Skip to main content

They were worse than philistines. They were villainstines!

The Avengers
6.30: Homicide and Old Lace

It seems Homicide and Old Lace (originally titled Tall Story) generally gets the short straw as the most vilified Avengers episode, but as with the much-decried Invasion of the Earthmen, I was able to find quite a bit to enjoy here. Even the rather deathless main body of the piece, a salvaging of a sort of The Great Great Great Britain Crime, can boast Gerald Harper (2.4: Death Dispatch, 4.15: The Hour That Never Was) as an idiot.


Mother: I put the word out – find out all you can about Intercrime.
Harriet: That’s seven words.

Mainly, though, I just enjoyed the interplay of Mother and his aunts, Harriet (Joyce Carey) and Georgina (Mary Merrall, 4.19: The Girl from Auntie) as he recounts the bodge up of Terrance Dicks and Malcolm Hulke’s teleplay with a few bits of 5.3: The Bird Who Knew Too Much, 5.1: The Fear Merchants, 5.22: Murdersville and bizarrely unstoppable Christopher Lee from 5.10: Never, Never Say Die (eliciting one of the best Mother explanations: “Finally, the attacker made a fatal mistake. He made Steed very angry”). I was put in mind of Woody Allen’s What’s Up Tiger Lilly from a few years prior, in which he fiddled with footage from Japanese movie Key of Keys to his own humorous ends.


Tara: What’s Intercrime?
Steed: Interpol helps the police against the criminals. Intercrime helps the criminals against the police.

In Bowler Hats and Kinky Boots, Michael Richardson has it that the Dicks and Hulke script was overly complicated with too many characters, coming in at 63 minutes in its assembly cut. What we glean has the basics of a solid premise, though: a plan by Intercrime (a sequel of sorts to that Season 2 story) to steal all the national treasures when they’re amassed in one warehouse in the event of (falsely alerted) war. 


Harriet: Just a minute. You made Tara King a blonde. I’ve seen her, she’s a brunette.
Georgina: That’s right.
Mother: Now look here, aunts. This is my story. And if I wish to make Tara King sky blue pink, I will.
Georgina: Ah, you’re so forceful.

Mother’s sleights of storytelling meet with a consistently critical, loophole-spotting audience. Following the unlikely survival of Freddie Cartwright (Donald Pickering, 5.6: The Winged Avenger), having been shot up and buried, he’s gunned down: “Well, well, well. Forgot his bulletproof vest, eh?” observes Harriet. “It can happen” replies Mother. They’re also particularly dismissive of Harper’s Colonel Corf: “Did he marry into an important family? Is that how he got the job?”)


Much of the main story is rather drab, but there are occasional highlights. Intercrime boss Dunbar’s (Keith Baxter) delivery of “Mr Steed, you should be dead” is winning. Steed, who is undercover as a top criminal, dismisses the first (French) safecracker with “He looks like a criminal!” There’s a frankly bizarre overdub when “brilliant gallant blonde” Tara escapes and a secretary goes flying with the cry of “Ahhh! You’ve laddered my stockings!


Mother: They were worse than philistines. They were villainstines!

I’m not sure Steed’s request for £100k to come along on the job is entirely convincing when he’s already (in theory) pocketed $785k in diamonds from his earlier theft, but still. There’s a nice edit of punching villains in the main story with the setting down of cups on saucers in the framing one (it’s the little things). As for the wrap up, the plea, “Couldn’t we have a downbeat ending for once?” meets with the response that Steed sprained his thumb and, concerning his partner, “The shock turned her brunette”.


So there’s enough here to make the proceedings mildly diverting, but it’s an insurmountable problem that the menu item is at best perfunctory. The coda has Mother using Rhonda as a ventriloquist’s dummy when Steed complains that it bothers him that she never speaks (“Rhonda’s lost her voice”), which elicits what appears to be genuine laughter on the part of Parker.








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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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.

He is a brigand and a lout. Pay him no serious mention.

The Wind and the Lion (1975) (SPOILERS) John Milius called his second feature a boy’s-own adventure, on the basis of the not-so-terrified responses of one of those kidnapped by Sean Connery’s Arab Raisuli. Really, he could have been referring to himself, in all his cigar-chomping, gun-toting reactionary glory, dreaming of the days of real heroes. The Wind and the Lion rather had its thunder stolen by Jaws on release, and it’s easy to see why. As polished as the picture is, and simultaneously broad-stroke and self-aware in its politics, it’s very definitely a throwback to the pictures of yesteryear. Only without the finger-on-the-pulse contemporaneity of execution that would make Spielberg and Lucas’ genre dives so memorable in a few short years’ time.

Another case of the screaming oopizootics.

Doctor Who Season 14 – Worst to Best The best Doctor Who season? In terms of general recognition and unadulterated celebration, there’s certainly a strong case to be made for Fourteen. The zenith of Robert Holmes and Philip Hinchcliffe’s plans for the series finds it relinquishing the cosy rapport of the Doctor and Sarah in favour of the less-trodden terrain of a solo adventure and underlying conflict with new companion Leela. More especially, it finds the production team finally stretching themselves conceptually after thoroughly exploring their “gothic horror” template over the course of the previous two seasons (well, mostly the previous one).

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.

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.

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.

That’s what people call necromancer’s weather.

The Changes (1975) This adaptation of Peter Dickinson’s novel trilogy carries a degree of cult nostalgia cachet due to it being one of those more “adult” 1970s children’s serials (see also The Children of the Stones , The Owl Service ). I was too young to see it on its initial screening – or at any rate, too young to remember it – but it’s easy to see why it lingered in the minds of those who did. Well, the first episode, anyway. Not for nothing is The Changes seen as a precursor to The Survivors in the rural apocalypse sub-genre – see also the decidedly nastier No Blade of Grass – as following a fairly gripping opener, it drifts off into the realm of plodding travelogue.

They literally call themselves “Decepticons”. That doesn’t set off any red flags?

Bumblebee  (2018) (SPOILERS) Bumblebee is by some distance the best Transformers movie, simply by dint of having a smattering of heart (one might argue the first Shia LaBeouf one also does, and it’s certainly significantly better than the others, but it’s still a soulless Michael Bay “machine”). Laika VP and director Travis Knight brings personality to a series that has traditionally consisted of shamelessly selling product, by way of a nostalgia piece that nods to the likes of Herbie (the original), The Iron Giant and even Robocop .

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.