Skip to main content

This is my only chance to assemble a disreputable past, and I'm going to take it.

Jeeves and Wooster
3.1: Bertie Sets Sail 
(aka Safety in New York)

Full disclosure: I don’t much care for the series' excursions to New York, however canonical some of them may be. The studiously ropey accents, the same low-angle buildings doubling for the Big Apple and repetitive elevator conversations grow wearisome quite quickly, veering from the sense of time and place the series gets so right generally and causing too much distraction. 


BertieI told them I was going to Manhattan and they came up with the goods.
JeevesNo mention was made of a carnival or fancy-dress occasion, sir?

Bertie Sets Sail is quite faithful in outline to its source material, a 1916 (so only a year into Wooster's life) short story, albeit with a shipboard prelude in which we establish Jeeves' disdain for Bertie’s new hat ("I shall be the Beau Brummel of Broadway") and the addition of one Tuppy Glossop, replete with doomed plans to be the sole British importer of the Spritz Polecat (alas, he only has the money to buy the one car).

BertieThere, it doesn't look at all bad, does it?
JeevesA violin case would complete the effect very creditably, sir.


As ever, Robert Daws' Tuppy is a performance of explosive irritation and ignorance. He's first seen here throwing a roll at Bertie, which proceeds to splatter the ship's captain with soup on landing. What follows is the upper-class equivalent of Del-Boy Trotter's cultural delicacy:

TuppyWho's the chap in fancy-dress?
BertieHe's the captain. Nice fellow. Speaks very good French.
TuppyLook, I'm terribly sorry, senor. Quelle fromage and all that. That'll hold him. They love it when you speak the lingo.


Naturally, Tuppy is making a romantic fool of himself, besotted with Pauline Stoker, despite being engaged to Angela, and naturally, he makes a completed hash of things (in order to talk shop to her father, he brushes up on his cars with The Boy's Book of the Automobile); when he places his order ("Let’s start with four"), Pauline helpful adds "Four Dozen, daddy":

TuppyI couldn't just order one car. I'd look such a fool.
BertieYou'll look an even bigger fool when you tell Stoker that you don't want 47 of them after all thank you very much.


The result is the inveigling of Bertie into a plan to steal back Tuppy's cheque, hinging on a burglar alarm Tuppy forgets to turn off, leading to the hapless Wooster being shot at by the police. Later, dining out with Tuppy, he resorts to hiding under a table when the Stokers arrive, which naturally goes wrong ("Well, I was just looking for a spoon"). As approximations of the Wodehouse formula go, this is perfectly serviceable; it's just a shame that neither Don Fellows (Stoker) nor Kim Huffman (Pauline) are a patch on Manning Redwood and Sharon Holm respectively in the previous season.


Also on the debit side in terms of casting is John Fitzgerald Jay as poet Rockmetteller "Rocky" Todd; there's more of him in Episode Two, but suffice to say the combination of a slightly wet character and an over-enunciated New York accent (I believe Kay is Canadian) makes the character positively irksome. No wonder Bertie can't wait to get away from his retreat. 


A retreat he's forced on due to the behaviour of Wilmot "Motty" Lord Pershore (Ronan Vibert, unlike Jay annoying in all the right ways), who has been foisted on Bertie by his mother, Lady Malvern (Moyra Fraser), while she tours US prisons for her book America from Within (that prisons are crucial to the climax is a fortuitous circumstance indeed). We first see Motty sucking on his cane, announced as a "strict vegetarian, teetotaller and devoted to reading" (Wodehouse's view that abstinence can only be deleterious is nothing if not consistent); the second trait elicits a disbelieving "Good lord!" From Tuppy.


BertieHas he had some sort of dashed fit or something? Jeeves, someone's been feeding him meat.
JeevesSir?
BertieHe's a vegetarian, you know. Probably been digging into a steak or something. Best fetch a doctor.

It turns out, however, that no sooner has Lady Malvern embarked on her tour than Motty's embarked on his own, of New York nightlife; discovered by Jeeves and Wooster with a stinking hangover, he announces "I drank too much. Much, much too much. Lots and lots too much. And what's more, I’m going to do it again. I'm going to do it every night" on account of "This is my only chance to assemble a disreputable past, and I'm going to take it".


The episode follows the short story to the extent that crucial events occur off screen, with Bertie returning (from Rocky's) to discover Motty has been incarcerated, but diverges in showing Lady Malvern come across her son in prison. Jeeves' ludicrously implausible explanation for his presence – even by the gentleman's gentleman's standards – stands as is, that he chose to go there to research her book:

Lady MalvernI find that very hard to believe.
JeevesBut surely, your ladyship, it is more reasonable to suppose that a person of his lordship's character would go to prison of his own volition… rather than by committing some breach of the law which would necessitate his arrest


Unsurprisingly, given it's straight from the source, this is the most effective passage of the story, and culminates in Bertie unsurprisingly sacrificing his hat, only to learn it has already gone:

BertieNow Jeeves, that Al Capone hat of mine. Get rid of it, burn it or something.
JeevesI've already taken the liberty of disposing of it, sir.


