Skip to main content

Well, I've always had a hankering for the eighteenth century. Gadzooks and stap me vitals.

The Avengers
5.2: Escape in Time

I suppose one couldn’t expect The Avengers to deliver a genuine "Could-it-be-possible?" element to a time-travel plot, but Escape in Time doesn't offer even a modicum of suspense or intrigue regarding how the scheme is being achieved; as soon as one of the intended victims escapes "1680" and shows up at Steed's flat (not even ten minutes in), it's clear we'll have to look elsewhere for satisfying plot twists.


ThyssenI can send a man back, through the centuries, back to an era where before he never even existed.

Unfortunately, there aren't really any. The side streets contact routine is reasonably diverting, as Steed and then Emma must run the relay of go-betweens – inflatable animal sellers, barbers who slap a cross in duct tape on their cheeks, a servant of Ganesh – in order to meet up with Thyssen (Peter Bowles), who offers an escape from clients' current problems into the past; they may choose an earlier period to settle in, traveling back to a previous period in Thyssen's house's existence. Where, of course, an ancestor who looks remarkably like its current owner lives.


ThyssenThese strange clothes you wear. The devil’s work! Designed to daze and bewitch a man's senses. To inflame him to lust.
Mrs PeelYou should see me 400 years from now.

Bowles gives a strong performance, so there's that, as a stammering, insecure Thyssen and Thyssen posing as his full-blooded ancestors (most notably Matthew, the black sheep of the family, having a go at Mrs Peel, who is having none of it, for her provocative attire). As Shallow Like Us notes, the doppelgänger in different time periods is resonant of City of Death. And as per The Fear Merchants, both Avengers face the villain in turn, with Steed offering a particularly winning "I haven't been found out yet" in response to Thyssen's inquiry over why he's unaware of his criminal exploits. And musing "Well, I've always have had a hankering for the eighteenth century. Gadzooks and stap me vitals" when asked which period he would like to escape to. 


There are some nice ideas here, admittedly, and the corridor tunnel effect is suitably disorientating and psychedelic, complete with an amusingly showy slot machine handle for the "device". There are "period" photos and footage of previous travellers, suggesting 12 Monkeys or Nic Cage through the ages, and copious employment of Dutch angles to add to the overall effect. 


SteedWell.
VestaWell?
SteedMrs Peel in the hands of the enemy. My confederate lying unconscious. A loaded gun pointed at my neck... I'm trapped. (Steed turns swiftly, grabbing Vesta and her weapon). Shall we dance?


Individual moments stand out as distinctive: Steed's gun ending up stuck in a chandelier during a fight, Geoffrey Bayldon's Clapham – something of a waste of Bayldon, the role failing to take full advantage of his eccentricity – being able to get a fix on the country house thanks to Steed's blindfolded recall of fowl play ("Turkeys. There were turkeys about"– residents of the Yule Tide Turkey Farm), Mrs Peel's response to Thyssen's admiration for her beauty ("I appreciate your appreciation"). And Steed generally, entirely unruffled by his predicament.


SteedRemarkable, quite remarkable.
Mrs PeelOh, it's not that good.
SteedThat you can sew. Known you all this time, never knew that you could sew.
Mrs PeelWell, our relationship hasn't exactly been domestic, has it?


Of note with regard to our central duo, Steed and Emma indulge in some fake canoodling and later make a pointed innuendo about their relationship (which could be read either way). There are some nice exchanges as they run through a selection of photos of disappearing acts; Emma remarks on an evil face if ever she saw one and Steed responds "That’s Tubby Vincent – he's on our side!" He comments of another, "Now there's a face full of avarice. Reminds me of an auntie of mine". The "Mrs Peel – we’re needed" is an invitation to a grand hunt ball while the conclusion finds us back in the realm of Season 4's transport motif, Steed covered in soot when he tries to start an Edwardian taxi. There's also another fight in a quarry, this time for Emma's stunt double to fend off a fellow on a motorbike. An episode that's memorable for premise, but not so much for follow-through.






















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…

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…

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.

I am so sick of Scotland!

