Skip to main content

Every day you die in here and every day it starts all over again.

The X-Files
6.14: Monday

Monday’s a little masterpiece. By rights, following as it does in the wake of the ever-burgeoning-in-reputation Groundhog Day, it ought to have come across as little more than a weak pretender, treading where many others have gone before – also 12:01 in that decade, along with a smattering of other eager TV shows – as a lukewarm Mulder and Scully encounter the same fateful events over and over again. But scripters Vince Gilligan and John Shiban, in tandem with never better or more attuned direction from Kim Manners, produce a forty-five-minute gem that counts as one of the very best of the series’ – or any series’ – standalones.

Pam: He never did that before.

Wiki has it that the episode was inspired by a Twilight Zone (Shadow Play), but who is Gilligan trying to kid? As in, it’s quite transparent what put an idea of that sort of story on their radar, as opposed to the means by which they play out. If there’s a weak spot in Monday, it’s a fairly minor one: that Mulder and Scully’s discussions around free will and determinism don’t feel very organic. But ‘twas ever thus with such Chris Carter-esque trappings; at least we aren’t subjected to a stodgy closing voiceover from Mulder.

Scully: You have control over everything that happens here.

The episode’s greatest impact comes in the tragedy of Pam (Carrie Hamilton who appeared in several later seasons of Fame and died only a few years after Monday was broadcast). She is, essentially, Bill Murray’s character, fated to see every day repeat over and over again but apparently powerless to alter the course of events (although, she is convinced Mulder and Scully, destined to enter the bank her boyfriend is robbing and go up with it when he triggers his bomb vest, are key). It’s particularly remarkable that this is so potent, as Pam is a largely oblique character, positioned to interact with Mulder or Scully at key moments (usually outside the bank) and only occasionally granted an additional, separate scene with boyfriend Bernard (Darren E Burrows, space head Ed in Northern Exposure, and entirely compelling as a very confused, not very bright man who cannot be reasoned with through traditional hostage techniques).

Pam: Don’t you see? We’re all in Hell. I’m the only one who knows it.

It’s difficult to be certain from the manner in which events unfold if the key to the situation is that Mulder and Scully should survive (along with the rest of those present) or that Pam dies, but one suspects the latter (or perhaps the precisely intersecting combination of the two). One might attempt to interrogate the logic that, with the multitude of times Pam has attempted to stop the bank blowing up, she never once before intervened inside, or that it didn’t occur to her that she herself, as the sole conscious party, might be the key, rather than Mulder and Scully per se (although, Mulder does appear to be a key to changing the scenario through his “spooky” openness to the idea she puts in his mind… eventually: “You’re the variable. It has to be you. I have tried everyone else”).

The key to this key is that Pam’s plight rings true on an emotional level, which means the conclusion is achingly poignant; no one can know what she had to go through, and we, like Mulder, can only imagine. The more so because she is wrong. Not about whom she goes to for help, but how she conceives of the resolution (“All I’m asking is just walk away”).

Mulder: I might just as easily not have a waterbed then I’d be on time for this meeting. You might just as easily have stayed in medicine and not gone into the FBI, and then we would never have met. Blah, blah, blah…
Scully: Fate.
Mulder: Free will. With every choice, you change your fate.

Which isn’t to say the episode is entirely grim. It’s also very funny. As the slew of different shows – Buffy, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Stargate SG-1, Community, Fringe, Supernatural, Russian Doll, Steven Moffat’s Doctor Who, inevitably – and more recent movie efforts – Triangle, Edge of Tomorrow, Source Code, Happy Death Day – have shown, the time-loop scenario is not just an evergreen for its existential crises, but also for its comedic ones. Edge of Tomorrow probably blends the two the most satisfyingly, a triumph for director Doug Liman, fond as he is of making it up as he goes along (to great success with The Bourne Identity). Although, let us not forget his Chaos Walking has spectacularly defaulted. Maybe that’s why he is currently churning out slavish pro-regime propaganda like love-under-a-lockdown Locked Down and forthcoming Cruise-in-"actual"-space nonsense (Capricorn One eat your heart out).

Gillian Anderson may be mostly stuck in a more customarily baffled/logical mode as Scully, but David Duchovny relishes the chance not just to wallow in his own food colouring but also indulge the humorous potential of Mulder’s fix. The terrible start to his day, where everything that can go wrong does, is funny not only for revolving around the episode’s premise – his clock, along with most of his apartment’s electrics, have stopped due to his waterbed springing a leak and flooding the floor – but because it’s a release following the in-situ teaser, in which we know he and Scully have/will meet an explosive end in a bank.

