Skip to main content

Sleep well, my friend, and forget us. Tomorrow you will wake up a new man.

The Prisoner
13. Do Not Forsake Me Oh My Darling


We want information.

In an effort to locate Professor Seltzman, a scientist who has perfected a means of transferring one person’s mind to another person’s body, Number Two has Number Six’s mind installed in the body of the Colonel (a loyal servant of the Powers that Be). Six was the last person to have contact with Seltzman and, if he is to stand any chance of being returned to his own body, he must find him (the Village possesses only the means to make the switch, they cannot reverse the process). Awaking in London, Six encounters old acquaintances including his fiancée and her father Sir Charles Portland (Six’s superior and shown in the teaser sequence fretting over how to find Seltzman). Six discovers Seltzman’s hideout by decoding a series of photographs, and sets off to find him in Austria. He achieves this, but both men are captured and returned to the Village. Restoring Six and the Colonel to their respective bodies, Seltzman appears to be overcome by the strain and dies. The Colonel departs in a helicopter. However, Six reveals Seltzman’s mind was deposited in the Colonel’s body and the Colonel’s mind perished with Seltzman. Seltzman is now free to continue his work in peace.


So how do you like it?

Would Do Not Forsake Me Oh My Darling be better if Patrick McGoohan played Number Six throughout? Well, it wouldn’t be Do Not Forsake Me Oh My Darling, so that’s moot. But this raises the question of whether it’s the episode, written by Vincent Tilsey (formerly of The Chimes of Big Ben) and directed by Pat Jackson, that stinks or the stiff, unpersuasive performance from Nigel Stock as Six. If the makers wanted to find an actor who was the complete opposite of McGoohan, both in temperament and charisma, they couldn’t have picked anyone better. Unfortunately, Stock completely destroys any viewer engagement. This is the really-a-bit-rubbish Prisonerepisode. It’s not awful, but it’s resolutely uninvolving.


Those who claim Do Not Forsake Me Oh My Darling was intended to kick-off an allegedly planned second season are apparently supported by the references to it being a whole year since Six went AWOL. But there’s no strong reason to see this as other than a convenient writer’s device. It’s quite clear that Six hasn’t been in the Village a mere three months (of broadcast episodes) and that there are significant gaps between events. Many Happy Returns, shot directly before Do Not Forsake Me, also emphasises the length of time since Six has been away from London. Whether or not another run was planned, it would surely have been a bum move to kick it off with a lead performance of barely suppressed tedium.


Where there’s no dispute is that Tilsey was asked to write it accommodate McGoohan’s absence from the set; he was shooting Ice Station Zebra. This was the fourteenth episode to be made, and one of the oddball later productions (Living in Harmony, The Girl Who Was Death and Fall Out being the others). Unfortunately it’s only oddball in the sense that it is atypical of The Prisoner, not in terms of it being whacky or out there or brimming with interesting ideas. It’s generally kept around this point in most re-ordering; some have it an episode or two earlier, but it makes sense that Do Not Forsake Meforms part of the gradual disintegration of the format leading the disintegration of the lead character’s identity.


Tilsey wasn’t fond of the script, nor the rewrites it received. He felt the idea was hackneyed (which it is) but couldn’t come up with anything better. What we end up with is the standard science fiction body-swap plot (the original title was Face Unknown, until the original title of Living in Harmony came to replace it; it now references Six’s fiancé, although that’s a somewhat tepid connection since there’s so little spark to the relationship). The theme of mind/body change is common to the series, although the device hasn’t been incorporated quite so broadly prior to this point; it might have been more fun if the content of the episode was as untempered as its premised. There are parallels with mind messing of A. B. and C. and the personality disorder of The Schizoid Man. This is roughly the inverse of that episode; rather than double the McGoohan we have none (or merely a sliver). The effect would be not unlike watching a Quantum Leap only to find Sam suddenly played by an exciting actor; you’d be left wondering which show you’d switched on.


