2.05 - Obsession

Rate every episode of The New Avengers.

Rate 'Obsession'

10
2
13%
9
6
40%
8
1
7%
7
3
20%
6
2
13%
5
0
No votes
4
1
7%
3
0
No votes
2
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 15

User avatar
Timeless A-Peel
Posting à la Carte
Posts: 4864
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 1:41 am
Location: New Scotland, Canada
Contact:

Post by Timeless A-Peel »

anti-clockwise wrote:Very nice observations Timeless. That makes more sense. She behaves so very differently in this episode. That likely explains why. I wasn't sure if thye had time to think it through so carefully but maybe they did.
Thanks! :D I think it's pretty much guaranteed that they thought it through enough to work out how it would affect Purdey, and what the consequences of that would be. It's a well-constructed episode in that way.
Last Watched: Who Was That Man I Saw You With?

Image

Anew: A TNA Site. Updated 4/30/14
NickP
Little Wonder
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 2:25 pm

Post by NickP »

9.

Some of the best action scenes of any TNA, albeit a lot of it courtesy of stock footage from the RAF but hugely enjoyable all the same.
Lhbizness

Post by Lhbizness »

Timeless A-Peel wrote:What would have happened if Gambit and Steed hadn't showed up? It's hard to say for sure, but one of them would have to die. Despite Purdey's protestations to the contrary, there's no doubt in my mind that Larry was about to shoot her before Gambit took him out. The last time she rejected him, he finally managed to tear up her pictures, which suggests a mental break on his part. He'd given up on ever getting Purdey back, so killing her wouldn't be a problem. It'd all come down to whether Purdey could make herself pull the trigger and take him down first. Otherwise she'd have ended up dead, and the rocket would have gone off.

I've always thought that her past with Larry made Purdey mistrustful of men to a certain extent--she seems leery of letting anyone get to close. Through the nature of their work, she's learned she can trust Gambit and Steed. It's interesting to note that the way Purdey relates to both of them deteriorates as Larry's presence in her life reasserts in her life. She argues with Steed more than once and shoots out his tires. She snaps at Gambit and won't tell him anything. Everything they try to do to help just makes her cut them off more, as though all her old mistrustfulness is coming back. It's also interesting to note that both Gambit and Steed put their arms around her and stand quite close when they're telling her about the "plum job", which is slightly unusual. But the way they do it is friendly and companionable, whereas every time Doomer does it, it’s forceful and possessive. I’m wondering now if that was an intentional choice on the director/writer’s part. It’s as though they’re subtly drawing parallels between Gambit and Steed on one hand, and Larry on the other. And yet Purdey just can’t shake Larry.
After our discussion last week, I went and re-watched this one. It is a fascinating if slightly flawed episode - I think the flaws lies in the changes in Purdey's character that aren't really built upon in later episodes. It never occurred to me until I read this that Purdey becomes more mistrustful of men as the episode goes on, and that some of her defensiveness/reticence around men might have to do with her past experience with Larry (who, it seems, she still loves in some sense).

The issue of "would he have shot her/would she have shot him" changes every time I watch Obsession - the first time I was convinced that Larry would have killed her, the second time that he could never bring himself to. It's interesting that it comes down to Gambit basically making the choice for her - which can be taken two different ways (at least). On the one hand, Gambit responds in the way that anyone would, killing a man who was threatening his partner. On the other hand, and on a thematic level, the episode takes that choice away from Purdey - rather than enabling her to eliminate the abusive male in her life (one which, as Larry claims, is a part of her), she loses that act of sovereignty to another man. Gambit, the good man, eliminates Larry, the bad one. As such, it becomes an exchange between men with the woman powerless in the middle - she is unable to enforce her own desires or conclude her own narrative. This isn't a fault of the characters per se, but the structure of the show. I think it would have been far more effective, and poignant, if Purdey was the one to shoot Larry. As it is, she still remains in limbo, still attached to a man who abused her and now unable to achieve closure of her own accord.
User avatar
Frankymole
You Have Just Been Posting (a lot)
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 9:33 am
Location: Carmadoc Research Establishment
Has thanked: 384 times
Been thanked: 311 times

Post by Frankymole »

anti-clockwise wrote: Once again TNA is before it's time. Today this behavior of terrorist bombing sadly seems to be a common occurrence in the world. Back then, it was much more rare.
It wasn't very rare in the UK, sadly. Ever since 1969 the IRA had been bombing the British Mainland, blowing up shopping centres, pubs, stations, hotels, airports... indiscriminately killing women and children as well as innocent men. They also conducted mortar attacks (including memorably on the roof of Heathrow Airport terminal building and the Prime Minister's residence), blew up the Conservative party conference hotel, and also attacked several military bases. This was nothing compared to Northern Ireland itself, though, which was a bloodbath (and occasionally still is). Sadly, a huge amount of funding for armaments and explosives for the IRA terrorists came from America (NORAID) as well as munitions provided by Libya and other dodgy states.
Last edited by Frankymole on Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Last watched: "The Town of No Return"
anti-clockwise
Mission... Highly Improbable!
Posts: 1678
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 2:34 pm

Post by anti-clockwise »

Frankymole wrote:
anti-clockwise wrote: Once again TNA is before it's time. Today this behavior of terrorist bombing sadly seems to be a common occurrence in the world. Back then, it was much more rare.
It wasn't very rare in the UK, sadly. Ever since 1969 the IRA had been bombing the British Mainland, blowing up shopping centres, pubs, stations, hotels, airports... indiscriminately killing women and children as well as innocent men. They also conducted mortar attacks (including memorably on the roof of Heathrow Airport terminal building and the Prime Minister's residence), blew up the Conservative party conference hotel, and also attacked several military bases. This was nothing compared to Northern Ireland itself, though, which was a bloodbath (and occasionally still is). Sadly, a huge amount of funding for armaments and explosives for the IRA terrorists came from America (NORAID) as well as munitions provided by Libya and others dodgy states.
Thank you for reminding me. That hands down is horrific. Thanks for correcting me on that. Pretty sad and disgusting that other countries were funding this.
"He likes his tea stirred anti-clockwise."
User avatar
Frankymole
You Have Just Been Posting (a lot)
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 9:33 am
Location: Carmadoc Research Establishment
Has thanked: 384 times
Been thanked: 311 times

Post by Frankymole »

I wish we could say we live in more enlightened times! At least the calming-down of Ireland and the Basque separatism terrorism in Spain is a step in the right direction. Other parts of the world are getting more uppity though...

