Skip to main content

No, I’m afraid it’s the girl who’s expendable.

The Avengers
1.1: Hot Snow

The first 20 minutes of The Avengers do not make for the most auspicious debut. It’s so far from the camper fantasy trappings of the show’s colour era, it may as well be a different programme. That’s not really the problem. Well, the problem is chiefly that there isn’t a whole episode by which to judge Hot Snow. But it’s also that this could be any old detective fiction yarn. There’s very little to mark out what we see here as unique. Certainly nothing as arresting as the high strangeness of the first episode of Doctor Who, or the bleak dystopia of Blake’s 7’s The Way Back.


Even Laurie Johnson’s original theme is on the generic side, only added to by the men-in-macs-with-guns spy titles. This is frequently creaky fluff-ridden “live” TV, of course, so it’s rough and ready and earns some leeway as a result. The first 10 minutes comprise a no-good, rotten so-and-so (Godfrey Quigley as Spicer) hiding behind doors (like a bargain basement Hitchcock) or just out of sight in the surgery of Ian Hendry’s Dr David Keel. Spicer is after a mislaid package. 


Meanwhile, Keel announces his nuptials to fellow Dr Richard Tredding (Philip Stone; dad in A Clockwork Orange and Captain Blumburtt in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom). Keel is getting hitched to Katherine Woodville’s receptionist Peggy, and it’s her fate that ensures his path crosses with John Steed.


Whom we don’t see here. So there’s only one surviving first season episode Steed is in. Hendry’s fine in a rugged, leading man, kind of way. But he’s more interesting as an actor by the time he’s gone to seed as Eric Paice in Get Carter a decade later. Peggy seems like a jolly nice girl, while Stone wins a few laughs as an amiable duffer (when Keel suggests he be the best man or give the bride away, he replies “Only too pleased to do both”).


Quigley’s boss is Ronnie Vance (Robert James, the High Priest in Masque of Mandragora, and Ven Glynd in the first The Way Back). He comes on, which means he doesn’t exactly, like a proto-Blofeld, the camera focusing only on his hands and the dog he is stroking on his lap. Emphasising the “realism” of the show, compared to what would follow, the plot focuses on cocaine; four gran’s worth of “snow” has been mistakenly delivered to the surgery (very dumb criminals, these). 


There’s also reference to one of the gang being “coked up”. Murray Melvin plays Charlie (no, not because he’s a user), and is instantly recognisable in both appearance and manner (he’d go on to play Reverend Runt in Barry Lyndon).


The murder of poor Peggy, who got a good look at Quigley so has to die (a bit of a stretch, really; certainly more fraught with potential repercussions for the gang to off her rather than Quigley) is almost artistically oblique. Either that or a bit clumsy. We don’t hear a shot, although we see her through gun site. And then Keel is holding her lifeless body. Quite effective on that level, as it makes it believable he has no idea what has happened until he sees the blood on his hand.


With barely a third of this surviving, it’s impossible to judge how the wholer piece works. But what there is, is fairly middling stuff. Not bad, but certainly not great. This, and the first complete surviving episode, go to underline how vital Steed – or rather Macnee – is to the series, and what a deceptively suave and laidback presence he is. I’ll give this an average score, as less or more would be guesswork.




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

To survive a war, you gotta become war.

Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985) (SPOILERS?) I’d like to say it’s mystifying that a film so bereft of merit as Rambo: First Blood Part II could have finished up the second biggest hit of 1985. It wouldn’t be as bad if it was, at minimum, a solid action movie, rather than an interminable bore. But the movie struck a chord somewhere, somehow. As much as the most successful picture of that year, Back to the Future , could be seen to suggest moviegoers do actually have really good taste, Rambo rather sends a message about how extensively regressive themes were embedding themselves in Reaganite, conservative ‘80s cinema (to be fair, this is something one can also read into Back to the Future ), be those ones of ill-conceived nostalgia or simple-minded jingoism, notional superiority and might. The difference between Stallone and Arnie movies starts right here; self-awareness. Audiences may have watched R ambo in the same way they would a Schwarzenegger picture, but I’m

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

You were a few blocks away? What’d you see it with, a telescope?

The Eyes of Laura Mars (1978) (SPOILERS) John Carpenter’s first serial-killer screenplay to get made, The Eyes of Laura Mars came out nearly three months before Halloween. You know, the movie that made the director’s name. And then some. He wasn’t best pleased with the results of The Eyes of Laura Mars, which ended up co-credited to David Zelag Goodman ( Straw Dogs , Logan’s Run ) as part of an attempt by producer Jon Peters to manufacture a star vehicle for then-belle Barbra Streisand: “ The original script was very good, I thought. But it got shat upon ”. Which isn’t sour grapes on Carpenter’s part. The finished movie bears ready evidence of such tampering, not least in the reveal of the killer (different in Carpenter’s conception). Its best features are the so-uncleanly-you-can-taste-it 70s New York milieu and the guest cast, but even as an early example of the sub-genre, it’s burdened by all the failings inherit with this kind of fare.

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

You don’t know anything about this man, and he knows everything about you.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s two-decades-later remake of his British original. It’s undoubtedly the better-known version, but as I noted in my review of the 1934 film, it is very far from the “ far superior ” production Truffaut tried to sell the director on during their interviews. Hitchcock would only be drawn – in typically quotable style – that “ the first version is the work of a talented amateur and the second was made by a professional ”. For which, read a young, creatively fired director versus one clinically going through the motions, occasionally inspired by a shot or sequence but mostly lacking the will or drive that made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much such a pleasure from beginning to end.

I don't like the way Teddy Roosevelt is looking at me.

North by Northwest (1959) (SPOILERS) North by Northwest gets a lot of attention as a progenitor of the Bond formula, but that’s giving it far too little credit. Really, it’s the first modern blockbuster, paving the way for hundreds of slipshod, loosely plotted action movies built around set pieces rather than expertly devised narratives. That it delivers, and delivers so effortlessly, is a testament to Hitchcock, to writer Ernest Lehmann, and to a cast who make the entire implausible exercise such a delight.