Skip to main content

The simple fact is, your killer is in your midst. Your killer is one of you.

The Avengers
5.12: The Superlative Seven

I’ve always rather liked this one, basic as it is in premise. If the title consciously evokes The Magnificent Seven, to flippant effect, the content is Agatha Christie's And Then There Were None, but played out with titans of their respective crafts – including John Steed, naturally – encountering diminishing returns. It also boasts a cast of soon-to-be-famous types (Charlotte Rampling, Brian Blessed, Donald Sutherland), and the return of one John Hollis (2.16: Warlock, 4.7: The Cybernauts). Kanwitch ROCKS!


JesselYou are convinced?
KanwitchPartially convinced.
JesselI can create super beings. It really works. 
KanwitchIf your protégée beats all six of them, then you shall have all the financing you want. If.

The Superlative Seven saw Brian Clemens redressing Dressed to Kill, with its costume party setting, but if it inevitably suffers from comparison to that episode, it avoids feeling like an unwarranted retread the way others have (The Correct Way to Kill). Still, we know from the start roughly what’s going on in this one; it's the specifics of the perpetrator(s) that are obscure, and it's especially gratifying that this turns out to be a scam on the part of Jessel (Sutherland) to sell his super soldiers to Kanwitch (who, as noted, rocks). 


The assassins obviously have some skillz, as seen in the opening when Kanwitch's champion (Terry Plummer) is dispatched, so I guess Jessel would have delivered something, if Kanwitch had taken the bait ("With your country's financial assistance, I can make an army of assassins"). Or maybe he would just have taken the money and run. I'm not sure you’d have figured Sutherland was destined for greatness from this, but it's always interesting to see him pre-Hawkeye Pierce.


KanwitchThe simple fact is, your killer is in your midst. Your killer is one of you.

Everyone – barring Emma, who drops by later – is bundled into a plane that turns out to be on automatic pilot, all having been given a different host’s name (Steed is under the illusion his invitation is from Sir George Robinson – "He's always going up the Amazon and getting lost"). It’s an "acid test"; these experts in their own manner, with records of courage and fortitude, are to fight one of Jessel's unbeatable opponents, an expert in all forms of combat; their chances of survival will depend on their own individual alertness and ingenuity against a killer among them.

Their ranks consist of: 


Jason Wade (James Maxwell, 3.23: The Outside-In Man) as two-faced Janus, assumed to be a big game hunter (there seem to be a few of those in The Avengers) but actually admits he's the offender off the bat ("I track things down, Mr Steed. And then, I dispatch them as quickly as possible"). He appears to be the fourth man down (they all end up in upright coffins), but it turns out he's faking it. And when he does buy the farm (Macnee's stunt double puts up his best fighting moves yet, before lobbing a spear into Wade's chest), he's soon resurrected, on account of his twin taking his place (the costumes are mostly obvious reflections of the wearer here, barring Steed's 19thcentury general and Dayton's executioner).


Max Hardy (Hugh Manning, 4.16: The Thirteenth Hole) dressed as a WWI German officer, runs a fencing school, and is the third slain (stabbed in a sword fight).


(Camp) Freddie Richards (Leon Greene) "claims to be the world’s strongest man" (you wouldn't know it to look at him) and is dressed as a fancy-dress strong man; he succumbs first (a broken back).


Joe Smith (Gary Hope, 1.25: Change of Bait, 3.12: November Five) is a matador dressed as a matador ("the best of all British bullfighters" – how many can there be?) He's done in second, warding off an oncoming cart before, in particularly idiotic fashion, getting lanced with a pitchfork.


Mark Dayton (Blessed) comes on dressed as executioner (complete, initially, with concealing hood) and is expert in unarmed combat. Dayton's the fourth to pop his clogs (if you don't include Wade, and on that basis is the final innocent party to go down). Booming Brian is particularly good at making Dayton’s suspicion of Steed aggressively persecuting.


HannahI'm Wilde.
SteedAre you? Every minute of the day?

Mrs Hannah Wilde (Rampling) is clad as a cowgirl and is an expert shot, having represented Britain. She doesn't get killed, because killing a girl would be unsporting. But she does hit Steed on the head, very unsportingly:

Mrs PeelWhere is Steed?
HannahBack at the house. I'm afraid I clobbered him.
Mrs PeelNaughty. He won't like that.


Obviously, they don't do the sensible thing of everyone sticking together, or the masterplan would collapse in upon itself, but the twist of the double is effective, and the reliable Sidney Hayers makes the most of the studio setting such that it adds rather than detracts from the claustrophobic atmosphere.


Dayton:What about you? What sets you out from the crowd?
Steed: (straightening Richards’ bent poker) Oh, maybe the way I hold my umbrella.

Like Epic, this gives Rigg a break to focus on Steed, and he's agreeably unflappable at the outset ("Just getting myself a drink, to ease the tension"), finishing off one over-confident Wade ("What shall it be for you, then? The bullet, the garrotte, the knife perhaps?") before succumbing to Wilde's gun butt. He also demolishes Jessel with a candlestick after Hannah has shot the gun from his hand, making Steed more into brute force and getting his hands dirty than we've seen for quite a while.


The opening features a shamelessly interior piece of woodland where Steed is (plastic) duck shooting (with his name on it), before Emma quacks and tells him "You're needed"; we're back there for the coda, as Emma blasts teddies, from the sky, one of which contains a bottle of champers, naturally. So she's obliged to bring down a couple of glasses to accompany it.



















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.

Another case of the screaming oopizootics.

Doctor Who Season 14 – Worst to Best The best Doctor Who season? In terms of general recognition and unadulterated celebration, there’s certainly a strong case to be made for Fourteen. The zenith of Robert Holmes and Philip Hinchcliffe’s plans for the series finds it relinquishing the cosy rapport of the Doctor and Sarah in favour of the less-trodden terrain of a solo adventure and underlying conflict with new companion Leela. More especially, it finds the production team finally stretching themselves conceptually after thoroughly exploring their “gothic horror” template over the course of the previous two seasons (well, mostly the previous one).

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.

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.

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.

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.

They literally call themselves “Decepticons”. That doesn’t set off any red flags?

Bumblebee  (2018) (SPOILERS) Bumblebee is by some distance the best Transformers movie, simply by dint of having a smattering of heart (one might argue the first Shia LaBeouf one also does, and it’s certainly significantly better than the others, but it’s still a soulless Michael Bay “machine”). Laika VP and director Travis Knight brings personality to a series that has traditionally consisted of shamelessly selling product, by way of a nostalgia piece that nods to the likes of Herbie (the original), The Iron Giant and even Robocop .

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

You don’t know anything about this man, and he knows everything about you.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s two-decades-later remake of his British original. It’s undoubtedly the better-known version, but as I noted in my review of the 1934 film, it is very far from the “ far superior ” production Truffaut tried to sell the director on during their interviews. Hitchcock would only be drawn – in typically quotable style – that “ the first version is the work of a talented amateur and the second was made by a professional ”. For which, read a young, creatively fired director versus one clinically going through the motions, occasionally inspired by a shot or sequence but mostly lacking the will or drive that made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much such a pleasure from beginning to end.