I remember having to check my car for bombs all the time in the 1980s - not fun really.

The original Avengers didn't seem to do terrorists much, though it had its share of gun-runners, and assassins.
Last watched: "The Town of No Return"
Lhbizness

Post by Lhbizness »

Most terrorism in The Avengers is home-grown, very often from within trusted circles (mercenaries in the British Army, Doomer as an RAF pilot). And very often it's for petty or personal reasons: money or personal revenge.
User avatar
Timeless A-Peel
Posting à la Carte
Posts: 4864
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 1:41 am
Location: New Scotland, Canada
Contact:

Post by Timeless A-Peel »

Lhbizness wrote:After our discussion last week, I went and re-watched this one. It is a fascinating if slightly flawed episode - I think the flaws lies in the changes in Purdey's character that aren't really built upon in later episodes. It never occurred to me until I read this that Purdey becomes more mistrustful of men as the episode goes on, and that some of her defensiveness/reticence around men might have to do with her past experience with Larry (who, it seems, she still loves in some sense).

The issue of "would he have shot her/would she have shot him" changes every time I watch Obsession - the first time I was convinced that Larry would have killed her, the second time that he could never bring himself to. It's interesting that it comes down to Gambit basically making the choice for her - which can be taken two different ways (at least). On the one hand, Gambit responds in the way that anyone would, killing a man who was threatening his partner. On the other hand, and on a thematic level, the episode takes that choice away from Purdey - rather than enabling her to eliminate the abusive male in her life (one which, as Larry claims, is a part of her), she loses that act of sovereignty to another man. Gambit, the good man, eliminates Larry, the bad one. As such, it becomes an exchange between men with the woman powerless in the middle - she is unable to enforce her own desires or conclude her own narrative. This isn't a fault of the characters per se, but the structure of the show. I think it would have been far more effective, and poignant, if Purdey was the one to shoot Larry. As it is, she still remains in limbo, still attached to a man who abused her and now unable to achieve closure of her own accord.
It might have been more cathartic if she'd been the one to shoot him, I agree. I do think it's had an impact on all her relationships, and it reinforces the bond she has with Gambit and Steed, because she trusts them in spite of her past. When Larry returns, it starts to undermine that trust, and her relationship with both of them. And yet Gambit and Steed still come through for her in the end, whereas Larry is willing to kill her after being rejected. I really don't doubt that Larry was a second away from killing her when Gambit shot him. He levels the gun at her, and his finger's tightening on the trigger. Purdey doesn't seem to have the wherewithal to do the same. She has plenty of time to either kill or disable Larry before Gambit arrives, and she doesn't. Gambit arrives on the scene, makes a split-second decision, and kills Larry before Larry can kill Purdey. I don't see it as Gambit choosing for Purdey, because he does what she can't bring herself to do, and he does it to save her life. His course of action flows from hers. Steed then does the same when he stops the rocket--foils Larry's plot which Purdey almost let unfold right in front of her. So in both cases, they react to Purdey's choices rather than make them for her. This isn't to heap blame on Purdey, because she's the injured party, but shows that she shouldn't have faced Larry alone, the way she did last time. Gambit and Steed have her back and make the hard calls that need to be made when she can't. The fact that she needs their support doesn't undermine her autonomy--they give to her rather than take away, which was all Larry ever did. If it had been Gambit or Steed in the same situation, Purdey would have made the same calls for them, and she would have done it without question.
Last Watched: Who Was That Man I Saw You With?

Image

Anew: A TNA Site. Updated 4/30/14
anti-clockwise
Mission... Highly Improbable!
Posts: 1678
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 2:34 pm

Post by anti-clockwise »

Wow Franky. That is really heavy. We are fortunate here to not have had a civil war for over a century. Checking for bombs as a way of life has got to be overwhelming. But glad you are here to tell us about it!
"He likes his tea stirred anti-clockwise."
User avatar
Timeless A-Peel
Posting à la Carte
Posts: 4864
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 1:41 am
Location: New Scotland, Canada
Contact:

Post by Timeless A-Peel »

Frankymole wrote:I wish we could say we live in more enlightened times! At least the calming-down of Ireland and the Basque separatism terrorism in Spain is a step in the right direction. Other parts of the world are getting more uppity though...

I remember having to check my car for bombs all the time in the 1980s - not fun really.

The original Avengers didn't seem to do terrorists much, though it had its share of gun-runners, and assassins.
I think I remember reading somewhere that a plot involving terrorism (for the original series or TNA, I can't recall which) was rejected for being too close to home given the IRA bombings (probably TNA, then). The show did like to play on Cold Wars fears and the like, but maybe that sort of plot was just too grim/serious for the writers to be able to put a light Avengersish spin on it in good conscience?
Last Watched: Who Was That Man I Saw You With?

Image

Anew: A TNA Site. Updated 4/30/14
Post Reply