Skip to main content

You didn’t come here just to sell ladies’ nighties, Mrs Peel.

The Avengers
4.5: Death at Bargain Prices

Great title, and the best episode of the season so far. Brian Clemens fashions a fine, larger-than-life teleplay brought effectively to the screen by Ealing man Charles Crichton, mustering strong support from returnees Andre “Quatermass” Morell (Death of a Batman) and TP McKenna (Trojan Horse).


Mrs Peel: I think it’s the plans for a nuclear bomb.
Steed: How can you tell, Madame Curie?
Mrs Peel: Thermodynamics, Mr Magoo.

I say larger-than-life. Its loopy in the extreme. Having reach the final third without revealing just what the diabolical masterminds are up to, we discover Horatio “King” Kane has been building a nuclear bomb – the first clue to this doesn’t appear until Professor Popple’s supply of honeyed bumble bees is mentioned, Popple being a nuclear physicist – and that “We’ve found our bomb. We’re standing in it”.


King Kane: The bomb, this store, will explode with the first customer who buys a washing machine.

Kane’s suitably barking plan is to hold the country to ransom, having set off a bomb that will take out a significant part of London: “My biggest takeover bid yet… Tomorrow I’m going to take over the entire country”. It’s entirely half-baked, but somehow in context of the setting it somehow seems completely fitting.


There’s no good reason that Wentworth (McKenna) should be holding court outside a tent surrounded by palm fronds, except that he was formerly a mercenary in the Congo – the set dressing leading to nothing, other than to emphasis the off-key approach generally.


A scene where Steed comes across Kane as the fading, querulous old man in the attic, waxing lyrical about the manufacturing of yesteryear (“Now it’s out of date before its left the assembly line. Rush, tear, grab and grub. That’s life today”) appears to be a massive misdirection (although that’s not uncommon in the series), except that it kind of isn’t, since he’s still talking about modern methods as a reason for payback in the final scene (the reading is that Cain is simply unstable, as he wouldn’t give away his motivation like that otherwise). Although, this exchange does also lead to an extremely well landed punch from Wentworth, giving Steed a shiner (“My pride was hurt” he confesses to Emma. Later, released from the confines of a carpet, she comments that she is uninjured: “Only my pride”).


Jarvis: Told you I’d keep my eyes PEELED, didn’t I?

The most fun comes from hanging out at the store, though. Steed still wanders about even after Wentworth has socked him one, while Emma dresses as a space girl, has to navigate the sexism of the staff and hangs out with store detective Jarvis (a scene stealing John Cater; it’s a great shame he’s killed off at the end of the second act): “You didn’t come here just to sell ladies’ nighties, Mrs Peel”.


Steed: I asked the chief predator where to find you and he said, “Our Mrs Peel is in Ladies’ Underwear”. I rattled up the stairs three at a time.
Mrs Peel: Merry quips department on the fifth floor, sir.

The best moments are all Steed, including the above, all-time-classic merry quip. Macnee’s rapport with Rigg is wonderful throughout, from their being mistaken for an expectant couple in the nursey section (“This must be a very happy time for both of you”) to Emma’s simple superiority in all things scientific (she susses it’s a bomb, thanks to her knowledge of thermodynamics – perhaps a bit too Mrs Gale, that), to Steed arriving at her flat post-black eye and finding the grape a grateful tonic (“Ah! The corpuscles are beginning to function normally”).


Steed: Cheese. Stilton.
Julie: Yes, sir.
Steed: Stilton. Pot-fed. Its feet, firmly manacled.
Julie: Firmly manacled? You want a very ripe one, sir?
Steed: Leaping about.
Julie: I’ll see if I can catch one for you.

He also has a fine, rascally scene with Diane Clare’s food girl, in which he places an order and then adds “More than enough for two, if we leave out that half onion” (“Is that a proposition?” asks Julie. “More of a sly suggestion” he replies).


Steed: Come for my teddy bear. Can’t sleep without one.

And the pre-bomb fight is one of the series’ best staged, as Steed deflects the advance of thugs with a ping pong ball gun, poses as a mannequin, uses a cricket bat to deflect a knife (“Straight drive to mid-on. It’s all in the grip, you know”) and the goes to it on a villain with the same.


Emma, meanwhile, having been “dismissed for philandering with the customers”, casually clicks her fingers in response to a heavy’s advance, instructing “Give me the gun”; the choreography is particularly strong in this scene, and it always helps when you aren’t too distracted by the stunt doubles (in The Avengers that’s a rarity, with Blu-ray even more so).


A highly enjoyable episode then, complete with a now de rigueur daffy coda as Steed and Emma ride off on newly-gifted bicycles (“After all, we did save them from the biggest closing down sale of all time”).











Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

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.

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.

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.