Nigel Stock had previously appeared with McGoohan in Danger Man, and was most familiar with viewers up to that point for his Dr Watson in the BBC Sherlock Holmes. He’d played opposite Douglas Wilmer a few years before, and would return to the role with Peter Cushing later in 1968. As a stuffy old duffer he’s perfect casting; just look at his lead in The Pickwick Papers. Unfortunately, call on Stock to behave dynamically and you have problems. He doesn’t convince in action, in a romantic scene or as a man with keen intelligence. He’s a plodder. One might argue this disparity with McGoohan is entirely the point; an unlikely figure occupies Six’s shoes. Be that as it may, it fails dramatically and there isn’t much way round that as a criticism.


It does, I suppose, provide all the argument we need for why Six doesn’t just leg it when he has the chance. It’s not merely a philosophical argument about mind-body duality. It’s rather more basic. You wouldn’t scarper if you suddenly found yourself looking like Nigel Stock, replete with piggy eyes and doughy body. With no poise, zip or panache. You’d do everything you could to reverse the process. Six even suggests at the climax that Seltzman (mostly played by Hugo Schuster), now reconstituted in the General’s (Stock’s) body would be none too happy about such a state of affairs (even though it makes him a good decade younger); “The good doctor’s mind now inhabits a body perhaps not to his liking”.


Colonel: The mind of one man into another? Impossible, I don’t believe it.
Two: Imagine the power we could have if the spy we returned had the mind of our choosing. We could break the security of any nation.

The feasibility of Seltzman’s process is done few favours by the references to studying an advanced yogi who could go into suspended animation for months, leading the Doctor to discover how to “transmit the psyche of one person into another”. Of course. Generally, there’s something a bit confused about the ethics in this episode. The Village, and Six’s superiors, want to locate Seltzman to make use of this process. Although, they don’t really need him to effect their plans do they? The Village has a working machine; it’s just that anyone being transferred with have to lump it as far as getting their old body back. But, given how unscrupulous the Village is, I don’t see that as being much of a problem. Seltzman is seen as a good, gentle scientist with moral qualms (“Rutherford, for example. How he must regret having split the atom”) but Two straight out accuses him of an invention as bad as the creation of the nuclear bomb (“Almost as bad as splitting the identity of two human beings”).


At a stretch, one might argue that Seltzman’s action in taking the Colonel’s body is justified by the harm it would do if he were forced to work for those who would put his creation to Machiavellian purposes. But he could simply have offed his mind along with his body if he was so principled. The Colonel hasn’t done anything evil that we know; he was merely following orders (“You assured me that he was in good health. You must contact Number One and tell him I did my duty”).  The twist itself is a good one and probably the most arresting part of the episode, but Six’s parting shot (“He is now free to continue his experiments in peace”) has connotations of unwholesome activities and unchecked experiments of Nazi scientists absconded to Argentina.


Six: The man who’s just flying out of here… Is not who you thought it was.
Two: I don’t believe it.
Six: He can and did change three minds at the same time.

In the Village we see that not only is there a functioning Seltzman machine (while the red and blue lighting affects for transference are quite groovy, this episode is generally lacking on the arresting visuals front, immersed as it is in “real world” spy fare), but there’s also the Amnesia Room. Of which we learn that subjects cooperate very quickly; in three days they can get what they need with “hardly any persuasion”. Of course, we’ve seen Six subjected to localised amnesia techniques before (in The Schizoid Man).


Two, played by Clifford Evans, might be the least memorable of Village subordinates. True, he’s not involved for much of the proceedings, but there’s little to distinguish him in terms of personality when he is.


Seltzman: Do you think your people have done this to you?
Six: No, I’m sure.

