Skip to main content

The gods are best served by those who want their help least.

Jason and the Argonauts
(1963)

(SPOILERS) I dare say post-Star Wars generations tend to see Ray Harryhausen and his ilk as a hoary old joke. But even as one who was the right age to be fully on board with the shiny new cinema of Lucas and Spielberg, the period before any of their fare reached television, when it was populated by all sorts of movies – 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, The Valley of the Gwangi, The Land that Time Forgot, Doc Savage: Man of Bronze – that would now generally be regarded as less salutatory fodder, was in fact a kindling of the imagination. And Harryhausen influenced a slew of filmmakers, rabid acolytes including the aforementioned, John Landis and Sam Raimi. He was, after all, overtly about spectacle, which is why – not unlike latter-day blockbusters – you tended to be short-changed with regard to solid characterisation or performances from the main protagonists (if you can easily distinguish the leads of the Sinbads, or Jason, you’re a better fan than I am). Jason and the Argonauts was a formative picture, hugely impressive in many respects. It still is. Yes, it’s as creaky as Talos in places, but there’s a reason this one, rather than Clash of the Titans nearly twenty years later, gets the lion’s share of the plaudits.

Not that Clash of the Titans didn’t reap decent box office, hitching a ride on the fantasy boom Lucas ignited through embracing just enough of that cuteness – Bubo the mechanical owl – to blend the old ways and the new. It didn’t, however, convince MGM to finance Force of the Trojans (something of a melange of mythic creatures and encounters en route to Aeneas’ founding of Rome, by the sound of it). As Harryhausen tells it, Jason and the Argonauts’ success was mostly in afterlife reputation – although business was brisk in the Britain – and he considered the Academy failing even to nominate the picture for Best Visual Effects was partly to blame.

One of the issues that does need to be recognised with these earlier effects films, and you name it, is that, in contrast to the later wunderkinds, there was little creative acumen in marrying the director with the effects maestro. You’re not going to be caught mistaking any of the directors associated with bringing Harryhausen’s vision to the screen for secret auteurs. And if Don Chaffey was one of the better ones – he’d also helm several Hammers and Pete’s Dragon, as well a slew of quality episodes of 60s TV including four episodes of The Prisoner and five of The Avengers; unfortunately, he ended up jobbing on indifferent US shows, the likes of Airwolf, TJ Hooker, MacGyver and Matt Houston – he wasn’t someone particular adept at making the human element as compelling as the armies of skeletons and winged harpies.

Which means Jason and the Argonauts relies on its supporting cast to enliven the dead air between strange encounters. Olympus is pretty much sorted, with a very authoritative Honor Blackman as Hera, the devoted deity protector of Todd Armstrong’s Jason. Blackman was still in The Avengers at this point (she would leave to make Goldfinger) but it’s evidence of her ascending currency that she was, effectively, the leading lady (yes, you can make a case for Nancy Kovak’s Medea, but she arrives quite late in the game, doesn’t do much – less still the grisly activities that make her memorable in the myths – and like Armstrong, she suffers the indignity of being dubbed).

Niall MacGinnis is strangely perfect as Zeus. Sure, Laurence Olivier is more authoritarian in Clash of the Titans, but MacGinnis’ portly joviality, yet with underlying firmness, lends the appropriate two-edged quality that goes with being a big-cheese god who rather sees humanity as playthings (and has the effective chess board to convey the same). Michael Gwynn (later Lord Melbury in Fawlty Towers’ first episode) is a bit on the camp side as Hermes, which is probably about right. Aside from that, there’s only Triton (Bill Gudgeon), who offers some decent slow-motion exertion along with a convincingly flicking tail as sea god Triton – Poseidon’s son, but a ringer – during the Clashing Rocks encounter. Nevertheless, for all that it is sparsely populated, this vision of Olympus is simple but effective. So much so, it’s probably the first thing many of us go to when conjuring an image of the Greek gods’ mountainous residence (all ionic columns and friezes).

As for the humans, Nigel Green’s unlikely – as in, he’s no Schwarzenegger, and you just have to go forward a couple of years to The Ipcress File for a more typical role – Hercules is a surprising hit. So much so, you miss him when he stays behind to search for chum Hylas (John Cairney). There’s also Gary Raymond as Acastus – a bad guy in this iteration – but he isn’t terribly interesting, and Laurence Naismith as Argus (think chunky). That’s really it, though. If you didn’t know Jason and the Argonauts wasn’t the first choice of title (there’d already been a Jason and the Golden Fleece) you’d think there was something a bit suss in the lack of individualisation of the title characters.

Fortunately, Pat Troughton’s also on hand as blind Phineus, beset by heartless harpies, and Jack Gwillim as King Aeëtes (the fiend responsible for sowing the Hydra’s teeth). Both would later return to Harryhausen projects, the former in Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger, the latter as Poseidon in Clash of the Titans. And there’s Douglas Wilmer as Pelias, who initiates Jason’s quest in a “that’ll get him out of the way so he doesn’t do for me” piece of “cunning”. Very oddly, since Harryhausen says there was no explicit plan to make a sequel, the movie ends without Jason confronting the man who killed his father and thus fulfilling the prophecy and serving justice. You wonder at whoever signed off on the script conferences (the screenplay is credited to Beverly Cross – later of Clash of the Titans – and Jan Read).

Mostly, though, Jason and the Argonauts is about the set pieces. The first, with bronze giant Talos, is still mighty. Based on an early automaton legend involving technocrat god Hephaestus but rather inflated in size by Harryhausen so as to invoke the Colossus of Rhodes, it’s a piece of stop motion entirely suited to the slightly unreal (like the skeletons in that respect). The effectiveness is added to by outstanding and unnerving sound effects (Bernard Herrmann’s score is superb too). I think the harpies sequence was always my favourite, though; there’s something very primal about their purpose and realisation, essentially existing to torment Phineus, resigning him to a state of purgatorial misery. The Hydra and skeletons are impressive – and the latter, of course, was a major influence on Raimi’s Army of Darkness – but it’s these early encounters that stayed with me the most.

So yes, when the stop motion isn’t up there on screen, the drawbacks of a Harryhausen picture tend to be starkly in evidence. But for all the playing fast and loose with specifics, there’s a respect for the essential myths in his work, not least Jason and the Argonauts, that is absent from later versions, be that the unholy mess of the Clash of the Titans remake(s) or the gods-free attempt at The Iliad (Troy). Gods doing what gods do, heroes doing what heroes do, and Harryhausen manifesting fantastic beasts in between.


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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.