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.

Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.