Skip to main content

Never underestimate the wiles of a crooked European state.

The Mouse on the Moon
(1963)

(SPOILERS) Amiable sequel to an amiably underpowered original. And that, despite the presence of frequent powerhouse Peter Sellers in three roles. This time, he’s conspicuously absent and replaced actually or effectively by Margaret Rutherford, Ron Moody and Bernard Cribbins. All of whom are absolutely funny, but the real pep that makes The Mouse on the Moon an improvement on The Mouse that Roared is a frequently sharp-ish Michael Pertwee screenplay and a more energetic approach from director Richard Lester (making his feature debut-ish, if you choose to discount jazz festival performer parade It’s Trad, Dad!)

Bracewell: We are the joint victims of a monstrous hoax.

The Mouse on the Moon is based on Leonard Wibberley’s third Grand Fenwick novel, published in 1962, so no time was wasted getting this one into production; United Artists conspicuously avoiding snapping up 1958 prequel Beware of the Mouse (set in the Middle Ages, so mudflood does not exist in this dojo). As before, Prime Minister Rupert Mountjoy (Moody filling the role vacated by Sellers) has a scheme for milking cash for his strapped state from a superpower. There’s no reference to the loot they received last time, and yet again Gran Fenwick’s national export is encountering hiccups. Explosive ones. Imports have been banned by the US, the UK, and the UN (following an explosion of a case of wine in their canteen). His crafty double think applies itself to the notion that the US is “always talking about international co-operation in space”, yet wouldn’t offer a penny of aid if any other country had any actual chance of sending a rocket up there; knowing Grand Fenwick hasn’t a chance of succeeding, they are sure to help fund their research, to the tune of $500k.

Bracewell: At Canaveral, we have elevators for this.
Professor Koknitz: Ah yes, but you have so many postponements. Up, down. Up, down. We go up in one.

American delegate Bracewell (John Phillips) concludes Mountjoy’s ulterior motives exactly (“Plumbing for the castle, probably”) and offers Fenwick $1m. The USSR makes its own generosity known in retaliation, providing a rocket designed to send a dog up, sans engine. Whether Wibberley swallowed the space race as legitimate – and many did not, doubting not only the authenticity of Sputnik’s feats, but also the Moon landings a decade plus later, so let’s not pretend everyone was wowed into blithe gullibility – he does a fine job of persuading you he is entirely cynical about the heightened endeavour in all respects. Soviet and US efforts are portrayed as mutually inept until their hands are forced, with acid remarks about their needing elevators due to all the postponements (something The Right Stuff is good at portraying). Notably, both countries’ heads of rocket engineering are Seig-Heiling Nazis (pretty much spot on), such that you wonder why anyone thought NASA was remotely legitimate in the first place.

Professor Koknitz: We do not reach Mach 2… We do not reach Escape Velocity… Power and not speed is important

The international spotlight cast on Fenwick means they have to feign sending up their rocket, albeit Rupert Mountjoy doesn’t realise his son Vincent (Bernard Cribbins) and Professor Kokintz (the returning David Kosoff) really do intend to go. Of course, everything about Fenwick’s approach is such overtly absurd fantasy that it makes the “real” efforts to get there appear authentic and feasible only by dint of contrast. So Kokintz dazzles with his own science, every bit as legitimate as that of the recognised professionals (he has, after all, got similar form, having invented his own fake superweapon that outdoes their nukes). His trip will take three weeks (“I regenerate air by catalytic disassociation”), and his fuel comes from the explosive properties of Fenwick wine (it contains Pinotium 64, an astonishing radioactive element that lends itself to a formula for stabilising nuclear power). Space food is out. They will have “Fresh eggs on the way up and roast chicken on the way down”.

Vincent Mountjoy: Astronaut. It’s all I’ve dreamed about since they sent up Sputnik 1.

When they finally take off, their competitors swiftly follow. Alas, the latter arrive too late and fail to lift off again (so needing a lift back; eerily prescient, if you take any stock in the idea that the lunar lander did what it’s claimed to have done). The depiction of space travel in The Mouse on the Moon is at least as convincing as the “real” thing. The lunar surface too. In this movie’s the version of the space race, the US is actually reasonably sensible, intent on preserving life rather than sanctioning needless endangerment. The General asserts that, in order to safeguard American boys, he would delay the mission for a thousand years, something his Nazi scientist Von Neidel (John Bluthal) vocally disagrees with. A headline earlier announces “US launches robot at Moon to report on the lunar surface”, so even a lark like The Mouse on the Moon suggests contingencies the actual space force failed to investigate. Of course, the notion that their $20bn budget blackhole may be exactly that isn’t entirely ignored (“The American tax payer has always been deceived. It is his birth right” comments cunning Rupert to his son, who objects to rocket funds being used for the castle plumbing system).

Professor Koknitz: Good evening, gentlemen. Grand Fenwick welcomes you to its Moon.
Vincent Mountjoy: Could I see your passports and vaccination certificates, please.

The Mouse on the Moon also has the drop on current concerns, such as all that (alleged) space flotsam floating around up there (you know, the stuff imminently in danger of landing on us, or of perforating the delicate hulls of space stations, but which never does): “Wherever civilisation goes, garbage is sure to follow” observes Koknitz of all the junk that has landed with them. It’s a nice touch too that, as soon as the Americans and Soviets touch down, the Fenwickians are demanding passports and “vaccination certificates”.

Vincent Mountjoy: Cynthia, will you marry me?
Cynthia: Yes, when you’ve been to the Moon and back.

Pertwee takes a gently scattershot approach with his satire, Fenwick quietly absorbing the decadent values of the more established western forces. Rupert’s niece Cynthia (June Ritchie) is an active protestor against the state on any given subject (“I don’t know. But whatever it is, we’ll fight it”). There also some amusing placards, with “Keep Fenwick off the Moon” followed by “And Out of the Common Market”. Cribbins attempts some slapstick mugging as he tries to pass himself off as a beatnik. Somehow, this is winning to Cynthia.

Rupert Mountjoy: Your great, great grandfather became prime minister at the age of six!
Vincent Mountjoy: Yes, but he was mad!
Rupert Mountjoy: Mad maybe, but one of our greatest prime ministers.

It’s been noted that Cribbins is playing Moody’s son despite the latter being only four years older. You never question this, though. Moody’s on fine form, suggesting a less diabolical Roger Delgado. Cribbins is good value too, if delivering the familiar hapless inept also seen in the likes of You Must Be Joking! and Daleks' Invasion Earth 2150 A.D. Notably, when he first returns from boarding school in England, dad despairs of his lost potential (he had all the makings of a great politician “As a child, he was fantastically sly and dishonest”) and opines to Cynthia that he should “never have sent him to British public school” (implying it may have turned Vincent a bit nancy).

Vincent Mountjoy: Who do you spy for? The Russians?
Maurice Spender: I say, steady!

Terry-Thomas pops up for a brief section as British spy Maurice Spender, tasked with determining the authenticity of the Fenwick rocket project and duly disarmed by the complete lack of security. T-T is offered a few decent lines and allowed to deliver a smattering of ingratiating cowardice, but this isn’t one of his vintage parts. Having seen the rocket decked out with showerheads and its evident application for castle heating, he reports back in the scoffing affirmative when John Le Mesurier asks “Absolutely no question of genuine space research, then?

Frankie Howerd: Three weeks? Oh dear! I’ll have to make other arrangements.

There’s a nice dig too at British bereft-ness post Empire, as the news report on the Fenwick Moon mission notes the contributions of the US (money) and Soviet Union (rocket) before proudly advising that the watch worn by Vincent is of British design. Also notable in small roles are Clive Dunn as a bandleader (becoming most distraught at the need to switch between multiple national anthems), Peter Sallis and John Lloyd. Frankie Howerd – as himself – marches on looking for the loo, only to be old it will be another three weeks before he can use it.

Rupert Mountjoy: Why should I be pleased about the blasted bobolinks?

I had in mind that we actually got to see the Bobolinks in The Mouse on the Moon. Further still, I was under the illusion they were a made-up bird, owing to their very silly name. Maurice Binder returns for the animated title sequence while regular Ray Harryhausen’s DP Wilkie Cooper – he also lensed the same year’s Jason and the Argonauts – keeps things colourful. The Mouse on the Moon is a post-Ealing Brit pic probably best suited to a younger audience, despite savouring some sharp targets. It makes for a better kids’ satire, though, than its predecessor does an adult one.




Popular posts from this blog

The Illumi-what-i?

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) (SPOILERS) In which Sam Raimi proves that he can stand proudly with the best – or worst – of them as a good little foot soldier of the woke apocalypse. You’d expect the wilfully anarchic – and Republican – Raimi to choke on the woke, but instead, he’s sucked it up, grinned and bore it. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is so slavishly a production-line Marvel movie, both in plotting and character, and in nu-Feige progressive sensibilities, there was no chance of Sam staggering out from beneath its suffocating demands with anything more than a few scraps of stylistic flourish intact.

This risotto is shmackin’, dude.

