Skip to main content

Definitely the perfect prisoner’s friend.

The Avengers
1.20: Tunnel of Fear

(SPOILERS) As Alan Hayes observes (in the booklet accompanying the DVD release of this recently discovered Season One episode), there’s a more than passing kitchen sink element to Tunnel of Fear. You could almost expect it to form the basis of a Public Eye case, rather than one in which Steed and Dr Keel get involved, if not for the necessary paraphernalia of secrets being circulated via a circus fairground.


Also rather upending the show’s later assured form, while I thought Patrick Macnee was an easy scene stealer from Ian Hendry in The Frighteners, I’m not sure he’s always the more confident performer of the two at this stage. Perhaps it’s the “live” nature of the recording that finds him rushing through scenes almost breathlessly, or possibly it’s being encumbered with a working-class compere role (“Girlies! Girlies! Girlies!” – thank goodness he wasn’t written any polari), but he doesn’t come across entirely naturally until he’s called upon to light an explosive cigarette at the climax.


On this occasion, the case comes to Keel – although Steed enables the investigation to sprout wings – as Harry Black (Anthony Bate, probably best known as Oliver Laçon in the Alec Guinness George Smiley adaptations), injured breaking out of prison – incarcerated for a crime he didn’t commit – shows up at the surgery in need of some attention. 


Fortuitously, his predicament dovetails very neatly with a case on Steed’s radar, and the latter gets the go-ahead from One-Ten (Douglas Muir in his fourth appearance as the character, saddled with Steed’s dog: “Well, what kind of food do you give this beast?”) to investigate further. 


This will entail Keel becoming “Definitely the perfect prisoner’s friend” and Steed masquerading as the showgirls’ MC (it’s unclear quite how he got the job at short notice, particularly since the rest of the crew seems as thick as thieves – because they are, and spies to boot – and he doesn’t seem to know well enough not to inflame Maxie Lardner (Stanley Platts). The latter eventually sets on him – “I thought I told you to keep your maulers off my girls!” – leading to the gentleman spy being bashed on the head with a vase by one of Rosie (Julie Samuels). Steed has been rather ungentlemanly, however – presumably purely in service of his cover – earlier slapping Rosie on the bottom, and this after he's caused another girl to squeal by laying his maulers on her.


CarolWhy don’t you go on a nice long holiday and leave us to get on with our work?

It isn’t only Maxie who’s unimpressed. Steed isn’t in the good books of Keel’s faithful nurse Carol (Ingrid Hafner), clearly having called upon the good doctor’s services a few too many times, but he nevertheless seems irrepressible in his bonhomie, even smooth-talking Harry’s mum (Doris Rogers): “There’s more to this than meets the eye. And yours are rather lovely”. Incorrigible is the word. There’s some quality interaction between this pair, including Steed referencing the law of probabilities, to which she responds “Can you be done for breaking it?


The most Avengers-y part of the plot gets the jump on The Manchurian Candidate by a good year (and the series would go there again, of course, with 4.9: Room Without a View). Harry was drugged then hypnotised, explaining his lack of memory of the night he supposedly stole the weekend’s takings of the fairground. The master hypnotist is Billy (Douglas Rye), working at the behest of Jack Wickram (John Salew) who “was took prisoner” in Korea and acted “very strange” when he came back, “like as if he had been brainwashed”.


Steed is captured and subjected to the technique, although I was unclear how far under he was supposed to be, or if he was under at all; Jack evidently isn’t sure either, on account of Steed’s cryptic responses; asked who he works for, he responds “I don’t know. Nobody knows”, which is probably true. And lists unhelpful facts about Keel (including the rather unfortunate repeated refrain of “Fond of children, fond of children”).


KeelYou mean you weren’t bluffing?
SteedI must confess, I really frightened myself for a moment. Quite frightened now. They cost a fortune.

If it sounds as if Steed gets all the good stuff, he’s actually offscreen for much of the third act, and perhaps the most surprising development is the domestic scene between Harry and his girlfriend Claire (Miranda Connell), who we first see ironing away in her bra and continuing to do so when the police barge into her house boat, just after she has concealed Keel and Harry. In a decidedly maturely-skewed turn of events, it’s revealed that Claire had a bairn while Harry was inside. Harry responds with “The little tramp!” while his ma insists it could happen to anyone and that she will stick by Claire over her son if it comes to it. Keel can only observe the exchange empathically, reticent of the delicate ground of attempting to offer advice. 


There’s no holy grail feeling to Tunnel of Fear, but it’s a very solid episode and offers additional insight into the show’s gradually development over the course of its first year. The idea of Steed using an unskilled civilian never quite gels at any point – certainly not with Season Two’s Dr King and Venus Smith – but Keel’s at least halfway believable as someone who’d willingly get embroiled in perilous plots and could take care of himself along the way (it’s a little more difficult to believe he’d be willing to use the gun he trains on villains, though). An episode also notable for being the final appearance from Steed’s pooch Puppy, who apparently had an accident on the underground and died. You’re left with more questions than answers knowing that, though.





















