Skip to main content

Would you care to remark upon the remarkability?

The Avengers
6.4: Split!

The opening teaser can go a long way to cementing an Avengers as a good ‘un in the memory, but it can also be just about all there is to a story. Such is the case with Split! in which, once you’ve seen Mercer (Maurice Good, 1.10: Hunt the Man Down, 3.7: Don’t Look Behind You, The New AvengersForward Base) hear the name Boris, undergo a personality change (the clawed hand!) and shoot his Ministry of Top-Secret Intelligence (the name’s probably the funniest part of the episode) colleague Compton (Iain Anders), it’s pretty clear what’s up. The only variable is quite how science fiction the explanation is, and in this case it’s very.


Steed: What have you done to your hand?
Mercer: A legacy from Berlin, October ’63.
Steed: Really?

Brian Clemens’ quickly-penned teleplay is also not so far from Spock’s Brain in terms of silliness. Boris Kartovski (Steven Scott, 1.13: One for the Mortuary, 1.26: Dragonsfield, 3.13: Second Sight – the name Boris Kartovski also featured in 4.22: A Touch of Brimstone) was shot in the heart by Steed, in 1963 Berlin, but he survived thanks to Dr Constantine’s (Bernard Archard, 4.3: The Master Minds) skills, putting him on ice and perfecting (well, never quite perfecting) the ability to place his mind in another’s body. Scott is good value in a performance that’s all eye movement, and sometimes lascivious eye movement at that, even if he looks a little like Mo out of The Three Stooges


Rooke: Perfect! I am the perfect prototype.

The episode’s structured such that whoever the latest incumbent “Boris” is must kill the one who isn’t “taking” and is becoming a liability. So Mercer is shot by Lord Barnes (Nigel Davenport, 4.21: The Danger Makers) and Barnes by Rooke (Julian Glover). Being Julian Glover, naturally he needs to be a bad guy, although he shoots Barnes while he’s still a good guy. His struggle for control at the climax is a particularly strong little scene, begging Steed to dispose of him (“Kill you old chap? I’d rather cure you”). 


Dr Constantine: He wants you to stand where he can see you. He was always one for a pretty woman. His appetite was remarkable, voracious. And he could be cruel. So cruel.

The mind transference also inserts a rather unpleasant rape subtext, with the prospect of Tara becoming host for Boris. Constantine tells her “You will feel no pain, Miss King, no pain at all. Unless you decided to fight it. Then your pain will be considerable” while, as the process is underway, Tarvovski is mock warned “Boris, don’t forget you’re dealing with a lady. Think some nice thoughts”. Steed saves her, of course (“I can’t promise you’ll play the violin again”), but Hinnell (John G Heller 4.12: Man-Eater of Surrey Green, 5.9: The Correct Way to Kill) contriving to shoot Constantine, the dolt, isn’t the most satisfying of solutions.


Tara: Clearly, he is highly intelligent, Strong weak, happy sad, carefree anxious man.
Steed: Is that a fact?
Tara: No I made it up.

Also dissatisfying is that, while we as the audience are way ahead, everyone else is required to be desperately slow. Since the plot is very linear, with little intrigue, it can only be the method by which the villains are doing what they’re doing that’s a surprise, and it wouldn’t be to anyone who’s seen a few science-fiction shows. Tara’s suspicious of Mercer from the start, stealing his report and getting his handwriting analysed, but it still takes a long time (“Brutal extrovert, man who will stop at nothing is a first-class description of Boris Tarkovski”) to put the pieces together (“I was feeling a bit extrovert” says Lord Barnes on smashing a glass in the fireplace).


Swindin: Wemarkable. Quite Wemarkable. Wemarkably Wemarkable.
Steed: Would you care to remark upon the remarkability?
Swindin: Yes, I would.

Still, Christopher Benjamin (JJ Hooter in 4.14: How to Succeed… At Murder, 5.10: Never, Never Say Die) supplies a reliably eccentric turn in the form of handwriting expert Swindin, and there’s a few nice conceits at the ministry (passes must be shown every ten feet of corridor). On the whole, Split! is a more serious-minded story, Clemens and co taking up the baton from the previous short-lived guard, but those tend to work when there’s some mystery or tension to keep the story going, and this one peters out quickly; the idea was much better applied, and more humorously, in 5.16: Who’s Who?