The main question Do Not Forsake Me raises is whether the Village operatives and Six’s superiors are one and the same. This idea is also broached in Many Happy Returns, which, as noted, directly preceded Do Not Forsake Me in production order. It was clearly something on the minds of the makers  (and Thorpe in Many Happy Returns may or may not be the new Number Two in Hammer Into Anvil). Here, Six’s boss Sir Charles Portland, also his prospective father-in-law, may or may not be directly involved with the Village’s activities. In an earlier draft of Tilsey’s script he clearly was, but it’s difficult not to deduce, despite Six’s baffling dismissal of the idea (except that duffer Stock Six says it, so we can believe he’s a bit bumbling and dim), that his superiors are at least in cahoots with the Village. How else to explain the coincidence that suddenly, a year after Six’s incarceration and just when Sir Charles and his colleagues are trying to crack Seltzman’s code, Six should have his essence transposed into the Colonel and be sent to find him?


If this fairly significant confirmation fails to muster much impact, it’s because the episode as a whole fails to compel. It isn’t just the controllers of the Village; there are whole raft of revelations about Six that provoke little more than a shrug. So we discover that Six is engaged to Janet Portland (Zena Walker), that he last saw her a year and a day ago and she wore a dress of yellow silk. And… Isn’t it all rather bland? Would there be more spark to the dutiful daughter if she was sharing her scenes with McGoohan? Well no doubt one of the least steamy kisses committed to celluloid wouldn’t have occurred (given the actor’s non-intimacy rep). Given the title is overtly referencing Janet’s wait for her beloved to return, it’s all a bit of a damp squib.


Two: Sleep well, my friend, and forget us. Tomorrow you will wake up a new man. 

Any reminder of McGoohan in the episode only serves to highlight what we’re missing; the montage of Six resisting, the Danger Man photo. When the actor voices Stock Six’s inner thought processes it feels awkward and out of synch. We can’t really buy into the idea that real Six is in there, and it means Stock’s performance is something of a failure. There are other, lesser titbits of information about Six. His code name in England is ZM73, in France is Duvall, and in Germany is Schmidt. He likes jugged hare.  His handwriting stays the same even when his body doesn’t. He also has at least three scenes where he is attempting to convince someone of his true identity, which is two too many.


As far as the eternal background hum of the identity of Number One is concerned, McGoohand drops in a nugget as the transference process begins. Two instructs Six, “Take it easy, take it easy. It will all be one in the end”.


Leaving aside the lack of grip exerted by Stock, we’re already familiar with idea of Six back in London attempting to convince others of his claims (The Chimes of Big Ben, Many Happy Returns). This element is even less fresh here. The code-breaking scene is quite good, however, in that we are easily able to follow Six’s methodology. Although, given it is so elementary you’d have thought experienced code-breakers could have come up with a result. The travelogue transitions from France to Austria are about what you’d expect, but there’s a neat line from a waiter when Six arrives in Kandersfeld; “Oh, welcome to the village sir. What would you like to order?


If the mind transfer twist is a good one, the means by which Six convinces Seltzman of his identity is lacking. “No two handwritings can be the same”, we are told. Er… how about forgery? Is Saltzman some kind of expert? It’s the sort of thing that, even though this is standard spy fare, comes across more like sub-standard spy fare.


So, no Village. No McGoohan. What are you left with? Well, there’s a pre-titles teaser, and a different Village introductory sequence, neither of which make a virtue of breaking with the norm. Other episodes do something interesting when freed from the shackles of the Village. Not this one. And Nigel Stock succeeds in sucking all the air out of the show. What are you left with? Something slightly forsaken.


**



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…

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…

I am so sick of Scotland!

Outlaw/King (2018)
(SPOILERS) Proof that it isn't enough just to want to make a historical epic, you have to have some level of vision for it as well. Say what you like about Mel's Braveheart – and it isn't a very good film – it's got sensibility in spades. He knew what he was setting out to achieve, and the audience duly responded. What does David Mackenzie want from Outlaw/King (it's shown with a forward slash on the titles, so I'm going with it)? Ostensibly, and unsurprisingly, to restore the stature of Robert the Bruce after it was rather tarnished by Braveheart, but he has singularly failed to do so. More than that, it isn’t an "idea", something you can recognise or get behind even if you don’t care about the guy. You’ll never forget Mel's Wallace, for better or worse, but the most singular aspect of Chris Pine's Bruce hasn’t been his rousing speeches or heroic valour. No, it's been his kingly winky.

