Skip to main content

Confuse The Twilight Zone with The Outer Limits? DO YOU EVEN KNOW ME?

The X-Files
11.4: The Lost Art of Forehead Sweat

(SPOILERS) Can Darin Morgan just write every episode of The X-Files? Even The Lost Art of Forehead Sweat, which teeters into the territory of the less than worthy of his talent in places by going for obvious targets – Morgan is generally signposted by his ability to do exactly not that – is leagues ahead of anything else in either this series or (mostly) the original.


Mulder: It’s the Mandela Effect. When someone has a memory of something that’s not shared by the masses, or the factual record.

As current age conspiracy theories go, the Mandela Effect is one of the leaders of the pack, and being an intrinsically quirky theory, it’s entirely appropriate that Morgan should present it in his trademark quirky, self-reflexive style. While it gets its name from the belief, as cited by Mulder, that Nelson Mandela died in prison, and includes such speculation as whether our internal organs, as per medical text books, are in different places from where they used to be, Morgan also references the more common idiosyncrasy of the effect, that it seems to weave its magic on innocuous pop culture events, such as whether there was a ‘90s movie called Shazam starring Sinbad (see also C-3P0’s never-used-to-be silver leg, or Jaws’ girlfriend in Moonraker’s lack of tooth-wear) or Scully’s childhood love for Goop-O (did Fruit Loops change their name from Froot Loops?) Although, the latter is most notable for Scully continuing the season’s taint referencing (“Lemon and lime tastes like leprechaun taint”).


Reggie: Were you followed?
Mulder: It would be a hell of a twist if it were Rod Serling.

And then there’s Mulder’s obsession with his memory of the first Twilight Zone episode,
(“But Mulder, isn’t you fake Twilight Zone memory also a Mandela Effect?”: “No, because my fake memory is real”) offered the altogether mundane explanation that, as the explanation would be with the beloved flawed memories of so many, that it was never an episode of The Twilight Zone at all; it’s from The Dusty Realm (ahem). That’s obviously the “wise’ conclusion of any rational minded type taking a cursory glance into these waters, and one suspects it’s Morgan’s too, given he only really gives the thing a smidgeon of credit in a late stage gag.


Mulder: Maybe, this is simply evidence of a parallel universe.
Scully and Reggie: WHAT?

He scrupulously avoids mentioning CERN, the holy grail of Mandela Effect theorists. Could that be because it’s already lined up for a devoted plotline (it is fairly irresistible)? But Mulder does kind of invoke it with his initial enthusiasm for a parallel universe answer to the conundrum (“We’re not going to do this parallel universe, sci-fi gobbledegook, nerd boy. Please, just drop it”).


Mulder: The Mandela Effect has been an Internet meme for almost a decade. It’s always been called that.
Reggie: Ah, you see, you’re having a Mengele Effect about the Mandela Effect.

The episode hinges on the testimony of one Reggie Something (Brian Huskey), in common with many Morgan structures required to tell shaggy dog stories (along with Dr They) in order to guide the narrative. He claims the government is trying to erase him from history, that he knows Mulder and Scully (or “Sculls”) and even that he actually started the X-Files (cue an amusingly re-jigged title sequence and clips from classic episodes, including the Pilot, Tooms, Clyde Bruckman’s Final Repose, Home, Bad Blood and, er Tesos Dos Bichos).


His path began while tracking down Dr Wuzzle books that he remembers being spelt Wussle (“No, I remember the logo being racist in a different way”), and he claims the Effect is named after Josef Mengele, because of the memory some have of his apprehension in Ohio in 1970.  That Reggie turns out to be Reginald Murgatroyd, who suffered a nervous breakdown through recognising that, by serving his country he was betraying its very ideals, is perhaps inevitable (Reggie witnessed a UFO landing in Grenada, and embarked on a series of government jobs, from US postal service, to IRS, to SEC, DoJ and CIA and DoD). But Morgan offers the sliver, in keeping with the work of Dr They, that Reggie is telling the truth, when Skinner arrives to see Murgatroyd driven away by the men in white suits (“Where the hell are they taking Reggie?”)


The problem is, the choice to make the Mandela Effect about Fake News is something of a misstep, not that Morgan doesn’t hit some targets, but that he also launches at lazy, easy ones. This season has become overpoweringly overburdened by the weight of the Trump regime, whereas this is exactly the kind of show that shouldn’t take new incumbents so literally as exerting real power. Writer after writer is crying into their cornflakes for an America they don’t recognise any more, but the Morgan of old response would more likely be that it’s exactly the same one, just with a different set of obfuscators sticking their heads above the parapets.


Dr They: It’s a presentation of real facts but in a way that ensures no one will believe any of it.
Mulder: To what end?
Dr They: The bitter end.

