the Mr Magister (the Master) of this tale; he minds the gate of Christian worship. The symbolism of the serpent is discussed, in reference to Dai’s amulet, and the presence of a serpent on the font in the church. Margaret (a font of knowledge) informs Adam that it was intended as a warning to be constantly on guard against the power of the serpent: a battle between the pagan and the Christian. 



So it seems that the series is setting up the pagan as a negative force, rather than a misunderstood one (although one could argue that this applies only to its misapplication in Milbury, which the final episode will moot). Earlier, she notes of the “Clipping the Church” ceremony that it was an old custom relating to renewing one’s faith by binding minds and souls together (but as the church is deconsecrated and the ceremony occurred by the stones, it makes no sense).


The best bit of pseudo-science to sound good this time out occurs when a horseshoe flies through the air and  attaches itself to one of the stones. Adam explains that, in contrast to the expected response from the stones which would have remained in alignment to the magnetic field of the Earth as it was when they were formed, they are aligned with its present magnetic field; “Some tremendous energy has passed through these stones very recently”.


Perhaps the highpoint is the discussion between Adam and Hendrick. It gives Hendrick a chance to show his more sinister dimensions and we also get to see just how imaginative the writers’ concept is. Adam discusses the contents of his telegram (Hendrick feigns ignorance), revealing that the stones are aligned to a super nova that exploded two centuries before Christ lived, leaving only a black hole. Further revelations follow, as Hendrick reveals he knows full well that a black hole is a mass of imploding energy; he is an ex-astronomer who resigned his Cambridge chair five years earlier, on coming into possession of some papers that revealed someone living in the village at the time had witnessed the star explode. “It was like coming home” is his eerie comment. The intimation that Hendrick may be reliving, reencapsulating or reincarnating a previous form of himself is touched upon as Adam casually dismisses this witness as a primitive cave dweller. This gets Hendrick’s goat because he was that primitive cave dweller, or as he puts it, “a visionary, spiritual leader, a man of destiny”.

AdamI beg his pardon.
HendrickI think you might be well advised to do so.

Adam takes him half seriously, and one area Thomas is good at is being faintly sarcastic. Just as Cuthbertson is skilled at suggesting steel behind his pomposity.


DaiI’ve got feelings. That’s quite different from understanding. Something happened here in the past, and its happening here again today.

Dai’s presence in the episode runs in tandem with Hendrick’s; both are reincarnated/repeated forms of past loops, but Dai is less conscious of his past and less able to martial his thoughts. If the kids interacting together for more than a minute exposes their limitations, when they are deflected off Jones’ consummate madness they are made to look slightly more capable. Dai refers to his serpent-adorned amulet as a treasure, but more importantly as a key. It is suggested that the amulet is designed to keep the owner from harm, so how that factors in to the events of the following episode is worthy of consideration.

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…

Why would I turn into a filing cabinet?

Captain Marvel (2019)
(SPOILERS) All superhero movies are formulaic to a greater or lesser degree. Mostly greater. The key to an actually great one – or just a pretty good one – is making that a virtue, rather than something you’re conscious of limiting the whole exercise. The irony of the last two stand-alone MCU pictures is that, while attempting to bring somewhat down-the-line progressive cachet to the series, they’ve delivered rather pedestrian results. Of course, that didn’t dim Black Panther’s cultural cachet (and what do I know, swathes of people also profess to loving it), and Captain Marvel has hit half a billion in its first few days – it seems that, unless you’re poor unloved Ant-Man, an easy $1bn is the new $700m for the MCU – but neither’s protagonist really made that all-important iconic impact.

Basically, you’re saying marriage is just a way of getting out of an embarrassing pause in conversation?

Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994)
(SPOILERS) There can be a cumulative effect from revisiting a movie where one glaring element does not fit, however well-judged or integrated everything else is; the error is only magnified, and seems even more of a miscalculation. With Groundhog Day, there’s a workaround to the romance not working, which is that the central conceit of reliving your day works like a charm and the love story is ultimately inessential to the picture’s success. In the case of Four Weddings and a Funeral, if the romance doesn’t work… Well, you’ve still got three other weddings, and you’ve got a funeral. But our hero’s entire purpose is to find that perfect match, and what he winds up with is Andie McDowell. One can’t help thinking he’d have been better off with Duck Face (Anna Chancellor).

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.

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…

Our very strength incites challenge. Challenge incites conflict. And conflict... breeds catastrophe.

The MCU Ranked Worst to Best

Do you read Sutter Cane?

In the Mouth of Madness (1994)
(SPOILERS) The concluding chapter of John Carpenter’s unofficial Apocalypse Trilogy (preceded by The Thing and Prince of Darkness) is also, sadly, his last great movie. Indeed, it stands apart in the qualitative wilderness that beset him during the ‘90s (not for want of output). Michael De Luca’s screenplay had been doing the rounds since the ‘80s, even turned down by Carpenter at one point, and it proves ideal fodder for the director, bringing out the best in him. Even cinematographer Gary K Kibbe seems inspired enough to rise to the occasion. It could do without the chugging rawk soundtrack, perhaps, but then, that was increasingly where Carpenter’s interests resided (as opposed to making decent movies).

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…

Only an idiot sees the simple beauty of life.

Forrest Gump (1994)
(SPOILERS) There was a time when I’d have made a case for, if not greatness, then Forrest Gump’s unjust dismissal from conversations regarding its merits. To an extent, I still would. Just not nearly so fervently. There’s simply too much going on in the picture to conclude that the manner in which it has generally been received is the end of the story. Tarantino, magnanimous in the face of Oscar defeat, wasn’t entirely wrong when he suggested to Robert Zemeckis that his was a, effectively, subversive movie. Its problem, however, is that it wants to have its cake and eat it.

Do not mention the Tiptoe Man ever again.

Glass (2019)
(SPOILERS) If nothing else, one has to admire M Night Shyamalan’s willingness to plough ahead regardless with his straight-faced storytelling, taking him into areas that encourage outright rejection or merciless ridicule, with all the concomitant charges of hubris. Reactions to Glass have been mixed at best, but mostly more characteristic of the period he plummeted from his must-see, twist-master pedestal (during the period of The Village and The Happening), which is to say quite scornful. And yet, this is very clearly the story he wanted to tell, so if he undercuts audience expectations and leaves them dissatisfied, it’s most definitely not a result of miscalculation on his part. For my part, while I’d been prepared for a disappointment on the basis of the critical response, I came away very much enjoying the movie, by and large.