If this is not a place for a priest, Miles, then this is exactly where the Lord wants me.

Bad Times at the El Royale (2018)
(SPOILERS) Sometimes a movie comes along where you instantly know you’re safe in the hands of a master of the craft, someone who knows exactly the story they want to tell and precisely how to achieve it. All you have to do is sit back and exult in the joyful dexterity on display. Bad Times at the El Royale is such a movie, and Drew Goddard has outdone himself. From the first scene, set ten years prior to the main action, he has constructed a dizzyingly deft piece of work, stuffed with indelible characters portrayed by perfectly chosen performers, delirious twists and game-changing flashbacks, the package sealed by an accompanying frequently diegetic soundtrack, playing in as it does to the essential plot beats of the whole. If there's a better movie this year, it will be a pretty damn good one.

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

It was one of the most desolate looking places in the world.

They Shall Not Grow Old (2018)
Peter Jackson's They Shall Not Grow Old, broadcast by the BBC on the centenary of Armistice Day, is "sold" on the attraction and curiosity value of restored, colourised and frame rate-enhanced footage. On that level, this World War I documentary, utilising a misquote from Laurence Binyon's poem for its title, is frequently an eye-opener, transforming the stuttering, blurry visuals that have hitherto informed subsequent generations' relationship with the War. However, that's only half the story; the other is the use of archive interviews with veterans to provide a narrative, exerting an effect often more impacting for what isn't said than for what is.

You kind of look like a slutty Ebola virus.

Crazy Rich Asians (2018)
(SPOILERS) The phenomenal success of Crazy Rich Asians – in the US at any rate, thus far – might lead one to think it's some kind of startling original, but the truth is, whatever its core demographic appeal, this adaptation of Kevin Kwan's novel taps into universally accepted romantic comedy DNA and readily recognisable tropes of family and class, regardless of cultural background. It emerges a smoothly professional product, ticking the expected boxes in those areas – the heroine's highs, lows, rejections, proposals, accompanied by whacky scene-stealing best friend – even if the writing is sometimes a little on the clunky side.

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.

Prepare the Heathen’s Stand! By order of purification!

Apostle (2018)
(SPOILERS) Another week, another undercooked Netflix flick from an undeniably talented director. What’s up with their quality control? Do they have any? Are they so set on attracting an embarrassment of creatives, they give them carte blanche, to hell with whether the results are any good or not? Apostle's an ungainly folk-horror mashup of The Wicker Man (most obviously, but without the remotest trace of that screenplay's finesse) and any cult-centric Brit horror movie you’d care to think of (including Ben Wheatley's, himself an exponent of similar influences-on-sleeve filmmaking with Kill List), taking in tropes from Hammer, torture porn, and pagan lore but revealing nothing much that's different or original beyond them.

It seemed as if I had missed something.

Room 237 (2012)
Stanley Kubrick’s meticulous, obsessive approach towards filmmaking was renowned, so perhaps it should be no surprise to find comparable traits reflected in a section of his worshippers. Legends about the director have taken root (some of them with a factual basis, others bunkum), while the air of secrecy that enshrouded his life and work has duly fostered a range of conspiracy theories. A few of these are aired in Rodney Ascher’s documentary, which indulges five variably coherent advocates of five variably tenuous theories relating to just what The Shining is really all about. Beyond Jack Nicholson turning the crazy up to 11, that is. Ascher has hit on a fascinating subject, one that exposes our capacity to interpret any given information wildly differently according to our disposition. But his execution, which both underlines and undermines the theses of these devotees, leaves something to be desired.

Part of the problem is simply one of production values. The audio tra…