Skip to main content

My cigars. He’s been smoking my cigars… And he’s… Bitten the end off. Bitten!

The Avengers
5.16: Who's Who???

As much as the series would fall back on remakes of earlier episodes when the producers were in a tight squeeze and pushing deadlines, necessity could also be the mother of invention. While The Prisoner made the worst possible fumble of the old body-swap scenario with Do Not Forsake Me Oh My DarlingWho's Who???, borne from the twin challenges of Patrick Macnee and Diana Rigg wanting time off (her departure from the series was announced during filming) is largely a success.


Dr KrelmarThe mind. The soul. The entire psyche. From one body to another. And vice versa.

Which isn't to say the performances of each other's alter egos are entirely masterful. As such, I don't entirely subscribe to the commonly held view that's it's one of the peaks of the season. Freddie Jones (scarcely needs an introduction, but try The Elephant Man and Krull for size) and Patricia Haines (3.3: The Nutshell, 4.3: The Master Minds) are note-perfect as vulgar enemy agents Basil and Lola and formidable as Steed and Mrs Peel. Rigg, meanwhile, gets into the gum chewing, frisky, slack-jawed demeanour of Lola with enthusiasm when she's been swapped. Macnee, however, doesn't even seem to be trying; couldn’t he have injected a bit of his spivvyness from Two's A Crowd? It isn't a deal-breaker, but it's a little akin to seeing Tom Baker in Meglos and realising he isn't making the most of the golden opportunity to show he can play something different.


Dr KrelmarPoliticians are replaceable. What we aim to destroy is the very structure of the security system.

Part of Basil and Lola's appeal is how unlikely they seem as top agents; Freddie Jones is just plain incongruous, although thankfully, this isn't a case of Nigel Stock as Number Six, where the conceit was straight-up unbelievable. They're chalk-and-cheese to our protagonists, winding each other up about their target’s other half ("She's enchanting, delectable, ravishing. Look at those legs") and rather sloppy with their execution, so just as well what they’ve done is implausible. Their plan proves remarkably effective too, wiping out half of the floral network (Major B prefers a bouquet of agents) before they're caught up with (Major B, head of the network, is played by Campbell Singer of 2.25: Six Hands Across a Table and The Celestial Toymaker).


SteedHooper's one of our best agents. He's a very upright fellow.
Mrs Peel: (observing Hooper's body high atop some packing crates with extended fake legs) Very.

Also appearing are Peter Reynolds (1.18: Double Danger) as Tulip, Arnold Diamond as scientist Dr Krelmar, Malcolm Taylor (2.1: Mission to Montreal and The Ice Warriors) as Hooper, and writer Philip Levene as the unfortunate Daffodil.


LolaI'm going to miss you, Basil.
BasilYou're not the only one, baby.

The episode is a relative rarity for maintaining a steady line in (larky) tension over how the proceedings will turn out, with the real Steed and Emma locked up or escaping while the real Basil and Lola wreak havoc. The climax, in particular, offers effective suspense as Emma convinces Krelmar she's been swapped back and needs swapping again (KrelmarI'm glad I got hereEmmaNot half as glad as I am, before knocking him out), and then ensuring Steed is swapped back before the good guys arrive and throw a spanner in the works. 


It also has a lot of fun playing with expectations regarding typical Macnee-Rigg interaction, such as Basil slapping Emma on the arse or the two engaging in a kiss (it's a device that has been employed since in everything from Doctor Who to The X-Files). It's also aware of the propensity for slip-ups, such as Boris calling Mrs Peel Emma early on (alas, she isn't suspicious enough as result), and she repaying the favour by accidentally calling him Steed at the other end of the plot. 


SteedMy cigars. He's been smoking my cigars… And he's… Bitten the end off. Bitten!

The contrast between Boris' plebeian and Steed's gentleman ("Steed has poise. A touch of the aristocrat") pays dividends, especially in a rant about Boris finishing off his bottle of '47 and biting the ends off his cigars ("What sort of fiend are we dealing with?"), or any slight that comes to mind ("I admire your tailor old man"; "More than I can say for yours"). 


It's not all a nod of approval to the upper classes; Major B is particularly bluffed out by basing everything on snobbery ("Anyway, I know an Old Etonian when I meet one, and I promise you, that chap in there’s no gentleman"), but then, he's a not uncommon idiot in authority for the show (he dismisses Emma as not knowing the name of his barber and she replies "I might, except that you're wearing a toupee"; he also exclaims "I'm a man of intelligence. Do you take me for a perfect idiot?" eliciting the response "No one's perfect". The old ones are the best). 