Also of note in the line-up is New York sojourn regular Ricco Ross as liftman Coneybear (who takes delivery of Bertie's hat); as an American actor living in the UK during the '80s he eked out a number of notable roles (Frost in Aliens, the Ringmaster rapping rubbish in Doctor Who story The Greatest Show in the Galaxy) and not so notable ones (Slipstream). The character is well-intentioned, attempting to offer the perspective of a contemporary African American amid privileged New York society, but for that reason also seems rather on-the-nose, over compensating for the series' exclusive whiteness by imbuing him with knowing moral superiority; plain good sense is identified as a fact of his race and so the effort taken by Clive Exton comes across as slightly patronising.



Sources: 
Jeeves and the Unbidden Guest (Carry On, Jeeves, Chapter 3)


Recurring characters:

Tuppy Glossop (1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.5, 2.6, 3.1)
Rockmetteller “Rocky” Todd (3.1)
J Washburn Stoker (2.4, 2.5, 3.1)
Pauline Stoker (2.4, 2.5, 3.1)
Liftman Coneybear (3.1)










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…

Our very strength incites challenge. Challenge incites conflict. And conflict... breeds catastrophe.

The MCU Ranked Worst to Best

Why would I turn into a filing cabinet?

Captain Marvel (2019)
(SPOILERS) All superhero movies are formulaic to a greater or lesser degree. Mostly greater. The key to an actually great one – or just a pretty good one – is making that a virtue, rather than something you’re conscious of limiting the whole exercise. The irony of the last two stand-alone MCU pictures is that, while attempting to bring somewhat down-the-line progressive cachet to the series, they’ve delivered rather pedestrian results. Of course, that didn’t dim Black Panther’s cultural cachet (and what do I know, swathes of people also profess to loving it), and Captain Marvel has hit half a billion in its first few days – it seems that, unless you’re poor unloved Ant-Man, an easy $1bn is the new $700m for the MCU – but neither’s protagonist really made that all-important iconic impact.

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…

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.

Stupid adult hands!

Shazam! (2019)
(SPOILERS) Shazam! is exactly the kind of movie I hoped it would be, funny, scary (for kids, at least), smart and delightfully dumb… until the final act. What takes place there isn’t a complete bummer, but right now, it does pretty much kill any interest I have in a sequel.

I have discovered the great ray that first brought life into the world.

Frankenstein (1931)
(SPOILERS) To what extent do Universal’s horror classics deserved to be labelled classics? They’re from the classical Hollywood period, certainly, but they aren’t unassailable titans that can’t be bettered – well unless you were Alex Kurtzman and Chris Morgan trying to fashion a Dark Universe with zero ingenuity. And except maybe for the sequel to the second feature in their lexicon. Frankenstein is revered for several classic scenes, boasts two mesmerising performances, and looks terrific thanks to Arthur Edeson’s cinematography, but there’s also sizeable streak of stodginess within its seventy minutes.

Only an idiot sees the simple beauty of life.

Forrest Gump (1994)
(SPOILERS) There was a time when I’d have made a case for, if not greatness, then Forrest Gump’s unjust dismissal from conversations regarding its merits. To an extent, I still would. Just not nearly so fervently. There’s simply too much going on in the picture to conclude that the manner in which it has generally been received is the end of the story. Tarantino, magnanimous in the face of Oscar defeat, wasn’t entirely wrong when he suggested to Robert Zemeckis that his was a, effectively, subversive movie. Its problem, however, is that it wants to have its cake and eat it.

Do not mention the Tiptoe Man ever again.

Glass (2019)
(SPOILERS) If nothing else, one has to admire M Night Shyamalan’s willingness to plough ahead regardless with his straight-faced storytelling, taking him into areas that encourage outright rejection or merciless ridicule, with all the concomitant charges of hubris. Reactions to Glass have been mixed at best, but mostly more characteristic of the period he plummeted from his must-see, twist-master pedestal (during the period of The Village and The Happening), which is to say quite scornful. And yet, this is very clearly the story he wanted to tell, so if he undercuts audience expectations and leaves them dissatisfied, it’s most definitely not a result of miscalculation on his part. For my part, while I’d been prepared for a disappointment on the basis of the critical response, I came away very much enjoying the movie, by and large.

Just make love to that wall, pervert!

Seinfeld 2.10: The Statue
The Premise
Jerry employs a cleaner, the boyfriend of an author whose book Elaine is editing. He leaves the apartment spotless, but Jerry is convinced he has made off with a statue.