Skip to main content

I shall lead my army into these new worlds and colonise them. My army of astronauts.

The Avengers
6.2: Invasion of the Earthmen

Some have labelled this one of the show’s nadirs, but I really can’t see it. Sure, the episode has many obligatory, patented Terry Nation SF teleplay clichés, including some quite ridiculous logic, it’s fair share of visual clunkers and a patchy quality betraying its troubled production even to those unaware, but for good stretches, Invasion of the Earthmen is a quite serviceable more serious-minded episode, even if that’s in direct contrast to the absurdity of its diabolical mastermind’s scheme.


The disarray of the early sixth season was a direct consequence of Thames sticking its oar in, deeming that the curve towards “heightened” material under Brian Clemens and Albert Fennell needed to be slammed into reverse (Clemens suggests it was about internal politics, since outside boys had been responsible for the company’s greatest hit). The result was – briefly – their exit, and the installation of Blackman era story editor and producer John Bryce; a healthy dose of reality would work wonders for the series’ staying power, was the gist of the theory. 


When Bryce went south, and back came Clemens and Fennell, there was extensive reworking of material shot under his aegis, and of Tara King’s character; like Macnee, the incoming producers thought Thorson was wrong for the part and show (Clemens claimed she hand no sense of humour, which was why Mother was needed; one suspects, in part, his view was quite so unforgiving because she was an element he had no control over). As a consequence, Tara’s capable ingenue, who makes short work of the villain during the meat of the episode, is reduced to someone requiring judo training from Steed in the bookends (and who doffs her blonde “wig” – a “disguise” – to become a brunette when not investigating the space school). 


Brett: You may run anywhere you wish, Miss King. Do try to give them a good chase.

It’s not all positive during the Alpha Academy scenes, though. While Tara is remarkably resourceful at eluding her captors, and overcomes threats involving very fake-looking boa constrictors, scorpions (it looks more convincing in that photo), spiders and boulders, she contrastingly reacts in markedly terrified fashion when faced with a few sewer rats and screams when she falls down a slide your average child at a playground would have no problem with. That said, while one might point to the obviously fake threats as black marks, they’re really no greater impediments to enjoyment than the now customary recourse to obvious studio stand-ins for outdoor sequences and Macnee’s undisguised stunt doubles. 


Added to which, the manner in which Brigadier Brett (William Lucas, Range in Frontios, 5.17: Death’s Door) sets his students on Tara could be seen as a prelude to later murderous delights such as A Clockwork Orange and Battle Royale. In terms of the show itself, it echoes both 4.25: A Sense of History (young upstarts) and 5.12: The Superlative Seven (a hunt to the death), with a hint of The Prisoner’s Dance of the Dead as Tara flees the mob.


Brett: Everyone you meet is an enemy and so must be destroyed.

In those terms, the mustard-yellow tops of the Alphas could be seen as a swipe at the “virtuous” fascism of Gene Roddenberry’s bright and aspirant future (as long as it’s the Federation way, it’s acceptable for the universe). Their numbers include future Dim Warren Clarke and future Survivor Lucy Fleming (showing a particularly sadistic streak) as well as Christian Roberts (To Sir With Love, Dr Renor in Blake’s 7’s Breakdown, UFO’s The Long Sleep) and Chris Chittell (The Tomorrow People). 


The subplot in which Huxton (Roberts) and Bassin (Chittell) are sent out on night survival (a “seek and destroy” assignment – “Only one of you must return”) is a baffling piece of Nation plotting, since it means a minimum of half of all trainees won’t survive the Academy (and such culling of candidates would inevitably attract unwanted attention). It’s nevertheless also effectively grim in sensibility. There’s no sudden discovery of gratitude or humanity when Tara warns Huxton of an attempt on his life; he proceeds to let fly an arrow at her. And her being carried off aloft by her captors is suggestive of a sacrificial rite rather than a precisely trained military unit.


Brett: This is the future, Miss King. The new worlds of space hanging like ripe plums in the sky waiting for the first men who have the courage to snatch them.

The more overtly SF elements may not stand up to much scrutiny, but the “humpty dumpty” spaceman suit is a suitably bizarre inclusion that strikes just the right blend of silly and surreal. Brett’s scheme, though… He plans to allow the East and West to strike out and explore new worlds and then, taking advantage of their technological development, “I shall lead my army into these new worlds and colonise them. My army of astronauts”. To do this, he needs to wage war on other space explorers, “To wipe them out, Miss King. I will invade the new territories out there while the world makes formal protests and looks to the rule books”. If this doesn’t exhibit a slender enough grip on feasibility, when Tara comments that it will take fifty years to reach that point (secret space programmes allowing), he shows her his advances in cryobiology, whereby eighty students (presumably all victors of night survival training) have been frozen at their physical peak. Hopefully they’ll be successfully thawed out.


Steed: I’m afraid I’m in the Civil Service now.
Brett: Yes, it does happen.

As mentioned, there aren’t a great number of laughs here. Steed’s introduction to Brett has its moments, noting he was once in the military but is now a civil servant, and introducing Tara as his wife… his secondthat is, explaining the seventeen-year-old son prospectively joining the Academy. Avoiding a mantrap, Steed observes, “That’s no way to catch rabbits”. Brett remarks on the deficiencies of boa constrictors, which are “incurably lazy after a meal. The boa constrictor Mr Grant encountered will sleep for at least another three weeks” (Grant, an old colleague of Steed set upon in the teaser, played by George Roubicek, Hopper in The Tomb of the Cybermen, as well an Imperial Officer in Star Wars and Luke in 2.21: The White Dwarf). 


As far as Steed is concerned, this is really more of a Tara showcase (appropriately enough, being Thorson’s first filmed episode). They (unwisely) split up as soon as they arrive on the grounds, after which the lion’s share of the action goes to her, before they converge once more in the tunnel (which offers a series of – unconvincing – tests to find the student’s greatest fear; in that respect, it’s not dissimilar to Vengeance on Varos’ rather underwhelming televised ordeals) and lock their pursuers in. 


TaraWhat will it be? A quite tête-à-tête? Dinner in the country? A ride in the park?
SteedPractice?

Macnee’s doing everything required, and looking very trim (he lost two stone between seasons), but there’s a pervading sense this just isn’t right; Tara’s more like a Doctor Who assistant to Steed’s mentor, ironic given Thorson’s insistence it should be obvious she and Steed were having a sexual relationship. Of which, the cues are just that bit too unsubtle, including Miss King (the only episode Steed addresses her this way) coming to the bedroom door in a hyper-short dressing gown. Her being all eyes for him is faintly embarrassing, and the sight of him showing up sans tie reeks of past-it old guy trying to get down with the kids. There was never a hint of such desperation with Mrs Peel. 


Which rather means that the episodes in the final season are altogether more successful when they aren’t trying to kindle something for which there’s no real spark (usually in the bookends). When the Avengers are doing their avenging, the season is an oft-underrated one, but I don’t really want to know what kind of practice Steed had in mind with Tara in the coda. Certainly not brushing up on her judo.









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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.