Getting an almost unrecognisable Stuart Margolin (Angel in The Rockford Files) to play Dr Thaddeus Q They is something of a coup, and at least part of his pitch is astute as it relates to Phoney Fake News: that the objective is to make anyone and everyone uncertain about what to believe any more. Certainly, as this relates to the conspirasphere, not that you’re supposed to believe anything in such territory, it could never be more so. They makes a case for a post-cover-up, post-conspiracy age (“Po-co”) (“In the old days, I’d never have gone out and told you”) and Morgan takes up his own baton from last season’s Mulder and Scully Meet the Were-Monster when They informs Mulder his time has passed (“Time when people of power thought they could keep secrets”). It doesn’t matter what comes out when no one can be sure how much veracity any of it has.


Mulder: To be honest, I’m not believing any of this.
Dr They: Well, believe what you want. You’re only proving my point, you twit.

The idea of consciously manipulating the truth in order to slide subjects from the radar (“the gamut from holocaust denial to corporate product news. Products catch on fire, companies like G- spending billions to repress memories”) has a certain cachet, but Morgan doesn’t quite stick the landing, going from playful noodling to clumsily on-the-nose Trumpism that Carter might have written (“We’re building a wall” announce the aliens. Who no longer want to have any further contact with us because we lie. The barrel-scraping parting shot? “You’re free to explore Uranus”) Mulder’s summation of the situation is at least amusing (“So that’s the truth. We’re not alone in the universe, but not one likes us?”), but the last quarter finds some decidedly not-so-sharp writing.


FBI Agent: You start out a rebel. But then you get fat. The next thing you know, you’re deep state. It’s sad.
Mulder: Do you know who I am? I’m Fox Mulder. I was fighting the power to break conspiracies before you saw your first chemtrail, you punks. I’m Fox Mulder! I’m Fox freakin’ Mulder, you punks! I’m Fox Mulder! Fox Mulder!

Which is a shame, as for much of this ride, Morgan is delivering dynamite, from shots at Duchovny’s waistline to the explanation that no one gets probed by aliens anymore because of the Mandela Effect. And the clip from The Last Martian is a lovely little vignette worthy of Joe Dante’s Mant (“That ain’t a window. That’s a mirror”).


Mulder: I was out squatchin’.
Scully: Any luck?
Mulder: No, but that’s not the point. I just had to get away from the madness for a little while. It seems this past year all I’ve done is watch the news and worry that the country’s gone insane. I had to get out to nature, you know, where it’s simple and uncomplicated, where it’s just you and the elements. And possibly a cryptozoological, simian-like hairy humanoid with enormous feet.
Scully: I think you just like squatchin’.

So this is the rarity for me, the Darin Morgan episode that doesn’t get five stars. Perhaps he’s got fat. Oh wait… That would just be small potatoes to him.


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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

Must the duck be here?

The Favourite (2018)
(SPOILERS) In my review of The Killing of a Sacred Deer, I suggested The Favourite might be a Yorgos Lanthimos movie for those who don’t like Yorgos Lanthimos movies. At least, that’s what I’d heard. And certainly, it’s more accessible than either of his previous pictures, the first two thirds resembling a kind of Carry On Up the Greenaway, but despite these broader, more slapstick elements and abundant caustic humour, there’s a prevailing detachment on the part of the director, a distancing oversight that rather suggests he doesn’t feel very much for his subjects, no matter how much they emote, suffer or connive. Or pratfall.

Whoever comes, I'll kill them. I'll kill them all.

John Wick: Chapter 2 (2017)
(SPOILERS) There’s no guessing he’s back. John Wick’s return is most definite and demonstrable, in a sequel that does what sequels ought in all the right ways, upping the ante while never losing sight of the ingredients that made the original so formidable. John Wick: Chapter 2 finds the minimalist, stripped-back vehicle and character of the first instalment furnished with an elaborate colour palette and even more idiosyncrasies around the fringes, rather like Mad Max in that sense, and director Chad Stahleski (this time without the collaboration of David Leitch, but to no discernible deficit) ensures the action is filled to overflowing, but with an even stronger narrative drive that makes the most of changes of gear, scenery and motivation.

The result is a giddily hilarious, edge-of-the-seat thrill ride (don’t believe The New York Times review: it is not “altogether more solemn” I can only guess Jeannette Catsoulis didn’t revisit the original in the interven…

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

I don’t know if what is happening is fair, but it’s the only thing I can think of that’s close to justice.

The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017)
(SPOILERS) I think I knew I wasn’t going to like The Killing of a Sacred Deer in the first five minutes. And that was without the unedifying sight of open-heart surgery that takes up the first four. Yorgos Lanthimos is something of a Marmite director, and my responses to this and his previous The Lobster (which I merely thought was “okay” after exhausting its thin premise) haven’t induced me to check out his earlier work. Of course, he has now come out with a film that, reputedly, even his naysayers will like, awards-darling The Favourite

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …