Skip to main content

If this were a hoax, would we have six dead men up on that mountain?

The X-Files
4.24: Gethsemane 

Season Four is undoubtedly the point at which the duff arc episodes begin to amass, encroaching upon the decent ones for dominance. Fortunately, however, the season finale is a considerable improvement’s on Three’s, even if it’s a long way from the cliffhanger high of 2.25: Anasazi.

It’s biggest problem – well, actually two biggest – is hauling out the cheap “mystery” of Mulder being dead. Of course, he isn’t dead, so Chris Carter is onto a massive loser trying to milk any kind of tension from the thread. A thread that, to make matters worse, is teased out over the course of the episode by yet another of the series’ tiresome “Scully gives evidence” framing devices. Was Carter unaware how weak and unpersuasive a crutch this had quickly become?

The only vague credit due to this set up is one that relates to the episode as a whole, and which is an interesting gambit for the series to make in terms of cliffhangers, knowing full well its cachet is built around the mystery of ETs. Suggesting that mystery is itself a conspiracy, that ETs are simply a bait and switch to distract from more heinous acts (an explanation with appreciable credibility, even if I’d resist any assumption of it being the whole story) directly counters the very reason The X-Files’ cachet was what it was: that the audience’s quest was allied with Mulder’s.

Here, though, Scully has “won”, in terms of giving evidence to an FBI committee – and so referencing her initial remit – that the X-Files are illegitimate. Her scepticism of Mulder’s quest has been proven. And we’re asked to entertain the idea that, in despair at being comprehensively hoaxed, Mulder has blown his brains out. While none of this has much elasticity in terms of plausible behaviour, it plays out surprisingly well in relation to the episode’s strongest suit, which comes via Scully’s encounters with Michael Kritschgau (John Finn).

Particulary as Finn is required to serve the role of exposition machine, pumping out an alternate take on Mulder being “deceived and used”, and how “they made you… believe so badly”. Belief that includes military aircraft (UFOs) and naturally occurring biological chimeras (aliens): “The lies are so deep, the only way to cover them, is to create something even more incredible”.

And you can buy the conceit, and very nearly the notion that much of what we have seen is BS. Even the Alien Bounty Hunter? Well, perhaps he’s a “Tartarian”, or from beyond the ice wall. The problem with this is that Mulder would surely have point-by-point refuted this version of events, being as geeky as he is on the subject, rather than relying on the audience’s vague recollection of half-glimpsed figures in murky mountainside facilities and muggy boxcar corpses. Certainly, the idea that the government is actively utilising the UFO/alien mythos for its own ends is probably the most on-point aspect the series has portrayed. Which is not to discount there are phenomena beside those that are manmade, but to suggest the additional explanation may be less galactic (at least, as we understand it) than ultraterrestrial in aspect.

The precursor to all this, and preventing the episode from reaching a consistent level of quality, is the sub-Thing quest for a frozen alien corpse. There’s some solid production value in the location footage of snowy Canadian peaks, and the fates of the crew – for such a swizz – are effectively nasty, but it needs to be emphasised that this is the third time in the space of two seasons an alien autopsy has been seen (the previous ones in 3.9: Nisei and 3.20: “Jose Chung’s From Outer Space”). Evidently, Carter was understandably taken by the Ray Santilli zeitgeist, but he arguably also relied too heavily on it as a source of inspiration or reference.

Notably, Gethsemane’s alien design is decent but noticeably less decent that the “legit” ETs/hybrids we’ve seen in the show to date. And for all that this is a Mulder-first episode in terms of the motivation, it’s another, like Anasazi, where the main common sense comes from Scully (well, it has to occasionally, simply for the sake of any credibility). I like the way she won’t be ensnared by Mulder’s attempts to use her own beliefs to justify his behaviour and make her understand how important this is; it’s proof of ET life. Wouldn’t she feel the same if evidence of God came down the pipe? “I don’t think it can be proven” she replies evenly, and he’s left without leverage.

He also stands charged, as her brother points out, as the guy at the centre of her life, yet he’s willing to leave her in the lurch to chase fake aliens in the ice while she visits the hospital (of which, as surprises go, I genuinely thought they’d resolved her cancer by this point in the run, rather than continually milking it).

Gethsemane isn’t a great episode by any means – the title is a bit on the nose too, and evocative in a way I the piece doesn’t quite earn – but credit to Carter for bringing in the “doubt” scenario (of course, the movie was already waiting in the wings by this point, and no fan was going to assume other than it featuring “actual” aliens, so whatever happened in the meantime would obviously see this hiccup resolved).

Popular posts from this blog

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

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

Tippy-toe! Tippy-toe!

Seinfeld 2.7: The Phone Message The Premise George and Jerry both have dates on the same night. Neither goes quite as planned, and in George’s case it results in him leaving an abusive message on his girlfriend’s answerphone. The only solution is to steal the tape before she plays it. Observational Further evidence of the gaping chasm between George and Jerry’s approaches to the world. George neurotically attacks his problems and makes them worse, while Jerry shrugs and lets them go. It’s nice to see the latter’s anal qualities announcing themselves, however; he’s so bothered that his girlfriend likes a terrible TV advert that he’s mostly relieved when she breaks things off (“ To me the dialogue rings true ”). Neither Gretchen German (as Donna, Jerry’s date) nor Tory Polone (as Carol, George’s) make a huge impression, but German has more screen time and better dialogue. The main attraction is Jerry’s reactions, which include trying to impress her with hi

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…