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

We live in a twilight world.

Tenet (2020)
(SPOILERS) I’ve endured a fair few confusingly-executed action sequences in movies – more than enough, actually – but I don’t think I’ve previously had the odd experience of being on the edge of my seat during one while simultaneously failing to understand its objectives and how those objectives are being attempted. Which happened a few times during Tenet. If I stroll over to the Wiki page and read the plot synopsis, it is fairly explicable (fairly) but as a first dive into this Christopher Nolan film, I frequently found it, if not impenetrable, then most definitely opaque.

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds. Juno and the Paycock, set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.

Anything can happen in Little Storping. Anything at all.

The Avengers 2.22: Murdersville
Brian Clemens' witty take on village life gone bad is one of the highlights of the fifth season. Inspired by Bad Day at Black Rock, one wonders how much Murdersville's premise of unsettling impulses lurking beneath an idyllic surface were set to influence both Straw Dogs and The Wicker Mana few years later (one could also suggest it premeditates the brand of backwoods horrors soon to be found in American cinema from the likes of Wes Craven and Tobe Hooper).

The protocol actually says that most Tersies will say this has to be a dream.

Jupiter Ascending (2015)
(SPOILERS) The Wachowski siblings’ wildly patchy career continues apace. They bespoiled a great thing with The Matrix sequels (I liked the first, not the second), misfired with Speed Racer (bubble-gum visuals aside, hijinks and comedy ain’t their forte) and recently delivered the Marmite Sense8 for Netflix (I was somewhere in between on it). Their only slam-dunk since The Matrix put them on the movie map is Cloud Atlas, and even that’s a case of rising above its limitations (mostly prosthetic-based). Jupiter Ascending, their latest cinema outing and first stab at space opera, elevates their lesser works by default, however. It manages to be tone deaf in all the areas that count, and sadly fetches up at the bottom of their filmography pile.

This is a case where the roundly damning verdicts have sadly been largely on the ball. What’s most baffling about the picture is that, after a reasonably engaging set-up, it determinedly bores the pants off you. I haven’t enco…

Seems silly, doesn't it? A wedding. Given everything that's going on.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I (2010)
(SPOILERS) What’s good in the first part of the dubiously split (of course it was done for the art) final instalment in the Harry Potter saga is very good, let down somewhat by decisions to include material that would otherwise have been rightly excised and the sometimes-meandering travelogue. Even there, aspects of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I can be quite rewarding, taking on the tone of an apocalyptic ‘70s aftermath movie or episode of Survivors (the original version), as our teenage heroes (some now twentysomethings) sleep rough, squabble, and try to salvage a plan. The main problem is that the frequently strong material requires a robust structure to get the best from it.

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.

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

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…

When I barked, I was enormous.

Dean Spanley (2008)
(SPOILERS) There is such a profusion of average, respectable – but immaculately made – British period drama held up for instant adulation, it’s hardly surprising that, when something truly worthy of acclaim comes along, it should be singularly ignored. To be fair, Dean Spanleywas well liked by critics upon its release, but its subsequent impact has proved disappointingly slight. Based on Lord Dunsany’s 1939 novella, My Talks with Dean Spanley, our narrator relates how the titular Dean’s imbibification of a moderate quantity of Imperial Tokay (“too syrupy”, is the conclusion reached by both members of the Fisk family regarding this Hungarian wine) precludes his recollection of a past life as a dog. 

Inevitably, reviews pounced on the chance to reference Dean Spanley as a literal shaggy dog story, so I shall get that out of the way now. While the phrase is more than fitting, it serves to underrepresent how affecting the picture is when it has cause to be, as does any re…