Skip to main content

Always keep you bowler on in times of stress. And watch out for diabolical masterminds.

The Avengers
6.1: The Forget-Me-Knot

I’d best clear up one thing right away. I like Tara King. Maybe it was my age I first saw her (eleven or twelve) or being simultaneously made aware of how unbeatable Mrs Peel was, and thus hers was a period I could have for myself in some way, but I didn’t perceive the assumed drop in quality, and liked her slightly dappy, make-do quality. Of course, I can see “objectively” that the relationship with Steed isn’t a patch on that of Emma or Cathy, but its biggest failing is not that it isn’t a match of equals, but rather the attempt to impress a romantic twist upon it.


Tara: You didn’t say it.
Steed: Say what?
Tara: Rara-rara-boom di-ay.
Steed: I very seldom do.

Macnee admitted he wasn’t initially keen on Thorson’s casting, and purely on the basis of a few sums, he has a point. Blackman was a mere three years younger than Macnee, Rigg a more noticeable sixteen years his junior (that chemistry went along way to plug the gap). Thorson, however, was lagging a tender quarter of a century behind, with the result that anything beyond her idolising him to his bemusement comes across like a creepy uncle, or Sir Rog in For Your Eyes Only. It speaks volumes that she’s a year younger than Joanna Lumley, who played Purdey more age appropriately in The New Avengers, recognising Steed as very much her senior and so making her flirtatiousness a form of wistful doting. While Macnee quickly got on very well with Thorson, he remained unconvinced of the thrust of their relationship: “[Thorson]’s character loved Steed, but I always thought that was a bad idea. The show was so much better with Steed and his leading lady as sparring equals, without the woman being subservient. But with Linda, it leaned that way”.


The other factor that counts against Tara from the off is her theme. It’s a nice piece in and of itself, but it’s just too much in context, suggesting Tara is exploding with unbridled, sultry passion for Steed (and so the implication that it must be vice versa).


The Forget-Me-Knot generally seems to be regarded as a disappointment, making a scrappy show of sending off Emma and introducing Tara (and Mother). That’s fair, if you go in with unrealistic expectations; it’s certainly wafer thin in terms of plotting. But as light weight as it is, even by Avengers standards, there’s something very amiable about it, even – or perhaps especially – the dependence on lame amnesia gags and the complete lack of any coherence with regard to the hows and whys of the experiencer’s loss of memory. 


Emma: Certainly strange, that we both seem to be suffering from amnesia.
Mortimer: What’s amnesia?
Emma: Loss of memory.
Mortimer: Oh. Who’s lost their memory?
Emma: You have.
Mortimer: Oh, sorry. I’d forgotten.

There were rumours this was a cobbled-together piece of extant Season Five material, something Brian Clemens has denied, attesting that he wrote it up when he came in to replace John Bryce and it was decided a proper handover was needed. The result was Rigg’s material being filmed in a speedy four days, and for the most part sharing her scenes with Sean Mortimer (the very game Patrick Kavanagh, later Father Seamus Fitzpatrick in Father Ted). Mortimer, having discovered a traitor in the Organisation (that’s the one Steed works for), has been shot with a memory-removing dart of unspecific effect and duration, hence his being shot repeatedly throughout the episode, and kidnapped. 


Emma: I remember the name Steed.
Mortimer: So do I. That must be you then.
Emma: Well it must be me.

There’s nothing very highbrow about the exchanges and riffs between Mrs Peel and Mortimer, but Rigg and Kavanagh have decent comic chemistry, ensuring their extended stay in a cellar is quite breezy. The highlight might be a very silly sequence in which Sean stands on one leg, pulling a silly face to distract a henchman, with Emma proceeding to attack him and managing, in the process, to shoot Sean again.


Dr Soames: One drink too many. That’s what’s wrong with him. Give him a sedative.

Rather like the earlier 3.24: The Charmers and its remake 5.9: The Correct Way to Kill, this is a story where agents team up, although this time, they’re all on the same side. Tara is instantly in awe of Steed after attacking him while in training and can’t believe he’s guilty, so goes to his aid when he too is rendered amnesiac (a very dispassionate doctor – John Lee, 5.3: The Bird Who Knew Too Much – has no interest in what really may be ailing Steed) and put on the suspect list of being a defector. 


Steed: I knew it. The way I opened that lock. I’m a burglar.

Various elements of this don’t really work – why Tara feels she has to give him her address, other than it being Chekov’s Address, paying off in a later scene when he needs to find help but can’t remember anything; when Tara is inevitably shot, she turns into an automaton (“Sorry but it’s the rules”) in response to Steed’s pleas, which doesn’t make much sense – but I didn’t have a problem with her mix of resourcefulness and inexperience. And the brick in her handbag is a masterful touch.


Filson: Even the biggest idols can have feet of clay.

Less successful, depending on how you look at it, are the villains. Simon Filson (Jeremy Burnham, 4.1: The Town of No Return, 5.1: The Fear Merchants) is so obviously set up as the defector in Mother’s midst, until you find he isn’t, that he’s never a remotely satisfying red herring. You’re left asking the question, why is he such a bastard? As for George Burton (Jeremy Young, 4.22: A Touch of Brimstone, 5.10: Never, Never Say Die), there isn’t any backstory at all.


Mother: What’s Mortimer doing at your place?
Steed: Trying to remember. He seems to be suffering from some kind of amnesia.
Mother: Drugged?
Steed: Possibly.
Mother: Brainwashed?
Steed: Perhaps.
Mother: Cheers.
Steed: Cheers.

