Skip to main content

In alphabetical order, he was clubbed, poisoned, shot, spiked, stabbed, strangled and suffocated. And his eardrums are damaged.

The Avengers
6.19: Killer

One of the series’ infrequent “Steed-gets-another-partner-for-an-episode” outings (see also 4.19: The Girl from Auntie). And while on the plus side, Lady Diana Forbes-Blakeney (Jennifer Croxton) mercifully avoids the overt flirtation of Tara, she also lacks the sense of fun and energy Thorson brings to her role. As a result, Lady Diana only ever seems like a stand-in, marking time, where other eccentric one-offs (5.19: Dead Man’s Treasure, 3.24: The Charmers) were more indelible.


Steed: Why didn’t he wait?
Mother: Why can’t any of them wait?

Killer – for a series that prides itself on amusing titles, this one is unforgivably bland – works surprisingly well dramatically, given how thin and repetitive it is. A man name Remak is murdering intelligence agents, all of whom proceed to face their killer alone after meeting the same “dying” contact Paxton (Harry Towb, The Seeds of Death, Terror of the Autons). They head for a pub, The Pirate, in Lower Storpington, where Brinstead (William Franklyn, 4.13: Silent Dust) directs them to a nearby factory. Where Remak disposes of them.


Clarke: In alphabetical order he was clubbed, poisoned, shot, spiked, stabbed, strangled and suffocated. And his eardrums are damaged.
Steed: His neck’s broken as well.

I’m not sure the means make a whole lot of sense as described by forensics man Clarke – Richard Wattis, The Chimes of Big Ben: one has the feeling Wattis ought to have appeared as an Avengers regular, but this was his only outing – since the succession of methods of death would surely be unlikely to leave the agent sufficiently alive to progress to each new one. And then there’s the miraculous clothes-mending machine. 


Steed: There’s a little disused graveyard to the north of Palmer’s Green, where a strange, mysterious body waits.
Lady Diana: Wrapped up in polythene.

Victims include the building’s engineer Wilkington (James Bree, 2.17: Immortal Clay), Trancer (Michael McStay, Derek Moberley in The Seeds of Doom), Gillars (Charles Houston), Calvin (Anthony Valentine, 5.3: The Bird Who Knew Too Much), Chattel (Jonathan Elsom, 5.5: The See-Through Man) and Wilkington’s business partner Bleech (John Bailey, 1.25: Change of Bait, 2.26: Killer Whale, 4.4: Dial a Deadly Number), who foolishly reckons on blackmail as a method of bargaining with Remak. 


All told, Remak’s a remarkably efficient killer, until Steed arrives, and he’s revealed as a machine (as if anyone hadn’t realised in the teaser), a method to “mass produce murder”, or more specifically “to decimate your intelligence service” as Merridon (Grant Taylor, UFO) puts it. One that can be destroyed by typing a few instructions into it, this being the sixties (not so far from The General).


Freddie: Oh pink. Gorgeous. You know, I've a passion for pink myself.

Tony Williamson previously wrote the very amusing Wish You Were Here, but this episode is generally much less frivolous. A couple of brief visits to Fancy Frills Limited are as much as we get, in pursuit of the identity of the pink ribbon that tied Wilkington’s corpse. Freddie (Michael Ward, a recurring Carry On player) is magnificently camp, and his greeting to Steed is explosively funny (“Good afternoon, sir. I’m Freddie, packager extraordinary”).


Steed: How did you get in?
Lady Diana: Agent’s Manual, Section 3, Paragraph 4. Always go in through a skylight.

Director Cliff Owen services the action commendably in his only contribution to the series (he also called the shots on The Wrong Arm of the Law, the Morecambe and Wise big screen outings and several ‘70s sex comedies); Trancer’s escape in the teaser is extremely well put together, while Lady Diana later has a convincing tumble with Brinstead (where she comes out best after getting hold of a samurai sword), and Steed’s later navigation of the various death traps is also a lot of fun, particularly when he comes across Lady Diana (the obstacles recall other deadly courses such as Blake’s 7’s Games, and as Shallow Like Us notes, Death to the Daleks). 


That said, the earlier means of doing for Brinstead with an oncoming cart is about as convincing as it was when used in 5.12: The Superlative Seven (as less than convincing behaviour goes, Paxton merely knocking Steed out at one point doesn’t seem to have been very wise, since of course he comes back for more; notably, Paxton’s location is explicitly written in as a backlot, enabling unadorned Elstree filming).


Steed: The Orient? Maybe you could teach me a thing or two.
Lady Diana: I doubt that very much.

Some fans have expressed wistfulness about what might have been, had Lady Diana been a regular rather than Tara. It’s true that Croxton plays the relationship more as an equal per the previous two partners, but I don’t detect much chemistry here, and she also seems more than a little awkward in her delivery at times. In terms of the character’s skillset, we learn she just spent eighteen months undercover organising agents in the Orient, which I guess explains her racist Chinese impression later in the episode.


Steed: Send me a postcard.
Tara: Every hour and on the hour.

As for Tara, who has been on holiday via a pink and purple pass, those dubious about Thorson need only look at the previous episode to see how winning – and funny – she can be. The continual bugbear of the relationship with Steed is not that she’s his less-experienced junior, it’s the playing up of her moon-eyed besottedness. Which is all we see from her here (if she’s that crazy about him, why does she even go on holiday?) The coda is, however, pretty good, with a gift for Steed in a tiny box; it holds an inflatable dinghy that proceeds to fill his apartment, the instructions on how to deflate it left far across the room.











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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

They'll think I've lost control again and put it all down to evolution.

