The Prisoner

“We want INFORMATION….INFORMATION....INFORMATION”

#6: “Who are you?”

#2: “The new #2.”

#6: “Who is #1?”

#2: “You are #6.”

#6: “I am not a number!  I am a FREE MAN!”

#2: {Laughs maniacally…]

Intro to “The Prisoner”, from Number of the Beast, by Iron Maiden

I finally watched all 17 episodes of this 1967 British TV show, featuring the late Patrick McGoohan in the title role.   As was so often the case – e.g. 79 episodes of Star Trek: the Original Series – I had scarce patience for such cerebral fare in the past.  I had heard the Iron Maiden song dozens of times, and even seen a few episodes of the show, including the quasi-comedic “The Girl Who Was Death”, which my friend Dave had shown me ages ago.

Premise.  A highly placed intelligence officer, known to us only as #6, abruptly decides to resign from an un-named intelligence agency.  Since it’s based in London, we can assume it’s MI6.  As he packs up his things in his London apartment, gas surrounds him, he’s abducted, and the next thing he knows he’s in a mysterious little village (where?), identified as #6.  All the other villagers are either fellow former spies (of whom he recognizes very few) or agents of the Agency posing as fellow prisoners to gain his confidence and eke out his secrets.  Everyone, even the top guy (#2 - who is #1?), simply has a number and no one is ever referred to by name.

In particular, the #1 secret the Agency tries to elicit from him – and which he consistently refuses to reveal – is simply his reasons for resigning.  Every episode a different #2 – the administrator of the village – attempts (unsuccessfully) to get him to reveal the secret.  Naturally each attempt fails and the #2 is replaced by another one, who tries something different (those damn invincible Gauls!).  It’s not even clear that the Village is necessarily in England or run by MI6.  In one episode it’s suggested the village may be on the Baltic Sea coast of Poland.  And #1’s identity is not revealed until “Fall Out”, the final episode, which likewise gives us some clue where the village is. 

Incidentally, the Village does in fact exist and survives to this day: Portmeirion Village, in North Wales.   If a 17 episode TV series from the 1960s is sufficient motivation, by all means visit.  Put that and Cross Plains, Texas, on your bucket list.   

For his part, in addition to refusing to reveal his reason for resigning, #6 makes constant efforts to escape.  However, the village is protected by mysterious white bouncing balloons.  Naturally he’s consistently unsuccessful but like Cool Hand Luke, never gives up.  As he says more than once: "I will not make any deals with you. I've resigned. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, de-briefed, or numbered. My life is my own."

Although he’s given a nice little house to live in, and the village is pleasant enough (if a bit quaint and boring) he’s under constant video surveillance.  Moreover, the men in lab coats frequently dose him with drugs and experiment on him – and of course, none of these work either.  Sometimes it seems like the Agency is using the village and the prisoners as small-scale guinea pigs for mind control experiments intended for mass deployment should they prove useful in the village.  But the village population has almost complete turnover, with #6 being about the only permanent resident. 

What is most remarkable about the show is its consistent anti-totalitarian theme.  Of course it’s easy to criticize Stalinist Russia or Nazi Germany, but here we’re talking about efforts by a “free democracy” to subjugate its citizens, naturally as subtly and unobtrusively as possible.   Even though #6’s quarters are nice and comfy, and the village takes care of him, he still resents being a prisoner in a gilded cage.  And he refuses to cooperate; his defiance is unrelenting and strident.  Ultimately you’ll see how that works for him, if you have the patience to watch all 17 episodes.  The final episode, “Fall Out”, in fact wraps up the series.

Formats.  As noted above, we were exposed via the Iron Maiden song.  When the band solicited then-living Patrick McGoohan’s permission, the actor was happy to consent.  Frank Herbert, the author of Dune, was considerably less cooperative and refused (so they called their Dune-inspired song “To Tame a Land”). 

What I saw was an A&E Collection in Blu-Ray from Netflix.  It cleans up very nicely in Blu-Ray, but unfortunately the set is $200.00 on eBay.  Oh well.  

Finally, they remade the show in 2009; that one has 6 episodes and features Jesus Caviezel as #6 and Ian McGandalf as #2.  "The Village" is out in the desert, not the UK seaside.  #6 now has love interests: Ruth Wilson (the Lone Ranger's sister-in-law) and Hayley Atwell (the hottie from "Captain America" and "Agent Carter"). #2 never changes (unlike the original).  It's just as cerebral - which means often a confusing mindf**k.  However, 40% consists of confusing flashbacks to #6's prior life in NYC, and the events leading up to his resignation, which are supposed to give some hint as to why he's in the Village.  I found it a worthy effort by people who know, love, and understand the 60s show, but ultimately unlikely to surpass the original.  