Major BIt would be different if they looked like doubles, that sort of thing. That’s been done before. But swapping psyches, I ask you.

As should be evident by this point, the series is having a lot of fun with its self-reflexivity. As such, it's amusing to see trademark ridiculously handy clues (see the next episode for evidence) used to lure our heroes to a "stilt" manufacturer. Although, if Steed finds it suspicious this week, why doesn't he react the same way every time a useful address shows up? There are also a couple of chucklesome "Important announcements" at the ad breaks, clarifying the potential confusion… "For the benefit of those who have just switched on The Avengers, we'd like to explain that these two villains have swapped minds… and these are the two villains. At least, I think they are. On with the show" and "But stay viewing. It'll all sort itself out – I hope".


Mrs PeelCome on, Basil baby!
SteedComing, honey child.

I'm not quite sure about the decision to take up permanent residence by Boris and Lola, since it was established earlier that Boris felt it when Steed was hit (so what if Boris' body is killed?), but mostly, Levene makes the whacky premise work in all the right ways, including a whispered saucy suggestion when Steed is unsure if Emma is the real Emma ("And if you want further proof"; "Oohhh… Mrs Peel") and a playful exit for a weekend away, assuming the parlance of their now locked up counterparts.


















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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

To survive a war, you gotta become war.

Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985) (SPOILERS?) I’d like to say it’s mystifying that a film so bereft of merit as Rambo: First Blood Part II could have finished up the second biggest hit of 1985. It wouldn’t be as bad if it was, at minimum, a solid action movie, rather than an interminable bore. But the movie struck a chord somewhere, somehow. As much as the most successful picture of that year, Back to the Future , could be seen to suggest moviegoers do actually have really good taste, Rambo rather sends a message about how extensively regressive themes were embedding themselves in Reaganite, conservative ‘80s cinema (to be fair, this is something one can also read into Back to the Future ), be those ones of ill-conceived nostalgia or simple-minded jingoism, notional superiority and might. The difference between Stallone and Arnie movies starts right here; self-awareness. Audiences may have watched R ambo in the same way they would a Schwarzenegger picture, but I’m

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

One final thing I have to do, and then I’ll be free of the past.

Vertigo (1958) (SPOILERS) I’ll readily admit my Hitchcock tastes broadly tend to reflect the “consensus”, but Vertigo is one where I break ranks. To a degree. Not that I think it’s in any way a bad film, but I respect it rather than truly rate it. Certainly, I can’t get on board with Sight & Sound enthroning it as the best film ever made (in its 2012’s critics poll). That said, from a technical point of view, it is probably Hitch’s peak moment. And in that regard, certainly counts as one of his few colour pictures that can be placed alongside his black and white ones. It’s also clearly a personal undertaking, a medley of his voyeuristic obsessions (based on D’entre les morts by Pierre Boileau and Thomas Narcejac).

You were a few blocks away? What’d you see it with, a telescope?

The Eyes of Laura Mars (1978) (SPOILERS) John Carpenter’s first serial-killer screenplay to get made, The Eyes of Laura Mars came out nearly three months before Halloween. You know, the movie that made the director’s name. And then some. He wasn’t best pleased with the results of The Eyes of Laura Mars, which ended up co-credited to David Zelag Goodman ( Straw Dogs , Logan’s Run ) as part of an attempt by producer Jon Peters to manufacture a star vehicle for then-belle Barbra Streisand: “ The original script was very good, I thought. But it got shat upon ”. Which isn’t sour grapes on Carpenter’s part. The finished movie bears ready evidence of such tampering, not least in the reveal of the killer (different in Carpenter’s conception). Its best features are the so-uncleanly-you-can-taste-it 70s New York milieu and the guest cast, but even as an early example of the sub-genre, it’s burdened by all the failings inherit with this kind of fare.

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

He is a brigand and a lout. Pay him no serious mention.

The Wind and the Lion (1975) (SPOILERS) John Milius called his second feature a boy’s-own adventure, on the basis of the not-so-terrified responses of one of those kidnapped by Sean Connery’s Arab Raisuli. Really, he could have been referring to himself, in all his cigar-chomping, gun-toting reactionary glory, dreaming of the days of real heroes. The Wind and the Lion rather had its thunder stolen by Jaws on release, and it’s easy to see why. As polished as the picture is, and simultaneously broad-stroke and self-aware in its politics, it’s very definitely a throwback to the pictures of yesteryear. Only without the finger-on-the-pulse contemporaneity of execution that would make Spielberg and Lucas’ genre dives so memorable in a few short years’ time.