Tara: For a moment I wondered who had gotten into you.

The coda has Steed doing some amusing mugging of a personality change when getting into his suit (with an accompanying music cue) and providing champagne rather than Tara’s preference of ice, grenadine, sake, crème de Violette, calvados, Devonshire cream and an unripened strawberry.









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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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…

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…

Everyone wants a happy ending and everyone wants closure but that's not the way life works out.

It Chapter Two (2019)
(SPOILERS) An exercise in stultifying repetitiveness, It Chapter Two does its very best to undo all the goodwill engendered by the previous instalment. It may simply be that adopting a linear approach to the novel’s interweaving timelines has scuppered the sequel’s chances of doing anything the first film hasn’t. Oh, except getting rid of Pennywise for good, which you’d be hard-pressed to discern as substantially different to the CGI-infused confrontation in the first part, Native American ritual aside.

Just because you are a character doesn't mean that you have character.

Pulp Fiction (1994)
(SPOILERS) From a UK perspective, Pulp Fiction’s success seemed like a fait accompli; Reservoir Dogs had gone beyond the mere cult item it was Stateside and impacted mainstream culture itself (hard to believe now that it was once banned on home video); it was a case of Tarantino filling a gap in the market no one knew was there until he drew attention to it (and which quickly became over-saturated with pale imitators subsequently). Where his debut was a grower, Pulp Fiction hit the ground running, an instant critical and commercial success (it won the Palme d’Or four months before its release), only made cooler by being robbed of the Best Picture Oscar by Forrest Gump. And unlike some famously-cited should-have-beens, Tarantino’s masterpiece really did deserve it.

That woman, deserves her revenge and… we deserve to die. But then again, so does she.

Kill Bill: Vol. 2  (2004)
(SPOILERS) I’m not sure I can really conclude whether one Kill Bill is better than the other, since I’m essentially with Quentin in his assertion that they’re one film, just cut into two for the purposes of a selling point. I do think Kill Bill: Vol. 2 has the movie’s one actually interesting character, though, and I’m not talking David Carradine’s title role.

Do you read Sutter Cane?

In the Mouth of Madness (1994)
(SPOILERS) The concluding chapter of John Carpenter’s unofficial Apocalypse Trilogy (preceded by The Thing and Prince of Darkness) is also, sadly, his last great movie. Indeed, it stands apart in the qualitative wilderness that beset him during the ‘90s (not for want of output). Michael De Luca’s screenplay had been doing the rounds since the ‘80s, even turned down by Carpenter at one point, and it proves ideal fodder for the director, bringing out the best in him. Even cinematographer Gary K Kibbe seems inspired enough to rise to the occasion. It could do without the chugging rawk soundtrack, perhaps, but then, that was increasingly where Carpenter’s interests resided (as opposed to making decent movies).

Check it out. I wonder if BJ brought the Bear with him.

Death Proof (2007)
(SPOILERS) In a way, I’m slightly surprised Tarantino didn’t take the opportunity to disown Death Proof, to claim that, as part of Grindhouse, it was no more one of his ten-official-films-and-out than his Four Rooms segment. But that would be to spurn the exploitation genre affectation that has informed everything he’s put his name to since Kill Bill, to a greater or less extent, and also require him to admit that he was wrong, and you won’t find him doing that for anything bar My Best Friend’s Birthday.

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

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.

When you grow up, if you still feel raw about it, I’ll be waiting.

Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)
(SPOILERS) It sometimes seems as if Quentin Tarantino – in terms of his actual movies, rather than nearly getting Uma killed in an auto stunt – is the last bastion of can-do-no-wrong on the Internet. Or at very least has the preponderance of its vocal weight behind him. Back when his first two movies proper were coming out, so before online was really a thing, I’d likely have agreed, but by about the time the Kill Bills arrived, I’d have admitted I was having serious pause about him being all he was cracked up to be. Because the Kill Bills aren’t very good, and they’ve rather characterised his hermetically sealed wallowing in obscure media trash and genre cul-de-sacs approach to his art ever since. Sometimes to entertaining effect, sometimes less so, but always ever more entrenching his furrow; as Neil Norman note in his Evening Standard review, “Tarantino has attempted (and largely succeeded) in making a movie whose only reality is that of celluloid”. Extend t…