Clearly in this age of the Patriot Act, NSA spying, Edward Snowden, et al, surely a series such as this one is more relevant than ever.  Enjoy. 

John Carter and the Lone Ranger

Recently I watched the more recent “Lone Ranger” film with Johnny Depp as Tonto and Armie Hammer as the title character.   It’s another CGI orgy with Depp essentially turning Jack Sparrow into an American Indian.  Enjoyable…to an extent.

Ages back I caught “John Carter” in the movie theater and then watched it on Blu-Ray.  Like “Lone Ranger” it was heavy on CGI, but had a fairly decent story and no awkward Depps lightening the mood.  Taylor Kitsch played the title character, Lynn Collins played his love interest Dejah Thoris [they played together in an earlier X-Men film], and Mark Strong – who always seems like Steve Carell’s bad-ass evil older brother – as the quasi villain. 

Both were financial failures as movies.  “John Carter” (2012) totaled out at $350 million production and marketing, yet only grossed $284 million worldwide.  “Lone Ranger” (2013) combined production and marketing was $375 million yet only grossed $260 million worldwide. 

Another big similarity is both had archaic source material.  “John Carter” was based on Edgar Rice Burroughs’ John Carter trilogy from 1913.  ERB, not to be confused with Naked Lunch writer William S. Burroughs, is much more famous for Tarzan, which remains a popular franchise.  His John Carter character is mainly known among sci-fi fans, as Carter is arguably the template for Conan and all other swords & sorcery heroes we’ve had since.  Robert Heinlein was a huge fan of ERB and even wrote a book, Number of the Beast, in tribute to ERB.  James Cameron also cites John Carter as an influence for his big film Avatar.  But since 1913, there had been only one film adaptation, in 2009, which was not great:  it was direct-to-DVD and pretty much tanked.  In any case, I reviewed both the source material and the 2009 film in my prior blog, dated 4/30/10.

The Lone Ranger was significantly more successful prior to the 2013 film.  The 1933-54 radio show was very popular, followed by the similarly popular 1949-57 TV show.  Although many actors have portrayed the Lone Ranger, Clayton Moore is most popularly associated with the role.  The theme song, better known as the William Tell Overture, is well known, as is the Ranger’s famous catchphrase, “Hi Ho Silver” (which even figures in some Frank Zappa shows). 

Ok.  But look at the films:  110 octane CGI orgies of 1080p eye candy.   In Dejah Thoris’ case, serious eye candy.  Most of the people know who of John Carter or the Lone Ranger are old folks who don’t care much for that type of film.  You won’t get that demographic into the theaters to see these films, or even to watch them on DVD at home.  “Matlock is on!’ 

Clearly Granpa wasn’t the desired demographic.  What about his XBOX/PS4 playing grandkid?  Yeah, that’s the ticket.  He’s the one you thought would shell out $15 at the megaplex to see them in 3D IMAX.  But with no familiarity with the source material – and no reason to care – he stayed at home playing XBOX or PS4.  So the movies tanked.

The studios must have thought:  hey, this is easy.  We have ready-made stories here!  John Carter and Lone Ranger were written ages ago.  We just need to tweak a screenplay a little and we’re home free!  No original thinking necessary!  It’s like printing money!  WRONG. 

The sad part is, neither film actually sucks.  Of the two, “Lone Ranger” is less reverential.   We get Reid’s backstory – a naïve prosecutor who doesn’t believe in guns – but the film is told from Tonto’s point of view, and Depp can’t resist giving him, as noted above, the full Jack Sparrow treatment.  “Carter” was more straightforward.  It’s vast, epic, and again, did I mention Dejah Thoris?  Yeah.  For my sci-fi readers out there, by all means check out the original source material.  

Fawlty Towers

“…and now for something completely different.”  I picked up this 1970s’ British comedy show a few months ago on DVD and finally got around to watching it.  There are two seasons, 1975 and 1979, each of only 6 episodes, so the entire series is only 12 episodes.  In fact, The Young Ones, the 1980s British comedy show, was likewise 6x2 in tribute to this one.

The show features a bed & breakfast in Torquay, England, a resort town on the Channel Coast (although not actually filmed there).  Torquay is where Wishbone Ash come from.   As a B&B its staff is limited and extremely overworked, which lends itself some very clever comedy.

Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).   You may recognize Cleese from Monty Python, and here he’s just as tall and arrogant as any upper class twit he may have portrayed on Flying Circus. 

Sybil Fawlty (Prunella Scales).   His wife is somewhat smarter than him and constantly puts him down – well-deserved, as it is.  They make a good bickering couple.

Polly Sherman (Connie Booth, Cleese’s real-life wife).   The B&B’s waitress and helper.  Frequently she has to cover for Basil or Manuel and typically gets caught in the crossfire of uppity, frustrated guests and Basil and/or Manuel.  She’s good eye candy.  You may remember her from the “Lumberjack Sketch” on Flying Circus, with Michael Palin as the lumberjack.

Manuel (Andrew Sachs).  The B&B’s waiter from Barcelona, somewhat lazy, poor English, and not too bright.  In the last episode, he confuses a rat for an oversized hamster and keeps it as a pet, almost costing the B&B its license. 

Slapstick comedy, double entendres, but nowhere near as saucy as Benny Hill’s shows.  It’s all good fun, I’ve yet to meet anyone familiar with the show who didn’t like it.  PBS used to run the episodes, now they’re available on DVD.  Enjoy!

Inglourious Sniper?

Recently I saw a movie which has lots of people talking:  “American Sniper”, the story of Chris Kyle.  CK served as a Navy SEAL sniper in Iraq for four tours.  This involved shooting people.  Bad people.  The movie made some people upset.  I have not read CK’s memoirs, so I’m going off the movie by itself.  I expect most people will do so as well, though some may well be induced to follow up with the book after seeing the movie.  I don’t plan on it.   

And I’m posting this on Wednesday instead of Friday for two reasons: first, I’ll be out of town this Friday, and second, for those of you who haven’t seen it, that’s two more days for you to get down to the multiplex and see it while it's still playing in the movie theaters (IMAX is optional).  By the way, there’s a short memorial to Chris Kyle at the end of the film, a montage of pictures of his funeral in Texas, which was as big an affair as the passing of a head of state.  I was seated in the middle of the row and couldn’t leave my seat until this was over, as NO ONE got up until the whole thing was over – and the whole room applauded.  Mind you, this is in Blue State Zone, Fairfax County Virginia, which went for Obama in 2008 and 2012.  Go figure.

Let’s review the movie, in basic terms.   CK is a rodeo dude from Texas.   He sees 9/11 and decides to join up – and to “be all he can be” (yes, I know that’s the Army’s old slogan) as a Navy SEAL.  After surviving and passing the grueling training which SEALs have to endure, he’s sent to Iraq.  Even after surviving his first tour and having a wife (Sienna Miller) and kids at home, he volunteers for subsequent tours (4 in all), much to his wife’s anger and resentment.  Each time he’s sent back to Iraq and pretty much does the same thing:  sniping at bad guys.  Somehow he survives, but it’s not a given that he’ll make it out alive.  Many of his buddies don’t.

Coward?  That’s an issue Michael Moore raised.  I wonder if he actually saw the movie.  He clearly doesn’t know anything about snipers, because if he did, he’d know that despite being nominally hidden and taking shots at a distance, snipers are still in danger – especially from other snipers.  “Enemy at the Gates” – based on a true story – covers the battle between Red Army sniper Vasily Zaitsev (Jude Law) vs. German sniper Major Koenig (Ed Harris); Zaitsev’s kills include 11 other snipers.  Other WWII snipers have even higher kill scores for enemy snipers.  In this film CK is engaged in a campaign with an Iraqi sniper who nearly kills him.  And at various points, when CK ascertains he can’t find any targets from up on the roof, he joins the grunts down on the ground clearing apartments block by block.  He routinely faces danger.   Whatever else he might have been, coward doesn’t apply. 

Propaganda.  A parallel was made with Quentin Tarantino’s movie “Inglourious Basterds”, which was QT’s attempt at making an offbeat WWII film.  A German sniper, Zoller (Daniel Bruhl) tries to romance a French girl, Shosanna (Melanie Laurent), oblivious to her hatred of Germans, no matter how heroic they might be.  The Nazis have made a movie glorifying Zoller (a film-within-a-film) which Zoller arranges to have premiere at Shosanna’s little French theater.  The Nazi top brass will be attending the premiere, so the good guys decide it’s a great opportunity to try something explosive and take them all out.   Naturally we don’t get to see a complete sniper film, just bits and pieces.