This is, of course, the first appearance by Patrick Newell (4.1: The Town of No Return, 5.14: Something Nasty in the Nursery) as Mother. So indelible a presence is he, I’d have likely sworn, before I revisited the show in the ‘90s, that he’d also appeared in the last Rigg series. Mother’s a bit more active here than he’ll later be, use ceiling grips to move around his room and fixing drinks himself (he’ll soon have an assistant to do that kind of business for him). He’s instantly such a – welcome – pillar of the proceedings that you wonder how the show ever got by without him.


Emma: And talking of forgetting, just remind me, are you the man who…
Steed: I’m afraid so.

And the fond farewell. While I’m considerably better disposed towards this episode than Avengers Forever, I do agree that the final Steed-Emma scene is in another league. Witty, silly, short and sweet. There’s whatever she whispers to him (above), offering one last piece of obligatory innuendo, and the reaction to the news that Peter Peel’s alive – “Air ace found in Amazonian Jungle”. But that’s merely a prelude to the wistful and wonderful final exchange:

Emma: Always keep you bowler on in times of stress. And watch out for diabolical masterminds.
Steed: I’ll remember. Emma. Thanks.


Steed dropping the formality for that one occasion, and then the punchline reveal: Peter Peel is the spit of John Steed!


It’s easy to understand why Emma’s replacement, based on Steed inviting Mother to choose (“You know my taste. I’ll trust your judgement”), caused disgruntlement with both fans and the main cast member, since Rigg was probably an impossible act to follow no matter who was settled on. As if in acknowledgment of this, the season’s (first set of) end titles aren’t nearly as good as the previous season’s; they’re trying a little too hard. That is, perhaps, the key. Rigg and Macnee made it look effortless. As appealing as the Tara King era can be, it’s never quite that.









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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

So you want me to be half-monk, half-hitman.

Casino Royale (2006)
(SPOILERS) Despite the doubts and trepidation from devotees (too blonde, uncouth etc.) that greeted Daniel Craig’s casting as Bond, and the highly cynical and low-inspiration route taken by Eon in looking to Jason Bourne's example to reboot a series that had reached a nadir with Die Another Day, Casino Royale ends up getting an enormous amount right. If anything, its failure is that it doesn’t push far enough, so successful is it in disarming itself of the overblown set pieces and perfunctory plotting that characterise the series (even at its best), elements that would resurge with unabated gusto in subsequent Craig excursions.

For the majority of its first two hours, Casino Royale is top-flight entertainment, with returning director Martin Campbell managing to exceed his excellent work reformatting Bond for the ‘90s. That the weakest sequence (still good, mind) prior to the finale is a traditional “big” (but not too big) action set piece involving an attempt to…

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

Remember, you're fighting for this woman's honour – which is probably more than she ever did.

Duck Soup (1933)
(SPOILERS) Not for nothing is Duck Soup acclaimed as one of the greatest comedies ever, and while you’d never hold it against Marx Brothers movies for having little in the way of coherent plotting in – indeed, it’s pretty much essential to their approach – the presence of actual thematic content this time helps sharpen the edges of both their slapstick and their satire.

Afraid, me? A man who’s licked his weight in wild caterpillars? You bet I’m afraid.

Monkey Business (1931)
(SPOILERS) The Marx Brothers’ first feature possessed of a wholly original screenplay, Monkey Business is almost brazenly dismissive towards notions of coherence, just as long as it loosely supports their trademark antics. And it does so in spades, depositing them as stowaways bound for America who fall in with a couple of mutually antagonistic racketeers/ gangsters while attempting to avoid being cast in irons. There’s no Margaret Dumont this time out, but Groucho is more than matched by flirtation-interest Thelma Todd.

You killed my sandwich!

Birds of Prey (and the Fanatabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) (2020)
(SPOILERS) One has to wonder at Bird of Prey’s 79% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I mean, such things are to be taken with a pinch of salt at the best of times, but it would be easy, given the disparity between such evident approval and the actually quality of the movie, to suspect insincere motives on the part of critics, that they’re actually responding to its nominally progressive credentials – female protagonists in a superhero flick! – rather than its content. Which I’m quite sure couldn’t possibly be the case. Birds of Prey (and the Fanatabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) isn’t very good. The trailers did not lie, even if the positive reviews might have misled you into thinking they were misleading.

On account of you, I nearly heard the opera.

A Night at the Opera (1935)
(SPOILERS) The Marx Brothers head over to MGM, minus one Zeppo, and despite their variably citing A Night at the Opera as their best film, you can see – well, perhaps not instantly, but by about the half-hour mark – that something was undoubtedly lost along the way. It isn’t that there’s an absence of very funny material – there’s a strong contender for their best scene in the mix – but that there’s a lot else too. Added to which, the best of the very funny material can be found during the first half of the picture.

You’re a disgrace to the family name of Wagstaff, if such a thing is possible.

Horse Feathers (1932)
(SPOILERS) After a scenario that seemed feasible in Monkey Business – the brothers as stowaways – Horse Feathers opts for a massive stretch. Somehow, Groucho (Professor Quincy Adams Wagstaff) has been appointed as the president of Huxley University, proceeding to offer the trustees and assembled throng a few suggestions on how he’ll run things (by way of anarchistic creed “Whatever it is, I’m against it”). There’s a reasonably coherent mission statement in this one, however, at least until inevitably it devolves into gleeful incoherence.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989)
(SPOILERS) There’s Jaws, there’s Star Wars, and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy, to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “mainly boring”.

Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the system when Burton did it (even…

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…