Skip to main content

Invisible man? Ha-ha-ha! I could see through that one immediately!

The Avengers
5.5: The See-Through Man

I’m sure Warren Mitchell and Patrick Macnee had a fine time bouncing off each other whenever the former won a guest spot on the show, but the return of Brodny in The See-Through Man is about as welcome as bringing back Harry Mudd in Star Trek's Mudd's Women. Additionally, and quickly becoming something of an over-used device, there are suggestions of pure science fictional goings-on, ones reduced to something much less remarkable (see also Escape in Tim eand From Venus With Love).


Indeed, the most impressive element here is the Russians' invisible man costume. I did wonder, though, hearing Steed pronounce "I don’t believe in invisible men" – Macnee would later play one in the 1998 movie – whether he'd be so sure of himself come the end of the season, once he'd been shrunk down to miniscule size without it being explained away rationally.


The scheme itself is appealing enough in its low cunning. The Russians have bought a formula from Roy Kinnear's Quilby ("He sent us an invention a week for the past twenty years") – forget Mitchell, Kinnear's performance is the highlight of any story he's in – or the Eastern Drug Corporation to be precise (they paid £100k for it). Behind the company is Ambassador Brodny, who remains oblivious to the truth; Major Vazin (Art Thomas, 3.18: The Girl from Auntie, 3.21: A Touch of Brimstone) is not, in fact, invisible but is rather a shorter man wearing a special suit to present the illusion, and that part of the ruse is to have the Avengers will report back that the Russians' invisibility project does indeed work, diverting British scientists' precious attention to a completely useless project.


And, to be absolutely fair, it’s fairly convincing that something genuine ought to have been going on, such that it’s a bit of a stretch to believe the Russians managed the setting up of a camera and electronic devices in the Ministry archive. Vazin's apartment and Quilby's office, fine, but the children's playground with its swinging rides and creaking turnstile (a visible man runs the risk of his "invisible" activities being seen in the wide open). One is left wondering how exactly the "veritable Houdini" pulled off some of his feats.


Quilby isn't the best Kinnear part (3.25: Esprit De Corps and 4.14: The Hour That Never Wasare both more memorable), but he and his patently fake beard make the most of it, from his disappointment when Steed spots the flaw in this new explosive, whereby one only has to wait for rain ("What happens if there’s a drought?") to his confusion over how he came up with the invisibility formula in the first place ("93 ingredients and 39 processes. Or is that…") Nice Union Jack hamster cage too.


Elena VazinYou have heard of a man called John Steed?
BrodnyOh yes. Yes, I have known him for years. The man of many talents. Of excellent taste, a good frie… A sworn enemy!

And if I find Brodny rather tiresome, Mitchell (3.4: The Golden Fleece, 3.24: The Charmers, 4.11: Two’s a Crowd) is at least given a decent scene with Macnee where Brodny thinks the invisible Vazin is in the room; Brodny, who does not smoke cigars or drink vodka, has to pretend he has a yen for them while Steed winds him up about Vaszi’s wife (“While the cat's away, ay?”)


SteedWell, I know you won’t believe this, but we've been offered a formula that can make a man invisible.
BrodnyInvisible? Ha-ha-ha.
SteedIt's a fraud, of course. But as you’re an old friend of mine, I though perhaps I’d give you the benefit of the, er…
BrodnyHa-ha. Invisible man? Ha-ha-ha! I could see through that one immediately!


The Steed and Emma opening business involves a microscope slide revealing "Mrs Peel – We're Needed", and at the close Emma is miming invisible chemistry equipment before revealing another slide saying "I’m hungry". If it had stopped there, all would have been well, but there's a tendency for these codas to go on a bit, with yet more vehicular mugging as Steed can't start the Rolls, which then goes off on its own. The See-Through Man is the weakest Emma Peel episode so far, and the weakest of the season; tellingly, the Brodny episode was also the biggest duffer in Season Four.













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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

Dude. You’re my hero and shit.

El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie (2019)
(SPOILERS) I was going to say I’d really like to see what Vince Gilligan has up his sleeve besidesBreaking Bad spinoffs. But then I saw that he had a short-lived series on CBS a few years back (Battle Creek). I guess things Breaking Bad-related ensure an easy greenlight, particularly from Netflix, for whom the original show was bread and butter in its take up as a streaming platform. There’s something slightly dispiriting about El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie, though. Not that Gilligan felt the need to return to Jesse Pinkman – although the legitimacy of that motive is debatable – but the desire to re-enter and re-inhabit the period of the show itself, as if he’s unable to move on from a near-universally feted achievement and has to continually exhume it and pick it apart.

It’s amazing what you can do when you don’t have to look yourself in the mirror any more.

Hollow Man (2000)
(SPOILERS) Paul Verhoeven very acutely critiqued his own choices when he observed of Hollow Manit really is not me anymore. I think many other people could have done that… there might have been twenty directors in Hollywood who could have done that”. It isn’t such a wonder he returned to Europe, and to quality, for his subsequent films. If Memoirs of an Invisible Man failed to follow up on the mental side effects of being seen right through found in HG Wells’ novel and (especially) in James Whale’s film, all Hollow Man does is take that tack, with the consequence that the proceedings degenerate into a banal action slasher, but with a naked Bacon instead of a guy in a hockey mask.

It’s not every day you see a guy get his ass kicked on two continents – by himself.

Gemini Man (2019)
(SPOILERS) Ang Lee seems hellbent on sloughing down a technological cul-de-sac to the point of creative obscurity, in much the same way Robert Zemeckis enmired himself in the mirage of motion capture for a decade. Lee previously experimented with higher frame rates on Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk, to the general aversion of those who saw it in its intended form – 48, 60 or 120 fps have generally gone down like a bag of cold sick, just ask Peter Jackson – and the complete indifference of most of the remaining audience, for whom the material held little lustre. Now he pretty much repeats that trick with Gemini Man. At best, it’s merely an “okay” film – not quite the bomb its Rotten Tomatoes score suggests – which, (as I saw it) stripped of its distracting frame rate and 3D, reveals itself as just about serviceable but afflicted by several insurmountable drawbacks.

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…

I have a cow, but I hate bananas.

The Laundromat (2019)
(SPOILERS) Steven Soderbergh’s flair for cinematic mediocrity continues with this attempt at The Big Short-style topicality, taking aim at the Panama Papers but ending up with a mostly blunt satire, one eager to show how the offshore system negatively impacts the average – and also the not-so-average – person but at the expense of really digging in to how it facilitates the turning of the broader capitalist world (it is, after all based on Jake Bernstein’s Secrecy World: Inside the Panama Papers Investigation of Illicit Money Networks and the Global Elite).

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

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.

What you do is very baller. You're very anarchist.

Lady Bird (2017)
(SPOILERS) You can see the Noah Baumbach influence on Lady Bird, Greta Gerwig’s directorial debut, with whom she collaborated on Frances Ha; an intimate, lo-fi, post-Woody Allen (as in, post-feted, respected Woody Allen) dramedy canvas that has traditionally been the New Yorker’s milieu. But as an adopted, spiritual New Yorker, I suspect Gerwig honourably qualifies, even as Lady Bird is a love letter/ nostalgia trip to her home city of Sacramento.

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.