Skip to main content

I've killed him! I've killed him again!

The Avengers
5.10: Never, Never Say Die.

An episode that sets out its store of intrigue quite nicely, and hums confidently along, but ultimately reveals itself holding the least plausible of decks. Never, Never Say Die sounds like a Bond title and tends to be a fairly highly-regarded episode, however; I can only assume much of that is based on its illustrious guest star, Christopher Lee, strutting his stuff in dual roles; both Professor Frank N Stone (hur-hur) and his monster, a part he has, of course, played before.


SteedWhen I was here last, the professor was not at his best.

At one point, Steed invokes the possibility that the professor is experiencing some sort of Jekyll-and-Hyde condition, which would, dare I say it, have been much more interesting. As it, is the clip from The Cybernauts (Emma is watching it on TV, which shows the show has now fully scaled the peak of uber meta-ness) seems to be winking at the audience and saying, "If this episode seems vaguely familiar, that’s because it is". With a sprinkling of Invasion of the Body Snatchers



It's also a clear signal that, after a string of soft SF, fake SF, and not-actually-fantasy episodes, the show is occasionally willing to go the whole untrammelled hog. These aren't just robots; they're automatons with the minds of their subjects transferred into them (rather begging the question whether expiring scientists would want their minds entombed in a metal shell and plastic skin):

Fake Dr StoneNo, Mr Steed, that is not my twin. That is a machine.
SteedA robot?
Fake Dr StoneWhat we call a duplicate. This can repair and recreate itself. All it needs is power. It's programmed like a computer with a man's complete memory. His total experience… What you would call a brain transfer, I suppose. It's based on the absorption of electrical impulses. By this means, Mr Steed, great minds need never die. We can preserve not only memory and experiences, but thought processes as well.


Philip Levene's screenplay offers much explanation of the goings-on at the Ministry of Technology, Neoteric Research Unit while simultaneously inviting us not ask too many questions. There are problems with weight and radio frequencies (the latter causing the duplicates to go on the rampage, smashing up anything emitting a disrupting signal), and they don't seem anywhere near being solved. The brain drain is invoked, and the promise "If we are to preserve our finest minds, in a matter of ten to twenty years we will outstrip every other nation. There will be no limited whatsoever to our advancement" with the tacit exclusion of politicians from the list, but since this is the fake Stone talking, who knows the truth of the matter (they're planning to duplicate the minister and his entourage, after all). And the declaration "We duplicates are programmed to survive, Mr Steed. We are programmed to take over" is puzzling. Who programmed them for this? Dr Stone? If so, why? And how does the programming mesh with the aim to transfer minds undiluted?


Fake Dr StoneIf we can show you the results of our work², if we can convince you it's perfectly safe, can we rely on your support?
SteedAsk me again after you’ve shown me.

Nevertheless, director Robert Day (Two Way Stretch) has a strong sense for pace, and there are memorable interludes and cameos to punctuate the duplications. Christopher Benjamin (4.14: How to Succeed… At Murder's JJ Hooter) is the focus of a first-rate teaser, hitting Stone's double with his car and being told the victim is DOA (how much of an exam did they actually give him?), only for the body to get up and leave; later, Whittle hits him a second time, prompting the memorable "I've killed him! I've killed him again!"


There's also the briefest or appearances by Arnold Ridley, causing confusion with a remote-controlled boat. Other Dad’s Army regulars to appear in the show include Arthur Lowe (5.19: Dead Man's Treasure), John Le Mesurier (3.21: Mandrake, 4.22: What the Butler Saw), Clive Dunn (5.14: Something Nasty in the Nursery), John Laurie (2.11: Death of a Great Dane, 3.2: Brief for Murder, 5.13: A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Station, 6.28: Pandora), and Talfryn Thomas (4.10: A Surfeit of H₂O, 6.7: Look… (stop me if you’ve heard this one) But There Were These Two Fellers…)


Indian Chess PlayerAfter much thought and prayer my knight moves to rook six.
EcclesAh, I shall answer with my rook to bishop four.
Indian Chess PlayerGoodness gracious me.

After showing off his fake Italian Piedi in 4.19: The Quick-Quick Slow Death, David Kernan was obviously a hit with producers (and, I'd hazard, Rigg), receiving an encore in which he tries out more accents to less mirthful effect; a short-wave radio buff, he informs Emma "There's nothing like a game of chess to improve international relations" as he mimics the accents of each of his chess opponents in different countries. His voices might at first appear insensitive, but it at least becomes clear he’s an equal-opportunities desecrator of dialects…until the stereotyping is evidenced by the depictions of his challengers too. Spike Milligan would have been proud.


Also present are Jeremy Young (his Willy Frant failed the pea test in 4.21: A Touch of Brimstone) as Stone’s assistant Doctor Penrose – and Penrose’ duplicate – and Patricia English (2.1: Mission to Montreal, 3.14: The Secrets Broker) as another doctor, James, and another duplicate. 


Mrs PeelDo you find her attractive?
SteedNot a patch on you. How about him?

The main claim to fame of the climax is it sourcing one of the most iconic Avengers images (the header picture for this review); ironic, given Steed and Emma are playing their duplicates here. Such playfulness and scant regard for suspension of disbelief are now rampant in the show, the only caveat being how well it’s done. The opening "Mrs Peel were needed" has Steed appearing on TV (interrupting The Cybernauts), while the coda picks up the broadcast theme, with his dismay at the lack of viewing choice and Emma switching on a party-political broadcast; the gag that follows is fairly basic ("You know, we've just averted a disaster. Can you imagine plastic politicians?": "Who would ever know the difference?") Cheers.


















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.

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.

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 …

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…

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.

Do you read Sutter Cane?

In the Mouth of Madness (1994)
(SPOILERS) The concluding chapter of John Carpenter’s unofficial Apocalypse Trilogy (preceded by The Thing and Prince of Darkness) is also, sadly, his last great movie. Indeed, it stands apart in the qualitative wilderness that beset him during the ‘90s (not for want of output). Michael De Luca’s screenplay had been doing the rounds since the ‘80s, even turned down by Carpenter at one point, and it proves ideal fodder for the director, bringing out the best in him. Even cinematographer Gary K Kibbe seems inspired enough to rise to the occasion. It could do without the chugging rawk soundtrack, perhaps, but then, that was increasingly where Carpenter’s interests resided (as opposed to making decent movies).

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…

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.

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.