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

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…

Move away from the jams.

Aladdin (2019)
(SPOILERS) I was never overly enamoured by the early ‘90s renaissance of Disney animation, so the raves over Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin left me fairly unphased. On the plus side, that means I came to this live action version fairly fresh (prince); not quite a whole new world but sufficiently unversed in the legend to appreciate it as its own thing. And for the most part, Aladdin can be considered a moderate success. There may not be a whole lot of competition for that crown (I’d give the prize to Pete’s Dragon, except that it was always part-live action), but this one sits fairly comfortably in the lead.

He made me look the wrong way and I cut off my hand. He could make you look the wrong way and you could lose your whole head.

Moonstruck (1987)
(SPOILERS) Moonstruck has the dubious honour of making it to the ninth spot in Premiere magazine’s 2006 list of the 20 Most Overrated Movies of all Time. There are certainly some valid entries (number one is, however, absurd), but I’m not sure that, despite its box office success and Oscar recognition, the picture has a sufficient profile to be labelled with that adjective. It’s a likeable, lightweight romantic comedy that can boast idiosyncratic casting in a key role, but it simply doesn’t endure quotably or as a classic couple matchup the way the titans of the genre (Annie Hall, When Harry Met Sally) do. Even its magical motif is rather feeble.

You're reading a comic book? What are you, retarded?

Watchmen: The Ultimate Cut (2009)
(SPOILERS) It’s a decade since the holy grail of comic books finally fought through decades of development hell to land on the big screen, via Zach Snyder’s faithful but not faithful enough for the devoted adaptation. Many then held the director’s skills with a much more open mind than they do now – following the ravages he has inflicted on the DCEU – coming as he was off the back of the well-received 300. Many subsequently held that his Watchmen, while visually impressive, had entirely missed the point (not least in some of its stylistic and aesthetic choices). I wouldn’t go that far – indeed, for a director whose bombastic approach is often only a few notches down from Michael Bay (who was, alarmingly, also considered to direct at one point), there are sequences in Watchmen that show tremendous sensitivity – but it’s certainly the case that, even or especially in its Ultimate Cut form and for all the furore the change to the end of the story provoked,…

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.

Bleach smells like bleach.

Million Dollar Baby (2004)
(SPOILERS) I’d like to be able to say it was beyond me how Clint’s misery-porn fest hoodwinked critics and the Academy alike, leading to his second Best Picture and Director double Oscar win. Such feting would naturally lead you to assume Million Dollar Baby was in the same league as Unforgiven, when it really has more in common with The Mule, only the latter is likeably lightweight and nonchalant in its aspirations. This picture has buckled beneath the burden of self-appointed weighty themes and profound musings, which only serve to highlight how crass and manipulative it is.

I’d kill you too, Keanu. I’d kill you just for fun, even if I didn’t have to.

Always Be My Maybe (2019)
(SPOILERS) The pun-tastic title of this Netflix romcom is a fair indication of its affably undemanding attributes. An unapologetic riff on When Harry Met Sally, wherein childhood friends rather than college attendees finally agree the best thing to be is together, it’s resolutely determined to cover no new ground, all the way through to its positive compromise finale. That’s never a barrier to a good romcom, though – at their best, their charm is down to ploughing familiar furrows. Always Be My Maybe’s problem is that, decent comedy performers though the two leads may be – and co-writers with Michael Golamco – you don’t really care whether they get together or not. Which isn’t like When Harry Met Sally at all.

You're always sorry, Charles, and there's always a speech, but nobody cares anymore.

X-Men: Dark Phoenix (2019)
(SPOILERS) To credit its Rotten Tomatoes score (22%), you’d think X-Men: Dark Phoenix was a travesty that besmirched the name of all good and decent (read: MCU proper) superhero movies, or even last week’s underwhelming creature feature (Godzilla: King of Monsters has somehow reached 40%, despite being a lesser beast in every respect). Is the movie’s fate a self-fulfilling prophecy, what with delayed release dates and extensively reported reshoots? Were critics castigating a fait accompli turkey without giving it a chance? That would be presupposing they’re all sheep, though, and in fairness, other supposed write-offs havecome back from such a brink in the past (World War Z). Whatever the feelings of the majority, Dark Phoenix is actually a mostly okay (twelfth) instalment in the X-franchise – it’s exactly what you’d expect from an X-Men movie at this point, one without any real mojo left and a variable cast struggling to pull its weight. The third act is a bi…

They went out of business, because they were too good.

School for Scoundrels (1960)
(SPOILERS) Possibly the pinnacle of Terry-Thomas’ bounder persona, and certainly the one where it’s put to best caddish use, as he gives eternally feckless mug Ian Carmichael a thorough lesson in one-upmanship, only for the latter to turn the tables when he finds himself a tutor. School for Scoundrels is beautifully written (by an uncredited Peter Ustinov and Frank Tarloff), filled with clever set pieces, a fine supporting cast and a really very pretty object of the competing chaps’ affection (Janette Scott), but it’s Terry-Thomas who is the glue that binds this together. And, while I couldn’t say for sure, this might have the highest “Hard cheese” count of any of his films.

Based on Stephen Potter’s 1947’s humorous self-help bestseller (and subsequent series of -manship books) The Theory and Practice of Gamesmanship (or The Art of Winning Games without Actually Cheating), which suggested ungentlemanly methods for besting an opponent in any given field, gam…

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…