Stranger Things Season 4: Volume 1 (SPOILERS) I haven’t had cause, or the urge, to revisit earlier seasons of Stranger Things , but I’m fairly certain my (relatively) positive takes on the first two sequel seasons would adjust down somewhat if I did (a Soviet base under Hawkins? DUMB soft disclosure or not, it’s pretty dumb). In my Season Three review, I called the show “ Netflix’s best-packaged junk food. It knows not to outstay its welcome, doesn’t cause bloat and is disposable in mostly good ways ” I fairly certain the Duffer’s weren’t reading, but it’s as if they decided, as a rebuke, that bloat was the only way to go for Season Four. Hence episodes approaching (or exceeding) twice the standard length. So while the other points – that it wouldn’t stray from its cosy identity and seasons tend to merge in the memory – hold fast, you can feel the ambition of an expansive canvas faltering at the hurdle of Stranger Things ’ essential, curated, nostalgia-appeal inconsequentiality.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

Is this supposed to be me? It’s grotesque.

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (2022) (SPOILERS) I didn’t hold out much hope for The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent being more than moderately tolerable. Not so much because its relatively untested director and his co-writer are mostly known in the TV sphere (and not so much for anything anyone is raving about). Although, it has to be admitted, the finished movie flourishes a degree of digital flatness typical of small-screen productions (it’s fine, but nothing more). Rather, due to the already over-tapped meta-strain of celebs showing they’re good sports about themselves. When Spike Jonze did it with John Malkovich, it was weird and different. By the time we had JCVD , not so much. And both of them are pre-dated by Arnie in Last Action Hero (“ You brought me nothing but pain ” he is told by Jack Slater). Plus, it isn’t as if Tom Gormican and Kevin Etten have much in the way of an angle on Nic; the movie’s basically there to glorify “him”, give or take a few foibles, do

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

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

Whacking. I'm hell at whacking.

Witness (1985) (SPOILERS) Witness saw the advent of a relatively brief period – just over half a decade –during which Harrison Ford was willing to use his star power in an attempt to branch out. The results were mixed, and abruptly concluded when his typically too late to go where Daniel Day Lewis, Dustin Hoffman and Robert De Niro had gone before (with at bare minimum Oscar-nominated results) – but not “ full retard ” – ended in derision with Regarding Henry . He retreated to the world of Tom Clancy, and it’s the point where his cachet began to crumble. There had always been a stolid quality beneath even his more colourful characters, but now it came to the fore. You can see something of that as John Book in Witness – despite his sole Oscar nom, it might be one of Ford’s least interesting performances of the 80s – but it scarcely matters, or that the screenplay (which won) is by turns nostalgic, reactionary, wistful and formulaic, as director Peter Weir, in his Hollywood debu

Get away from my burro!

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) (SPOILERS) The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is beloved by so many of the cinematic firmament’s luminaries – Stanley Kubrick, Sam Raimi, , Paul Thomas Anderson and who knows maybe also WS, Vince Gilligan, Spike Lee, Daniel Day Lewis; Oliver Stone was going to remake it – not to mention those anteriorly influential Stone Roses, that it seems foolhardy to suggest it isn’t quite all that. There’s no faulting the performances – a career best Humphrey Bogart, with director John Huston’s dad Walter stealing the movie from under him – but the greed-is-bad theme is laid on a little thick, just in case you were a bit too dim to get it yourself the first time, and Huston’s direction may be right there were it counts for the dramatics, but it’s a little too relaxed when it comes to showing the seams between Mexican location and studio.

If that small woman is small enough, she could fit behind a small tree.

Stranger Things Season 4: Volume 2 (SPOILERS) I can’t quite find it within myself to perform the rapturous somersaults that seem to be the prevailing response to this fourth run of the show. I’ve outlined some of my thematic issues in the Volume 1 review, largely borne out here, but the greater concern is one I’ve held since Season Two began – and this is the best run since Season One, at least as far my failing memory can account for – and that’s the purpose-built formula dictated by the Duffer Brothers. It’s there in each new Big Bad, obviously, even to the extent that this is the Big-Bad-who-binds-them-all (except the Upside Down was always there, right?) And it’s there with the resurgent emotional beats, partings, reunions and plaintively stirring music cues. I have to be really on board with a movie or show to embrace such flagrantly shameless manipulation, season after season, and I find myself increasingly immune.

What’s so bad about being small? You’re not going to be small forever.

Innerspace (1987) There’s no doubt that Innerspace is a flawed movie. Joe Dante finds himself pulling in different directions, his instincts for comic subversion tempered by the need to play the romance plot straight. He tacitly acknowledges this on the DVD commentary for the film, where he notes Pauline Kael’s criticism that he was attempting to make a mainstream movie; and he was. But, as ever with Dante, it never quite turns out that way. Whereas his kids’ movies treat their protagonists earnestly, this doesn’t come so naturally with adults. I’m a bona fide devotee of Innerspace , but I can’t help but be conscious of its problems. For the most part Dante papers over the cracks; the movie hits certain keynotes of standard Hollywood prescription scripting. But his sensibility inevitably suffuses it. That, and human cartoon Martin Short (an ideal “leading man” for the director) ensure what is, at first glance just another “ Steven Spielberg Presents ” sci-fi/fantas