Skip to main content

If you hold on too long, someone’s going to put a bullet in your head.

The Avengers
2.8: Bullseye

Another Eric Paice teleplay, and an improvement over The Decapod although, where that had a decent twist, the whos, whys and whats of Bullseye lead to something of a shrug. Its greatest asset is Ronald Radd’s stock market tycoon Henry Cade, a Gordon Gekko a quarter of a century before Wall Street, revelling in buying up, stripping down and selling on his assets without conscience or regard for those who may lose out.


Cathy: I feel if I hold on a little longer someone’s going to go up to three pounds.
Young: If you hold on too long, someone’s going to put a bullet in your head.

Cathy’s back in the frame, and front-and-centre, similarly to Venus in the previous episode. Unlike Venus, though, she has sass and smarts on her side. Steed ensures a sizeable portion of shares in suspicious gun manufacturer Anderson’s Small Arms are purchased when Mr Anderson is discovered with a bullet in him (the first of a string; board members start dropping like flies), and all it takes is for Cathy to appear at the shareholders meeting, ask a few diligent questions, and presto, she’s taken his place.


Perhaps surprisingly, the portrait of the pressures of share dealing and Cade’s attempted takeover are far more engaging than the arms dealing side. Which is a bit of a murk of Anderson arms being smuggled to Africa under the watch of Karl (Bernard Kay).


There are shenanigans too; Karl is carrying on with Dorothy Young (Laurie Leigh) in front of her director husband (Felix Deebank), who is attempting to carry on with his secretary Jean (Mitzi Rogers); he manages to get her back to his house boat at any rate, in an example of some very dodgy '60s office dirty doggedness. Karl’s interests are purely those of leverage, however, as he’s also been carrying on with Doreen Ellis (Judy Parfitt). Quite how Karl came to gain such a hold over the company and its staff eluded me, and his demise is similarly perfunctory and insubstantial; he heads off for Brittany with Dorothy and we are told the river police caught up with the boat and recovered the guns.


Cathy: How would you describe your taste in décor?
Cade: Vulgar.
Cathy: I see you are a frank and straightforward man.
Cade: No, I’m cunning and devious.

Radd was only 33 when he made this, but he could easily pass for the 44 he’s playing as Cade. It’s amusing to see the positive impression he makes on Cathy, and particularly the way Steed overtly disapproves (“You don’t want to get mixed up with the likes of him”). Indeed, the episode ends with Cathy and Cade agreeing to a dinner date. While Cade, presumably an ex-pat since he has a home in the Bahamas, is unapologetic about his behaviour, he’s also winningly transparent, describing his typical actions upon taking over a business (first he pays off directors, then fires all the executive staff, then brings in an accountant to go through books for irregularities) and pointing out that Anderson has no moral high ground to stand on (three co-directors devoting their lives to making armaments, and each finding a bribe too big to refuse; which got them bumped off).


Appropriately, Cade is instrumental in tying up the case; Cathy sells her shares to him, enabling the takeover and thus putting a halt to Karl’s activities. To add insult to the company’s injury, Cade wastes no time in disposing of his purchase, selling it to a Japanese syndicate (questioned why he didn’t examine their files down to the last paperclip, he replies, “Well, I always say that, it frightens them you see”).


Steed: Fascinating place. Oh, they’re so greedy!

Of course, Cathy has reason to see the positive side of Cade (she thinks he puts on a show, and it may be that he’s less unscrupulous than he likes to make out), as Steed hasn’t exactly been doing everything in his power to win her favour. He has been entering her flat, posing as a window cleaner and telling the police she’s gone to the Isle of Wight when they show up at the door. He also arranges for her to meet Young on his houseboat. “Did you conduct any more of my private business while I was out?” she asks. His reaction to the sights of the stock exchange is similarly Steed-ish, although the proceedings are generally Steed-lite (“A shrewd man, your broker” Cade surmises of him when they finally meet).


Generally, not a great episode, but one with a great guest character (although, foreman George (Robin Wentworth) also raises a smile, commenting that his wife wouldn’t believe the truth, that he was stocktaking late into the night, so he may as well tell her a lie).


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I think I’m Pablo Picasso!

Venom: Let There Be Carnage (2021) (SPOILERS) I get the impression that, whatever it is stalwart Venom fans want from a Venom movie, this iteration isn’t it. The highlight here for me is absolutely the wacky, love-hate, buddy-movie antics of Tom Hardy and his symbiote alter. That was the best part of the original, before it locked into plot “progression” and teetered towards a climax where one CGI monster with gnarly teeth had at another CGI monster with gnarly teeth. And so it is for Venom: Let There Be Carnage . But cutting quicker to the chase.

Are you, by any chance, in a trance now, Mr Morrison?

