Skip to main content

My Doggett would have called that crazy.

The X-Files
9.4: 4-D

I get the impression no one much liked Agent Monica Reyes (Annabeth Gish), but I felt, for all the sub-Counsellor Troi, empath twiddling that dogged her characterisation, she was a mostly positive addition to the series’ last two years (of its main run). Undoubtedly, pairing her with Doggett, in anticipation of Gillian Anderson exiting just as David Duchovny had – you rewatch these seasons and you wonder where her head was at in hanging on – made for aggressively facile gender-swapped conflict positions on any given assignment. And generally, I’d have been more interested in seeing how two individuals sympathetic to the cause – her and Mulder – might have got on. Nevertheless, in an episode like 4-D you get her character, and Doggett’s, at probably their best mutual showing.

Of course, you have to wonder what Chris Carter secretly thought of Monica, since he utterly character-assassinated her between the end of the series and her 2016 reappearance. Nothing about Reyes hitherto suggested someone who’d sacrifice her moral centre to work with Cigarette Smoking Man in exchange for surviving the End Times. So, you know, taking a massive shit all over her, basically. Presumably Carter figured she hadn’t really worked out and, like the actual father of Scully’s baby, he could flagrantly retcon her (why Gish agreed to this, though, is anyone’s guess. It’s isn’t as if she was having trouble getting work).

And no, Carter’s predictive programming of a virus unleashed on humanity through a vaccination programme as a means to depopulating the planet isn’t enough to give any of the cobblers of his Seasons 10 and 11 arcs a free pass. I mean, he’s essentially putting it all out there, if you take the narrative fact of a virus as literally as you do it including alien DNA (and it requiring Scully to develop a vaccine to remedy the situation – oh wait, that bit was the Dallas-esque frickin-dream My Struggle II. Unless, of course, it’s Carter’s way of saying “None of this is real”. Which, admittedly, would be quite clever. But still in no way dramatically satisfying).

But back to 4-D. Some will say the only way to rise above what’s going on right now is aim for 4-D. Or is that five? Steven Maeda’s conceit of the title being the locker number of serial killer Timothy Lukesh (Dylan Haggerty) is a bit too cute, maybe, and I think he missed some potential in exploring both posited parallel worlds rather than sticking to just the one. But in many other respects, this feels quite prescient of the kind of fare that became commonplace in film and TV since. Not least Fringe, for which it was bread and butter. Madea had worked on The X-Files since the seventh season, and his contributions to the ninth would be two of its best (the other being Audrey Pauley). He’d go on to write for both Lost and the entirely underrated Groundhog Day-esque Day Break.

We open with Doggett being shot in an alley after Reyes has had her throat cut. Then, apparently incoherently, Doggett shows up to see Reyes at her new apartment. The series is at its most romantically suggestive between them here. what with his offering her his polish sausage as she brushes a crumb from the side of his mouth. A moment later she receives a call to say Doggett is in hospital. And lo, the man in her apartment is gone. This is, of course, a blurring of parallel worlds, and Reyes being Reyes, she is quickly credulous of such an idea when it formulates.

Some have criticised this aspect of her personality, but I rather think it’s to the character’s credit. It also cuts to the chase, which is always a good thing (on this occasion, it leads to a masterful scene, the highlight of the episode, opposite Lukesh; she’s resolute and unintimidated as he stands within an inch of her face telling her how “You bled just like a pig”).

The classic series pitfalls are here too, of course. It isn’t such a problem that we never learn how Lukesh won his abilities, but it’s a little lazy that someone should do no more with them than go around cutting out women’s tongues while begrudgingly caring for a bed-bound mother (Angela Paton). One who eventually has her’s removed too. Madea would say this is exactly the point, that Lukesh is so warped he can’t see the potential of his gift, but the issue is not that character defect but rather that we end up reverting to one of those all-purpose X-Files motivational templates.

That said, as dubious plot choices go, I quite like how quickly the frankly absurd idea of putting Reyes in the spotlight as a suspect unravels. There’s Cary Elwes’ banal ex-/FBI irritant on hand, who I’d commendably managed to forget about; Elwes is a good actor and plays Brad Foulmer’s dirt-bag aspects to the hilt, no doubt about that, but he deserves better (additional to which, the nick-of-time, plug the bad guy in the head resolution is annoying, most especially because it denies Reyes agency very much her due, mainly because of the nasty end her other self met).

Scully’s barely in 4-Dagain; the last episode I watched was Via Negativa – and Monica offers a gentle put down of her empathic reductiveness as Dana tells of also seeing something that wasn’t there once (“I think that’s wonderful. A blessing. But that’s not what happened to me”). This is an episode that shows both the positives and negatives of the new-ish line up. Both Gish and Robert Patrick are great, and they both have interesting things to do, but it’s also undeniable that they lack the indefinable spark that makes you want to see them together (or, in Mulder and Scully’s case, if you had any sense, see them not get together).

One thing I particularly like with 4-D is that we’re never explicitly told which is our X-Files world. We assume it’s the one where Doggett doesn’t have his respirator turned off and Reyes doesn’t get her throat cut, but such is the astuteness of our joining proceedings with that world, we’re left with a lurking unease, even as Reyes’ compassionate euthanasia sets her world to rights (actually, maybe I should reconsider the conviction that she’d never ally herself with CSM). 






Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.

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.

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.