In this case the movie is naturally sympathetic to CK, but less than enthusiastic about trumpeting the entire Iraq war.  Clearly the bad guys are bad guys: Al-Zarqari (whatever his name is) has an enforcer who kills Iraqis who betray Al Qaeda to the Americans, and he likes to use a drill to do so, even against children.  Recall, however, that not only did Clint Eastwood do this film, he also made a pair of WWII films, “Flags of Our Fathers” (about the raising of the flag on Iwo Jima, told from the US perspective) and “Letters From Iwo Jima” (the same story, dovetailed from the Japanese perspective).   A filmmaker can tell a story about a sympathetic soldier without necessarily endorsing the cause the soldier fights for.  The local Catholic newspaper, which reviews films to screen them for moral issues and religious topics, put it very well: “Yet the film avoids any big-picture moral assessment of the specific struggle in which he participated or of armed clashes in general.” 

The perfect example is Erwin Rommel, the “Desert Fox” of WWII.  Easily Germany’s most capable commander, he was also a man of such skill and integrity that even hard-asses like Winston Churchill couldn’t resist admiring him.  There was even a US movie made in the 1950s, “The Desert Fox”, with James Mason as Rommel.  Rommel, however, redeemed himself in the eyes of the Allies by being executed by Hitler for having a tangential role in the plot to kill the Fuhrer in July 1944. 

Yet Heinz Guderian, the top German Panzer general, arguably as talented as Rommel, never got a movie.  His deal was that he was temporarily relieved of duty for several months but eventually reinstated when Hitler realized he needed someone competent – even if Guderian lacked the tact and sense to simply tell Hitler what he wanted to hear.  But Guderian never joined the anti-Hitler group, mainly because he realized that (A) the group was doomed to failure, and (B) with the Allies insisting on unconditional surrender, regime change in Berlin wouldn’t save Germany anyway.  The Americans were impressed enough with him to encourage him to write memoirs, but unlike Rommel, no one made a movie glorifying him.

Even Dante, of all people, recognized “virtuous pagans” such as Virgil, who served as his guide through Hell and Purgatory.  Sooner or later someone may make a movie about Saladin, who is the Muslim warlord most amenable to Christian admiration.  He appears in “Kingdom of Heaven”, a film which is mostly unfavorable towards the Crusaders. 

If you’re convinced that any movie which sympathetically portrays a soldier is, ipso facto, per se, propaganda for the soldier’s country, side, and cause, well… I can’t argue with a sick mind.  Agree to disagree.

Anyhow.  Jesse Ventura attacked the movie for suggesting a connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11.  The suggestion is highly attenuated:  CK sees the Twin Towers collapsing on 9/11, gets upset, volunteers for the military, and gets sent to Iraq.  I missed the part when ANY character explicitly makes a connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11.   Apparently CK was already in the Navy when 9/11 occurred, so 9/11 could not have been his motivation for joining the military.  Again, the connection is very slim.

There is some issue in here about CK targeting women and children.  According to the movie, they were armed and attempting to kill US soldiers.  Contrast that with “Full Metal Jacket”, in which a door gunner on a Huey in Vietnam takes delight in shooting Vietnamese civilians.  Asked by “Joker” (Matthew Modine) how he can shoot women and children, the gunner laughs, “easy, you don’t lead them as much.” 

Finally, one of CK’s comrades in Iraq starts having second thoughts about the war and begins articulating them, discreetly, to CK.  Later the man’s mother reads out a letter her son wrote to her, which goes into more detail.  CK himself appears immune to doubt, but not everyone in the film is so sure of the US position as he is.  This ingredient in the film is a large counterbalance to CK’s gung ho attitude yet gets ignored when the film is criticized as “propaganda”.  Seriously, if Josef Goebbels was watching this, he’d wind up in a “bitch please” meme.

If you understand Eastwood and what he tends to do with his films, you’ll understand why the film was done the way it was.  I expect he distilled the essence of CK and showed him as imperfect but skilled.  The man was a sniper in a nasty war.  He accepted what he was told and didn’t question authority or policy.  He had a difficult time adjusting to civilian life, as many veterans do.  While he may have exaggerated somewhat in some ways and puffed up his own achievements by some degree (debatable), when you strip it down to what we can confirm and verify, you’re still left with an impressive character.  If you can grasp distinctions, you can understand that he was a minor hero, and we can celebrate his story without devolving into propaganda.