Skip to main content

Now, you know about black magic, don’t you?

The Avengers
2.16: Warlock

A genuinely supernatural episode, one of the series’ big no-nos, for some fans, your appreciation for Warlock will likely rest entirely on whether you accept its premise. I regard it as one of the highlights of the second season, although the common verdict appears to be that it’s something of a disappointment.


Peter Hammond was one of the series’ best directors, and he pulls out the stylistic stops to make the most of Doreen Montgomery’s teleplay. Montgomery had a long career as writer for the big screen from the late ‘30s to the late ‘50s; this was her only contribution to the show, in an episode originally designed as the introduction for Cathy Gale’s character. There are liberally evident signs of this, most obviously Steed visiting her at the Natural History Museum, where she is studying skulls.


Steed: I know the face forget the name. Ah yes, poor Yorick. I knew him, you know, a fellow of infinite jest.
Cathy: More than can be said for you.

The Steed-Cathy repartee is firmly in place right off the bat, as is her status as a font of all knowledge (“Now, you know about black magic, don’t you?” –  including witchcraft, superstition and blood rites). Steed has discovered An Occult Grimoire at the home of this friend Peter Neville (Alban Blakelock, giving a fine transfixed performance, accompanied by simply-but-strikingly superimposed sparkly objects). Neville was, this being The Avengers, due to attend a Missile Committee meeting (always with the missiles!), but is bedbound, diagnosed with severe shock.


It’s up to Cathy to infiltrate the cause of his malaise, a black magic circle presided over by Peter Arne’s Cosmo Gallion. Arne, who gives a highly memorable, charismatic performance, was originally intended to appear in the Doctor Who story Frontios, but was murdered shortly before filming began. Cosmo’s services are for hire, in this case by Markel (John Hollis, Lobot in The Empire Strikes Back, and Sondeergard – who rocks – in The Mutants, as well as appearing in later Avengers The Cybernauts, The Superlative Seven and Legacy of Death).


While the episode hedges its bets with regard to the reality of magic (“It’s not a question of will, but of faith”), there’s little doubt what’s depicted is at very least psychically effected. Neville is sent into a spin, Cathy is drawn to the coven (even though she professes not to have been under the influence, she does appear to have arisen at the appointed, incantatory time). Cathy informs Steed that psychology plays a big part (but not all?) in warlocks exerting a hold over their victims, stating that one could exert influence at a distance, and “quite probably” make someone do what they ordered.


Montgomery’s teleplay picks up on the essentials of Crowleyian magic ((“Do ast thou wilt is the whole of the law”), but it’s softened slightly through Cosmo’s credentials as “an authority on paranormal psychology”. He’s an expert in “the study of trance states, hypnosis, telepathy, that sort of thing”. The magic community is obviously a small one, since Cosmo has read Cathy’s monograph on voodoo, and despite warning her with regard to the legality of joining black magic groups, he welcomes her into his own magic circle. Naturally, he’s taken with her, offering to cast her horoscope (she was born at midnight on 5/10/30, a half decade younger than Blackman herself)


Cosmo: Mr Markel, you’re really a very stupid man. Like all of your kind, you only believe what you can see and what you can touch.

Markel, who is after a formula for a new propellant (another propellant!), isn’t really interested in Cosmo’s methods, though, only his results, which leads to the latter unreservedly dismissing his idiocy (“Your methods are certainly effective, Markel. He’s dead” Cosmo notes after Markel aggressively attempts to discern why Neville’s brief case is absent the all-important papers). And, when Markel demands his money back, threatening Cosmo, the chrome-domed thug is soon on the receiving end of a heart attack administered by means a voodoo doll.


Cosmo is also intent on bringing Cathy to his magical beck-and-call (“Will with me, Cathy Gale”), considering her perfect for the Ritual of Asmodeus (the demon of lust, responsible for twisting people’s sexual desires, so one guesses the episode wouldn’t have gone out if Cosmo had brought the ritual to a successful head). As it is, there’s much writhing, chanting, and vigorously ecstatic gyration from a frenzied Julia (Pat Spender). So it’s a bit disappointing that events resolve themselves so perfunctorily (the name of the game for the show at this point). Cathy and Steed are surrounded, but Cosmo conveniently drops dead; his exertions required complete faith, so when he failed it destroyed him.


Steed is rigorously facile, throughout, chatting up a barmaid by telling her fortune (“Here’s to palmistry”) and running foul of Cathy (“You seem to think this is something to joke about. I saw too much of this sort of thing when I was in Africa, Steed” to which he responds levelly “I am only interested in who killed Neville”). His debonair attendance of Cosmo’s “very elementary” lecture, posing as a physicist, doesn’t manage to convince us that he’s a devotee, which doesn’t escape Cosmo’s notice either (“Well, for a start, his aura is wrong for a man of science”). It’s probably appropriate then that, for the third episode in a row, Cathy is centre stage. Steed is unmasked (or unhooded), tied up, and when he escapes, Cathy has already brought matters to a head.


Warlock features the penultimate appearance of One Ten (in the Studio Canal DVD release order, which I’m following), sharing pints in the pub with Steed, both in matching bowlers (“Myrtle, is this the bottom of the barrel?”), an additional incongruity with subject matter that starts with hexes and ends in a full-blooded occult ceremony. The close-out finds Steed and Cathy joking about finding something relaxing to do where someone else does all the work for a change. Such as boxing; Warlock’s certainly far from straightforward pugilism, a confident and sprightly change of tone and subject matter for the show.








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.