Skip to main content

The possibilities are gigantic. In a very small way, of course.

The Avengers
5.24: Mission… Highly Improbable

With a title riffing on a then-riding-high US spy show, just as the previous season's The Girl from Auntie riffed on a then-riding-high US spy show, it's to their credit that neither have even the remotest connection to their "inspirations" besides the cheap gags (in this case, the episode was based on a teleplay submitted back in 1964). Mission… Highly Improbable follows in the increasing tradition (certainly with the advent of Season Five and colour) of SF plotlines, but is also, in its particular problem with shrinkage, informed by other recent adventurers into that area.


Doctor Who went there with Planet of the Giants in 1964 and Irwin Allen based a whole series in Land of the Giants, while Fantastic Voyage miniaturised to a more extreme degree in '66. I wonder if the greater informant of this one being dusted off was the Incredible Shrinking Master episode I Dream of Jeannie that aired in the first quarter of '67. It has to be said that, while there's nothing quite as indelible here as Larry Hagman being menaced by a giant cat (although Nicholas Courtney's daft crash helmet does rather burn itself on the retina), the episode rattles along pleasantly enough.


ChiversSir Gerald's been delayed.
RushtonDelayed?
ChiversAbsolutely weighed down with a load of rubbish.
RushtonRubbish?
ChiversBureaucratic rubbish.


The villainy is strictly low rent, though, courtesy of Dr Chivers (Francis Matthews, 4.17: The Thirteenth Hole) attempting to sell secrets – and later, a new shrinking ray created by Professor Rushton (Noel Howlett) – to bumbling Russian Brodny-type Shaffer (Ronald Radd, 2.8: Bullseye, 3.23: The Outside-In Man). 


Chivers' methods in aid of a quick buck are alarmingly casual, from putting Sir Gerald (Kevin Stoney, The Daleks' Master PlanInvasionRevenge of the CybermenAnimalsHostage) in a shoebox and dumping him in the trash, to washing poor Gifford (Courtney, 2.5: Propellant 23) down a drain. Later, when a shrunk Mrs Peel goes missing, the response is a casual "Forget it, we can spray the whole grounds later".


Mrs PeelI better be getting into my rifling Rushton's desk kit.

Indeed, little of Philip Levene's plot stands up to scrutiny, probably hoping that the over-sized sets will distract our attention. Which they do, for the most part. Mrs Peel isn't doing an awful lot during the first half, such that I wondered if this was a symptom of her imminent exit of the show, particularly since Jane Merrow (as Susan, Rushton's daughter; she was also in The Schizoid Man, and apparently Patrick McGoohan liked her, which is high praise indeed) was screen-tested for her replacement. 


SchaefferWonderful vehicle, doctor. How are you going to move it? In your raincoat pocket?

Accordingly, the bulk of the shrinkage concerns Steed, who finds his way into the prototype Saracen SV7 armoured car before its reduced in scale (so Chivers can pass it to Schaeffer). Quite why Steed go to look at the SV7 when it's on display isn't clear, apart from enabling him to find the miniature Rolls sitting on it. We're introduced to the most expensive set, Shaeffer's desktop, at just past the halfway mark, and inevitably have to keep returning to it to make good use of the phone (also scene prior to Courtney's demise, which comes by way of action man hands). 


Mrs PeelI'm not sure I shouldn't keep you like this. After all, it's one way to bag a man.

Quips abound when Emma locates her diminutive colleague ("Tell me, Steed, is everything to scale?": Fnar) but it isn't a very good episode for her self-esteem, since she's mistaken for Susan and very easily kidnapped, and then rather carelessly gets shrunk at about the same time Steed is reconstituted. Steed meanwhile shows his penmanship skills, making a remarkable impact on the fragile ankles of heavies (one of whom is engrossed in Jane Austen's Emma).


SteedWell, I must say, Mrs Peel, the pen is mightier than the sword.
Mrs PeelWell, between us, we've written them off.

He also has to avoid the stench of Shaeffer's now excessively large cigar. There are some nice moments with the latter earlier, who is struggling to impress his peers by demanding random medals be pinned to his chest ("For bravery! Conspicuous bravery!"), leading to bemused queries ("What lovely medals. Is that for… endurance? Crimean War? You’re very well preserved"). Richard Leech (2.13: Traitor in Zebra, 3.18: Dressed to Kill) also appears, as an unlikely colonel. 

  
Ending with Steed wistfully considering things that could be reduced in size ("Miniskirts": "Wishful thinking, I'm afraid") and handing Emma a tiny brolly, Mission… is an agreeable end to the season, but like much of it, it fails to quite go that extra distance Season Four did; its content stands out less than its switch to colour.
























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.

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.

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…

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

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.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) (SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek , but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan . That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

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

They say if we go with them, we'll live forever. And that's good.

Cocoon (1985) Anyone coming across Cocoon cold might reasonably assume the involvement of Steven Spielberg in some capacity. This is a sugary, well-meaning tale of age triumphing over adversity. All thanks to the power of aliens. Substitute the elderly for children and you pretty much have the manner and Spielberg for Ron Howard and you pretty much have the approach taken to Cocoon . Howard is so damn nice, he ends up pulling his punches even on the few occasions where he attempts to introduce conflict to up the stakes. Pauline Kael began her review by expressing the view that consciously life-affirming movies are to be consciously avoided. I wouldn’t go quite that far, but you’re definitely wise to steel yourself for the worst (which, more often than not, transpires). Cocoon is as dramatically inert as the not wholly dissimilar (but much more disagreeable, which is saying something) segment of Twilight Zone: The Movie directed by Spielberg ( Kick the Can ). There