Mulder: If what you’re saying is true, how come I don’t remember? How come you’re the only one.
Pam: That’s got to be fifty times you’ve asked me that.
Mulder: Fifty-one. What’s the answer?

There’s also some smart and seamless continuity here. Scully asks “When did you get a waterbed, Mulder?” His bemused look is not a consequence of temporal tampering or his being obtuse, but rather that his body was inhabited by Morris Fletcher (Dreamland) at the time of its purchase. It’s a particularly dry touch that the tense and cyclic bank scenario is contrasted with one almost as unappealing and seemingly endless: a stiflingly dull division audit at the FBI offices that makes being blown up in a bank robbery almost seem like a light relief.

Pam: I’m begging you, please don’t go in there. If you walk in that bank, you’ll die.

Aside from studiously going through days where attempted digressions from the norm fail – Mulder using an ATM machine; Scully going to deposit his pay cheque instead – Gilligan and Shiban effectively walk the fine line of Mulder being inquisitive about Pam, nevertheless responding to the call of duty, and incrementally recognising he has to retain some of the information. This happens just enough to imbue tension in his own situation: his déjà vu at events (leading to the aforementioned discussion), seizing the initiative in speaking to Pam after Scully gives him her description, and his realisation that he needs to tell himself to remember “He’s got a bomb”.

Mulder: You’re saying this day repeats over and over again.
Pam: Until we get it right. Till my boyfriend doesn’t blow up that bank.

Of course, Gilligan’s in his own Groundhog Day even now, one of never-ending Breaking Bad spinoffs. While Carter, if ever he gets work, it’s for reheated X-Files that taper off when viewers realise he’s still calling the humdrum shots.

Scully: It doesn’t have to end like this.
Bernard: Yeah, it does.

Perhaps the most compelling philosophical aspect to the episode is the way in which it places our heroes on the inside looking out (Skinner doesn’t get much of a look in this time). This creates a palpable sense of a veil, a mass warping of perception, and the need to grasp blindly for what one doesn’t know but thinks may be. Rather like swimming through consensus reality itself, right? In Monday, this perception of a paradigm inevitably leads to death. Which makes it unsurprising that Groundhog Day’s affirmative vision is the one with all the longevity.









Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Damn prairie dog burrow!

Tremors (1990) (SPOILERS) I suspect the reason the horror comedy – or the sci-fi comedy, come to that – doesn’t tend to be the slam-dunk goldmine many assume it must be, is because it takes a certain sensibility to do it right. Everyone isn’t a Joe Dante or Sam Raimi, or a John Landis, John Carpenter, Edgar Wright, Christopher Landon or even a Peter Jackson or Tim Burton, and the genre is littered with financial failures, some of them very good failures (and a good number of them from the names mentioned). Tremors was one, only proving a hit on video (hence six sequels at last count). It also failed to make Ron Underwood a directing legend.

Here’s Bloody Justice for you.

Laughter in Paradise (1951) (SPOILERS) The beginning of a comedic run for director-producer Mario Zampa that spanned much of the 1950s, invariably aided by writers Michael Pertwee and Jack Davies (the latter went on to pen a spate of Norman Wisdom pictures including The Early Bird , and also comedy rally classic Monte Carlo or Bust! ) As usual with these Pertwee jaunts, Laughter in Paradise boasts a sparky premise – renowned practical joker bequeaths a fortune to four relatives, on condition they complete selected tasks that tickle him – and more than enough resultant situational humour.

I hate natural causes!

Body Bags (1993) (SPOILERS) I’m not surprised Showtime didn’t pick this up for an anthology series. Perhaps, if John Carpenter had made Coming Home in a Body Bag (the popular Nam movie series referenced in the same year’s True Romance ), we’d have something to talk about. Tho’ probably not, if Carpenter had retained his by this point firmly glued to his side DP Gary Kibbe, ensuring the proceedings are as flat, lifeless and unatmospheric as possible. Carpenter directed two of the segments here, Tobe Hooper the other one. It may sound absurd, given the quality of Hooper’s career, but by this point, even he was calling the shots better than Carpenter.

I'm offering you a half-share in the universe.