Outlaw/King (2018)
(SPOILERS) Proof that it isn't enough just to want to make a historical epic, you have to have some level of vision for it as well. Say what you like about Mel's Braveheart – and it isn't a very good film – it's got sensibility in spades. He knew what he was setting out to achieve, and the audience duly responded. What does David Mackenzie want from Outlaw/King (it's shown with a forward slash on the titles, so I'm going with it)? Ostensibly, and unsurprisingly, to restore the stature of Robert the Bruce after it was rather tarnished by Braveheart, but he has singularly failed to do so. More than that, it isn’t an "idea", something you can recognise or get behind even if you don’t care about the guy. You’ll never forget Mel's Wallace, for better or worse, but the most singular aspect of Chris Pine's Bruce hasn’t been his rousing speeches or heroic valour. No, it's been his kingly winky.

If this is not a place for a priest, Miles, then this is exactly where the Lord wants me.

Bad Times at the El Royale (2018)
(SPOILERS) Sometimes a movie comes along where you instantly know you’re safe in the hands of a master of the craft, someone who knows exactly the story they want to tell and precisely how to achieve it. All you have to do is sit back and exult in the joyful dexterity on display. Bad Times at the El Royale is such a movie, and Drew Goddard has outdone himself. From the first scene, set ten years prior to the main action, he has constructed a dizzyingly deft piece of work, stuffed with indelible characters portrayed by perfectly chosen performers, delirious twists and game-changing flashbacks, the package sealed by an accompanying frequently diegetic soundtrack, playing in as it does to the essential plot beats of the whole. If there's a better movie this year, it will be a pretty damn good one.

You kind of look like a slutty Ebola virus.

Crazy Rich Asians (2018)
(SPOILERS) The phenomenal success of Crazy Rich Asians – in the US at any rate, thus far – might lead one to think it's some kind of startling original, but the truth is, whatever its core demographic appeal, this adaptation of Kevin Kwan's novel taps into universally accepted romantic comedy DNA and readily recognisable tropes of family and class, regardless of cultural background. It emerges a smoothly professional product, ticking the expected boxes in those areas – the heroine's highs, lows, rejections, proposals, accompanied by whacky scene-stealing best friend – even if the writing is sometimes a little on the clunky side.

Prepare the Heathen’s Stand! By order of purification!

Apostle (2018)
(SPOILERS) Another week, another undercooked Netflix flick from an undeniably talented director. What’s up with their quality control? Do they have any? Are they so set on attracting an embarrassment of creatives, they give them carte blanche, to hell with whether the results are any good or not? Apostle's an ungainly folk-horror mashup of The Wicker Man (most obviously, but without the remotest trace of that screenplay's finesse) and any cult-centric Brit horror movie you’d care to think of (including Ben Wheatley's, himself an exponent of similar influences-on-sleeve filmmaking with Kill List), taking in tropes from Hammer, torture porn, and pagan lore but revealing nothing much that's different or original beyond them.

It was one of the most desolate looking places in the world.

They Shall Not Grow Old (2018)
Peter Jackson's They Shall Not Grow Old, broadcast by the BBC on the centenary of Armistice Day, is "sold" on the attraction and curiosity value of restored, colourised and frame rate-enhanced footage. On that level, this World War I documentary, utilising a misquote from Laurence Binyon's poem for its title, is frequently an eye-opener, transforming the stuttering, blurry visuals that have hitherto informed subsequent generations' relationship with the War. However, that's only half the story; the other is the use of archive interviews with veterans to provide a narrative, exerting an effect often more impacting for what isn't said than for what is.

What about the panties?

Sliver (1993)
(SPOILERS) It must have seemed like a no-brainer. Sharon Stone, fresh from flashing her way to one of the biggest hits of 1992, starring in a movie nourished with a screenplay from the writer of one of the biggest hits of 1992. That Sliver is one Stone’s better performing movies says more about how no one took her to their bosom rather than her ability to appeal outside of working with Paul Verhoeven. Attempting to replicate the erotic lure of Basic Instinct, but without the Dutch director’s shameless revelry and unrepentant glee (and divested of Michael Douglas’ sweaters), it flounders, a stupid movie with vague pretensions to depth made even more stupid by reshoots that changed the killer’s identity and exposed the cluelessness of the studio behind it.

Philip Noyce isn’t a stupid filmmaker, of course. He’s a more-than-competent journeyman when it comes to Hollywood blockbuster fare (Clear and Present Danger, Salt) also adept at “smart” smaller pictures (Rabbit Proof Fence

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.