The Doors (1991) (SPOILERS) Oliver Stone’s mammoth, mythologising paean to Jim Morrison is as much about seeing himself in the self-styled, self-destructive rebel figurehead, and I suspect it’s this lack of distance that rather quickly leads to The Doors becoming a turgid bore. It’s strange – people are , you know, films equally so – but I’d hitherto considered the epic opus patchy but worthwhile, a take that disintegrated on this viewing. The picture’s populated with all the stars it could possibly wish for, tremendous visuals (courtesy of DP Robert Richardson) and its director operating at the height of his powers, but his vision, or the incoherence thereof, is the movie’s undoing. The Doors is an indulgent, sprawling mess, with no internal glue to hold it together dramatically. “Jim gets fat and dies” isn’t really a riveting narrative through line.

These are not soda cans you asked me to get for you.

The Devil’s Own (1997) (SPOILERS) Naturally, a Hollywood movie taking the Troubles as a backdrop is sure to encounter difficulties. It’s the push-pull of wanting to make a big meaningful statement about something weighty, sobering and significant in the real world and bottling it when it comes to the messy intricacies of the same. So inevitably, the results invariably tend to the facile and trite. I’m entirely sure The Devil’s Own would have floundered even if Harrison Ford hadn’t come on board and demanded rewrites, but as it is, the finished movie packs a lot of talent to largely redundant end.

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.

Fifty medications didn’t work because I’m really a reincarnated Russian blacksmith?

Infinite (2021) (SPOILERS) It’s as if Mark Wahlberg, his lined visage increasingly resembling a perplexed potato, learned nothing from the blank ignominy of his “performances” in previous big-budget sci-fi spectacles Planet of the Apes and, er, Max Payne . And maybe include The Happening in that too ( Transformers doesn’t count, since even all-round reprobate Shia La Boeuf made no visible dent on their appeal either way). As such, pairing him with the blandest of journeyman action directors on Infinite was never going to seem like a sterling idea, particularly with a concept so far removed from of either’s wheelhouse.

I can do in two weeks what you can only wish to do in twenty years.

Wrath of Man (2021) (SPOILERS) Guy Ritchie’s stripped-down remake of Le Convoyeur (or Cash Truck , also the working title for this movie) feels like an intentional acceleration in the opposite direction to 2019’s return-to-form The Gentleman , his best movie in years. Ritchie seems to want to prove he can make a straight thriller, devoid of his characteristic winks, nods, playfulness and outright broad (read: often extremely crude) sense of humour. Even King Arthur: Legend of the Sword has its fair share of laughs. Wrath of Man is determinedly grim, though, almost Jacobean in its doom-laden trajectory, and Ritchie casts his movie accordingly, opting for more restrained performers, less likely to summon more flamboyant reflexes.

Five people make a conspiracy, right?

Snake Eyes (1998) (SPOILERS) The best De Palma movies offer a synthesis of plot and aesthetic, such that the director’s meticulously crafted shots and set pieces are underpinned by a solid foundation. That isn’t to say, however, that there isn’t a sheer pleasure to be had from the simple act of observing, from De Palma movies where there isn’t really a whole lot more than the seduction of sound, image and movement. Snake Eyes has the intention to be both scrupulously written and beautifully composed, coming after a decade when the director was – mostly – exploring his oeuvre more commercially than before, which most often meant working from others’ material. If it ultimately collapses in upon itself, then, it nevertheless delivers a ream of positives in both departments along the way.

I’ll look in Bostock’s pocket.

Doctor Who Revelation of the Daleks Lovely, lovely, lovely. I can quite see why Revelation of the Daleks doesn’t receive the same acclaim as the absurdly – absurdly, because it’s terrible – overrated Remembrance of the Daleks . It is, after all, grim, grisly and exemplifies most of the virtues for which the Saward era is commonly decried. I’d suggest it’s an all-time classic, however, one of the few times 1980s Who gets everything, or nearly everything, right. If it has a fault, besides Eric’s self-prescribed “Kill everyone” remit, it’s that it tries too much. It’s rich, layered and very funny. It has enough material and ideas to go off in about a dozen different directions, which may be why it always felt to me like it was waiting for a trilogy capper.

Madam, the chances of bagging an elephant on the Moon are remote.

First Men in the Moon (1964) (SPOILERS) Ray Harryhausen swaps fantasy for science fiction and stumbles somewhat. The problem with his adaptation of popular eugenicist HG Wells’ 1901 novel isn’t so much that it opts for a quirky storytelling approach over an overtly dramatic one, but that it’s insufficiently dedicated to pursuing that choice. Which means First Men in the Moon , despite a Nigel Kneale screenplay, rather squanders its potential. It does have Lionel Jeffries, though.

I’ve crossed the Atlantic to be reasonable.

Dodsworth (1936) (SPOILERS) Prestige Samuel Goldwyn production – signifiers being attaching a reputable director, often William Wyler, to then-popular plays or classical literature, see also Dead End , Wuthering Heights , The Little Foxes , The Best Years of Our Lives , and earning a Best Picture nomination as a matter of course – that manages to be both engrossing and irritating. Which is to say that, in terms of characterisation, Dodsworth rather shows its years, expecting a level of engagement in the relationship between Sam Dodsworth (Walter Huston) and his wayward, fun-loving wife Fran (Ruth Chatterton) at odds with their unsympathetic behaviour.