Doctor Who Season 8 – Worst to Best I’m not sure I’d watched Season Eight chronologically before. While I have no hesitation in placing it as the second-best Pertwee season, based on its stories, I’m not sure it pays the same dividends watched as a unit. Simply, there’s too much Master, even as Roger Delgado never gets boring to watch and the stories themselves offer sufficient variety. His presence, turning up like clockwork, is inevitably repetitive. There were no particular revelatory reassessments resulting from this visit, then, except that, taken together – and as The Directing Route extra on the Blu-ray set highlights – it’s often much more visually inventive than what would follow. And that Michael Ferguson should probably have been on permanent attachment throughout this era.

Who’s got the Figgy Port?

Loki (2021) (SPOILERS) Can something be of redeemable value and shot through with woke? The two attributes certainly sound essentially irreconcilable, and Loki ’s tendencies – obviously, with new improved super-progressive Kevin Feige touting Disney’s uber-agenda – undeniably get in the way of what might have been a top-tier MCU entry from realising its full potential. But there are nevertheless solid bursts of highly engaging storytelling in the mix here, for all its less cherishable motivations. It also boasts an effortlessly commanding lead performance from Tom Hiddleston; that alone puts Loki head and shoulders above the other limited series thus far.

I’m just glad Will Smith isn’t alive to see this.

The Tomorrow War (2021) (SPOILERS). Not so much tomorrow as yesterday. There’s a strong sense of déjà vu watching The Tomorrow War , so doggedly derivative is it of every time-travel/alien war/apocalyptic sci-fi movie of the past forty years. Not helping it stand out from the pack are doughy lead Chris Pratt, damned to look forever on the beefy side no matter how ripped he is and lacking the chops or gravitas for straight roles, and debut live-action director Chris McKay, who manages to deliver the goods in a serviceably anonymous fashion.

Why don't we go on a picnic, up the hill?

Invaders from Mars (1986) (SPOILERS) One can wax thematical over the number of remakes of ’50s movies in the ’80s – and ’50s SF movies in particular – and of how they represent ever-present Cold War and nuclear threats, and steadily increasing social and familial paranoias and disintegrating values. Really, though, it’s mostly down to the nostalgia of filmmakers for whom such pictures were formative influences (and studios hoping to make an easy buck on a library property). Tobe Hooper’s version of nostalgia, however, is not so readily discernible as a John Carpenter or a David Cronenberg (not that Cronenberg could foment such vibes, any more than a trip to the dental hygienist). Because his directorial qualities are not so readily discernible. Tobe Hooper movies tend to be a bit shit. Which makes it unsurprising that Invaders from Mars is a bit shit.

What's a movie star need a rocket for anyway?

The Rocketeer (1991) (SPOILERS) The Rocketeer has a fantastic poster. One of the best of the last thirty years (and while that may seem like faint praise, what with poster design being a dying art – I’m looking at you Marvel, or Amazon and the recent The Tomorrow War – it isn’t meant to be). The movie itself, however, tends towards stodge. Unremarkable pictures with a wide/cult fanbase, conditioned by childhood nostalgia, are ten-a-penny – Willow for example – and in this case, there was also a reasonably warm critical reception. But such an embrace can’t alter that Joe Johnston makes an inveterately bland, tepid movie director. His “feel” for period here got him The First Avenger: Captain America gig, a bland, tepid movie tending towards stodge. So at least he’s consistent.

Hey, my friend smells amazing!

Luca (2021) (SPOILERS) Pixar’s first gay movie ? Not according to director Enrico Cassarosa (“ This was really never in our plans. This was really about their friendship in that kind of pre-puberty world ”). Perhaps it should have been, as that might have been an excuse – any excuse is worth a shot at this point – for Luca being so insipid and bereft of spark. You know, the way Soul could at least claim it was about something deep and meaningful as a defence for being entirely lacking as a distinctive and creatively engaging story in its own right.

As in the hokey kids’ show guy?

A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood (2019) (SPOILERS) I don’t think Mr Rogers could have been any creepier had Kevin Spacey played him. It isn’t just the baggage Tom Hanks brings, and whether or not he’s the adrenochrome lord to the stars and/or in Guantanamo and/or dead and/or going to make a perfectly dreadful Colonel Tom Parker and an equally awful Geppetto; it’s that his performance is so constipated and mannered an imitation of Mr Rogers’ genuineness that this “biopic” takes on a fundamentally sinister turn. His every scene with a youngster isn’t so much exuding benevolent empathy as suggestive of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang ’s Child Catcher let loose in a TV studio (and again, this bodes well for Geppetto). Extend that to A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood ’s conceit, that Mr Rogers’ life is one of a sociopathic shrink milking angst from his victims/patients in order to get some kind of satiating high – a bit like a rejuvenating drug, on that score – and you have a deeply unsettli