Skip to main content

It’s the power that excites me, sir.

The Avengers
2.11: Death of a Great Dane

Death of a Great Dane’s opening suggests a much broader episode than proves to be the case, the kind of eccentric set up one would expect of later period Avengers; Gregory (Leslie French) attends a rain-lashed funeral, reminiscing that he was with the deceased for four years, at which point it is revealed this is a pet cemetery. If the remainder is straighter, the teleplay by Roger Marshall and Jeremy Scott is nevertheless replete with witty plotting and dialogue, superbly delivered by a fine cast.


Mrs Gale: Did he always travel on a full stomach?

After the discovery of an “indigestible breakfast” in the stomach of a car crash victim (£50,000 in uncut diamonds), Steed and Mrs Gale embark on the trail of funds of the bed-ridden (since his heart attack) Mr Litoff, who managed to build up up one of the world’s largest financial empires over the course of 25 years. It seems his personal assets have been converted to cash and illegally transferred offshore during the previous six months. Mr Litoff was known for his philanthropy, but “turned off the tap” at the time he was laid low. Cathy finds this development unlikely; it isn’t so surprising, then, that we eventually learn Litoff’s no longer in the land of the living, and it’s hisbody lying in the pet cemetery.


The plot is engineered by a typically eccentrically formulated trio, led by a particularly young and dashing Frederick Jaeger as Getz (quite unlike his Doctor Who appearances a decade or so later, in Planet of Evil and The Invisible Enemy), Litoff’s unsung assistant. His co-conspirators are Gregory, the servile butler, and Sir James (John Laurie on typically magnificent form; not for nothing would he appear three more times in the series), a crucial key to the deception as Litoff’s personal physician.


Along the way, we take in some colourful locations and scenarios. For no particular good reason, but very Avengers, diamond smuggler Miller was a keen magician, leading Steed to interview his wife (Clare Kelly) at the Big Laugh joke shop (“I hope he’s better at it than you are”, Cathy critiques of Steed’s sleights of hand; Steed then meets with her customary disapproval when he jokes he may see how he goes with the widow).


Sir James: Our dreams have betrayed us.

We are also invited to a wine tasting, a particularly exuberant showcase for Laurie, who has great chemistry with Macnee. Sir James dreams of founding a clinic in Asia, where he can be honest with his patients (“Madam, your heart flutters because you’re a gross and greedy overeater” would be a sample line), and feigns indulgence of Steed’s suspicions of Getz.


Mostly, though, the scene is about Sir James’ amazement at Steed’s perceptive palate (“You’re wonderful!”), although Cathy, despite being well-versed in pretty much anything and everything, doesn’t know you aren’t supposed to drink the wine at a wine tasting (Steed instructs her to imbibe milk before hand, though, “Keeps your palate perceptive and stops you getting sloshed” so which is it?) and goes home tipsy for an altercation with a lackey (at the event, she smiles in superior fashion when an old duffer complains “I don’t know why they allow women down here”).


Gregory: It’s the power that excites me, sir. I want to be rude, and ill-mannered, and order people about! And then I look forward to an association with a considerable number of good-looking women.

If Sir James’ motivation is clinics of his own (rather than wealth), Gregory’s is “rebellion against subservience”. As winning and larger-than-life as Laurie can’t help but be, French’s character is the most engaging, observing due etiquette and diplomacy but nursing adverse ambitions beneath his mild exterior. French plays Gregory as an appealing worm intent on turning, even when we learn of his motives (neither he nor Sir James were in on the murders of Mitchell and his wife); we’re almost sorry when Steed shows no clemency (“You will be wanting me?”), and Gregory opines “Sad about all my beautiful women”.


As with Sir James, the best Gregory scenes match him with Steed, comparisons between the two made visually through similar hats and umbrellas, and general geniality. They both like dogs too (“I bet you haven’t seen a decent tree in years” Steed greets the “surviving” hound), of course. As it seems did Miller, who could not bring himself to have Bell Hound put down to complete the deception (about which, alas for her, Mrs Miller knew). Gregory isn’t greedy, happy with a smaller cut of the fortune than Getz (“I’m quite content with eleven million pounds, sir”)


Jaeger makes for a particularly strong opponent, perhaps not furnished with as many memorable exchanges as his other co-stars, but enough to deliver a worthy villain of the piece. He also indulges much temple rubbing. For him, motivation is simply “dissatisfaction with a role of faceless service”.


Death’s plot is constantly moving, making every scene count, especially noticeable when in a season with its fair share of sluggish episodes. Sir James reveals himself at the end of Act Two, leading to Steed’s imprisonment (in luxury) until Cathy arrives in the following act. In common with her luck of late, she’s almost immediately identified as Steed’s accomplice, and both end up locked in Litoff’s bedroom (at which point her leather ensemble makes an appearance).


Her sending the message that Litoff’s body has been exhumed triggers a standard hasty resolution, but that’s not a drawback on this occasion; Death of a Great Dane follows The Mauritius Penny as another first class episode, one of the best of the season.









Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.