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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

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…

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…

You're waterboarding me.

The Upside (2017)
(SPOILERS) The list of US remakes of foreign-language films really ought to be considered a hiding to nothing, given the ratio of flops to unqualified successes. There’s always that chance, though, of a proven property (elsewhere) hitting the jackpot, and every exec hopes, in the case of French originals, for another The Birdcage, Three Men and a Baby, True Lies or Down and Out in Beverly Hills. Even a Nine Months, Sommersby or Unfaithful will do. Rather than EdTV. Or Sorcerer. Or Eye of the Beholder. Or Brick Mansions. Or Chloe. Or Intersection (Richard Gere is clearly a Francophile). Or Just Visiting. Or The Man with One Red Shoe. Or Mixed Nuts. Or Original Sin. Or Oscar. Or Point of No Return. Or Quick Change. Or Return to Paradise. Or Under Suspicion. Or Wicker Park. Or Father’s Day.

What about the meaningless line of indifference?

The Lion King (2019)
(SPOILERS) And so the Disney “live-action” remake train thunders on regardless (I wonder how long the live-action claim would last if there was a slim hope of a Best Animated Feature Oscar nod?) I know I keep repeating myself, but the early ‘90s Disney animation renaissance didn’t mean very much to me; I found their pictures during that period fine, but none of them blew me away as they did critics and audiences generally. As such, I have scant nostalgia to bring to bear on the prospect of a remake, which I’m sure can work both ways. Aladdin proved to be a lot of fun. Beauty and the Beast entirely tepid. The Lion King, well, it isn’t a badfilm, but it’s wearying its slavish respectfulness towards the original and so diligent in doing it justice, you’d think it was some kind of religious artefact. As a result, it is, ironically, for the most part, dramatically dead in the water.

Would you like Smiley Sauce with that?

American Beauty (1999)
(SPOILERS) As is often the case with the Best Picture Oscar, a backlash against a deemed undeserved reward has grown steadily in the years since American Beauty’s win. The film is now often identified as symptomatic of a strain of cinematic indulgence focussing on the affluent middle classes’ first world problems. Worse, it showcases a problematic protagonist with a Lolita-fixation towards his daughter’s best friend (imagine its chances of getting made, let alone getting near the podium in the #MeToo era). Some have even suggested it “mercifully” represents a world that no longer exists (as a pre-9/11 movie), as if such hyperbole has any bearing other than as gormless clickbait; you’d have to believe its world of carefully manicured caricatures existed in the first place to swallow such a notion. American Beauty must own up to some of these charges, but they don’t prevent it from retaining a flawed allure. It’s a satirical take on Americana that, if it pulls its p…

You know what I think? I think he just wants to see one cook up close.

The Green Mile (1999)
(SPOILERS) There’s something very satisfying about the unhurried confidence of the storytelling in Frank Darabont’s two prison-set Stephen King adaptations (I’m less beholden to supermarket sweep The Mist); it’s sure, measured and precise, certain that the journey you’re being take on justifies the (indulgent) time spent, without the need for flashy visuals or ornate twists (the twists there are feel entirely germane – with a notable exception – as if they could only be that way). But. The Green Mile has rightly come under scrutiny for its reliance on – or to be more precise, building its foundation on – the “Magical Negro” trope, served with a mild sprinkling of idiot savant (so in respect of the latter, a Best Supporting Actor nomination was virtually guaranteed). One might argue that Stephen King’s magical realist narrative flourishes well-worn narrative ploys and characterisations at every stage – such that John Coffey’s initials are announcement enough of his …

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.

Kindly behove me no ill behoves!

The Bonfire of the Vanities (1990)
(SPOILERS) It’s often the case that industry-shaking flops aren’t nearly the travesties they appeared to be before the dust had settled, and so it is with The Bonfire of the Vanities. The adaptation of Tom Wolfe’s ultra-cynical bestseller is still the largely toothless, apologetically broad-brush comedy – I’d hesitate to call it a satire in its reconfigured form – it was when first savaged by critics nearly thirty years ago, but taken for what it is, that is, removed from the long shadow of Wolfe’s novel, it’s actually fairly serviceable star-stuffed affair that doesn’t seem so woefully different to any number of rather blunt-edged comedies of the era.

Is CBS Corporate telling CBS News "Do not air this story"?

The Insider (1999)
(SPOILERS) The Insider was the 1999 Best Picture Oscar nominee that didn’t. Do any business, that is. Which is, more often than not, a major mark against it getting the big prize. It can happen (2009, and there was a string of them from 2014-2016), but aside from brief, self-congratulatory “we care about art first” vibes, it generally does nothing for the ceremony’s profile, or the confidence of the industry that is its bread and butter. The Insider lacked the easy accessibility of the other nominees – supernatural affairs, wafer-thin melodramas or middle-class suburbanite satires. It didn’t even brandish a truly headlines-shattering nail-biter in its conspiracy-related true story, as earlier contenders All the President’s Men and JFK could boast. But none of those black marks prevented The Insider from being the cream of the year’s crop.