Time Bandits (1981) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam had co-directed previously, and his solo debut had visual flourish on its side, but it was with Time Bandits that Gilliam the auteur was born. The first part of his Trilogy of Imagination, it remains a dazzling work – as well as being one of his most successful – rich in theme and overflowing with ideas while resolutely aimed at a wide (family, if you like) audience. Indeed, most impressive about Time Bandits is that there’s no evidence of self-censoring here, of attempting to make it fit a certain formula, format or palatable template.

Oh, you got me right in the pantaloons, partner.

The Party (1968) (SPOILERS) Blake Edwards’ semi-improvisational reunion with Peter Sellers is now probably best known for – I was going to use an elephant-in-the-room gag, but at least one person already went there – Sellers’ “brown face”. And it isn’t a decision one can really defend, even by citing The Party ’s influence on Bollywood. Satyajit Ray had also reportedly been considering working with Sellers… and then he saw the film. One can only assume he’d missed similar performances in The Millionairess and The Road to Hong Kong ; in the latter case, entirely understandable, if not advisable. Nevertheless, for all the flagrant stereotyping, Sellers’ bungling Hrundi V Bakshi is a very likeable character, and indeed, it’s the piece’s good-natured, soft centre – his fledgling romance with Claudine Longet’s Michele – that sees The Party through in spite of its patchy, hit-and-miss quality.

I never strangled a chicken in my life!

Rope (1948) (SPOILERS) Rope doesn’t initially appear to have been one of the most venerated of Hitchcocks, but it has gone through something of a rehabilitation over the years, certainly since it came back into circulation during the 80s. I’ve always rated it highly; yes, the seams of it being, essentially, a formal experiment on the director’s part, are evident, but it’s also an expert piece of writing that uses our immediate knowledge of the crime to create tension throughout; what we/the killers know is juxtaposed with the polite dinner party they’ve thrown in order to wallow in their superiority.

Never lose any sleep over accusations. Unless they can be proved, of course.

Strangers on a Train (1951) (SPOILERS) Watching a run of lesser Hitchcock films is apt to mislead one into thinking he was merely a highly competent, supremely professional stylist. It takes a picture where, to use a not inappropriate gourmand analogy, his juices were really flowing to remind oneself just how peerless he was when inspired. Strangers on a Train is one of his very, very best works, one he may have a few issues with but really deserves nary a word said against it, even in “compromised” form.

You must have hopes, wishes, dreams.

Brazil (1985) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam didn’t consider Brazil the embodiment of a totalitarian nightmare it is often labelled as. His 1984½ (one of the film’s Fellini-riffing working titles) was “ the Nineteen Eighty-Four for 1984 ”, in contrast to Michael Anderson’s Nineteen Eighty-Four from 1948. This despite Gilliam famously boasting never to have read the Orwell’s novel: “ The thing that intrigues me about certain books is that you know them even though you’ve never read them. I guess the images are archetypal ”. Or as Pauline Kael observed, Brazil is to Nineteen Eighty-Four as “ if you’d just heard about it over the years and it had seeped into your visual imagination ”. Gilliam’s suffocating system isn’t unflinchingly cruel and malevolently intolerant of individuality; it is, in his vision of a nightmare “future”, one of evils spawned by the mechanisms of an out-of-control behemoth: a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. And yet, that is not really, despite how indulgently and glee

Miss Livingstone, I presume.

Stage Fright (1950) (SPOILERS) This one has traditionally taken a bit of a bruising, for committing a cardinal crime – lying to the audience. More specifically, lying via a flashback, through which it is implicitly assumed the truth is always relayed. As Richard Schickel commented, though, the egregiousness of the action depends largely on whether you see it as a flaw or a brilliant act of daring: an innovation. I don’t think it’s quite that – not in Stage Fright ’s case anyway; the plot is too ordinary – but I do think it’s a picture that rewards revisiting knowing the twist, since there’s much else to enjoy it for besides.

A herbal enema should fix you up.

Never Say Never Again (1983) (SPOILERS) There are plenty of sub-par Bond s in the official (Eon) franchise, several of them even weaker than this opportunistic remake of Thunderball , but they do still feel like Bond movies. Never Say Never Again , despite – or possibly because he’s part of it – featuring the much-vaunted, title-referencing return of the Sean Connery to the lead role, only ever feels like a cheap imitation. And yet, reputedly, it cost more than the same year’s Rog outing Octopussy .

I'm an old ruin, but she certainly brings my pulse up a beat or two.

The Paradine Case (1947) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock wasn’t very positive about The Paradine Case , his second collaboration with Gregory Peck, but I think he’s a little harsh on a picture that, if it doesn’t quite come together dramatically, nevertheless maintains interest on the basis of its skewed take on the courtroom drama. Peck’s defence counsel falls for his client, Alida Valli’s accused (of murder), while wife Ann Todd wilts dependably and masochistically on the side-lines.

You’re easily the best policeman in Moscow.

Gorky Park (1983) (SPOILERS) Michael Apted and workmanlike go hand in hand when it comes to thriller fare (his Bond outing barely registered a pulse). This adaptation of Martin Cruz Smith’s 1981 novel – by Dennis Potter, no less – is duly serviceable but resolutely unremarkable. William Hurt’s militsiya officer Renko investigates three faceless bodies found in the titular park. It was that grisly element that gave Gorky Park a certain cachet when I first saw it as an impressionable youngster. Which was actually not unfair, as it’s by far its most memorable aspect.

I don’t like fighting at all. I try not to do too much of it.

Cuba (1979) (SPOILERS) Cuba -based movies don’t have a great track record at the box office, unless Bad Boys II counts. I guess The Godfather Part II does qualify. Steven Soderbergh , who could later speak to box office bombs revolving around Castro’s revolution, called Richard Lester’s Cuba fascinating but flawed. Which is generous of him.