February 21, 2021

OBSERVATION: High Tide at Noon - The Simon Breck Character - Book vs. Movie

In April 2020 I posted a review of the 1957 Rank film "High Tide at Noon".  I admitted that it wasn't totally my type of movie, and only watched it for Patrick McGoohan, who played the character of Simon Breck.

Now, many female McGoohan fans absolutely LOVE him in this film, if not for his bad-boy character, then for his youthful looks.  

It is also one of the very few times he kissed a woman on-screen (though I still argue we don't see any lip contact... but I digress...).  In fact, there is speculation that Simon actually rapes the main character, Joanna MacKenzie, played by Betta St. John.  In the interviews released on the DVD "In My Mind", McGoohan even states he "practically rapes" the girl in the film.

The first scene it could have happened during is when Joanna meets Simon in the old abandoned house.  At first she lets him kiss her, then things get more "serious" and she suddenly changes her mind.  Joanna runs away and Simon watches her go.

The other time it could have happened is when Simon visits the same house, now fixed up and Joanna's home, after her husband Alec has died.  Simon thinks he again has a chance to "win" Joanna, who hates him and tries to get him to go away.  Things start to get heated, when the scene just plain ends.

Next, we see Joanna run to her parent's house and Nils heads to the Breck household to settle things.  Simon implies he isn't looking for trouble with Nils, who goes for him anyway.  They make for the docks, get into their fishing boats, and Simon disappears into the night.  Nils shouts out to him that he'll kill him if he ever returns to the island.

So, what happened at Joanna's house after we, the audience, left?  Did Simon indeed rape her, like so many viewers think?

I decided to find out once and for all.  How?  Easy.  Look at the original book.

"High Tide at Noon" was written in 1944 by Elisabeth Ogilvie and actually based on the island of Criehaven/Ragged Island, Maine, where her family vacationed.

I readily admit I can't STAND reading non-fiction, so reading the entire story would be a chore.  Instead, I logged onto Archive.org and borrowed the book.  I did a search for "Simon" to narrow the pages down a bit.  What I discovered was a bit surprising!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Firstly, in the film, Joanna's family name is MacKenzie .  In the book, it is Bennett.  Simon Breck's family name isn't Breck in the book, it is Bird.  His physical description is very similar to that of McGoohan himself at the time, other than the "smoky gray eyes":

"He had a thin, tanned face and flat cheeks slanting to a lean chin... his red hair was like copper with the sun on it, and he was slight and narrow hipped in his snug dungarees". 

The scene where Simon and Joanna speak for the first time by his boat is almost exactly like the book.  More time has passed since they last spoke in the book than in the film, though.  Simon also implies that he prefers girls who haven’t been around the block a few times.

The scene where Joanna meets Simon at the abandoned house is also mostly the same, BUT with some important exceptions, one being Simon's touching her breast to see if her heart is also racing.  That would be a no-no on 1957 movie screens. In the film, he instead says "so's yours... I bet...".

But one big difference is how Simon reacts to Joanna suddenly wanting him to stop making love to her.  He had been rather nice to her up to that point, just like in the film.  Simon says "you gotta learn some time", and she runs away.  But in the book, he starts to get mad.  He gives her 5 minutes to think about it and basically implies she better give in to him.  She doesn't, and runs away.  In the movie, he almost seems to find it all humorous.  In the book, he's mad as Hell.  She lead him on by being coy by his boat, agreed to meet him that night, allowed him to hold and kiss her, and then suddenly "pulls the salt water business" on him:

"I'll give you five minutes to get the hell over it, and then you'll listen to reason. I don't let anybody fool with me, lady. Sooner or later, they pay up".

In the film, we get the impression Joanna hates Simon just for the passes he has made to her.  Anything he or his family may have done to the MacKenzies seems secondary.  Simon is a sort of pest, not much else.

But in the book, it is far more complicated and intense.  Joanna's family basically owns the island, and the Birds are looked down upon as "trash".  It is part of the reason Simon takes her physical rejection of him to the point of utter hatred.  She has become "uppity", as he says in the film.  Did she lead him on then reject him because she thinks she is better than anyone from the Breck (Bird) family?

Simon gets his hands (and lips) on her way more in the book, even after she spurns him.  And she hates it more as well.  He is nastier, dirtier, meaner. 

The scene at the dance, which ends in a melee, is almost exactly like the book.

But the next one, in the now fixed up house, after Alec's death, is far more "meaty" in the book.  The fact he has Alec's IOU for her house is more important.  Also more important is the Breck family's tampering of other fishermen's gear, and Simon's interactions with Nils.  

In the film, Simon is run off the island for good by Nils just after the scene with Joanna at the house.  He hasn't even had a chance to find out about Alec's IOU.  In the book, time passes before Simon leaves the island, and he isn't exactly chased by Nils, though Nils is indeed waiting at the Bird house to "settle" things with him.  In time, the family does indeed pay Alec's debt to Simon (via a lawyer).

There are other differences between the book and film, such as Joanna having a baby after Alec dies.  I didn't look much at sections not dealing with the Simon character.  So curious viewers of the film will have to read those themselves.  

But now we know... Simon did NOT rape Joanna in either the film or book "High Tide at Noon".  

... UNLESS that is exactly WHY the last scene in Joanna's house ends the way it does, and WHY Nils runs Simon off the island right away.  

Sticking to the book would have made the film even longer, and given McGoohan, a young newcomer to the Big Screen, a far meatier and more important role.  In hindsight, a real missed opportunity.  We all know he could play mean, nasty, and angry.  All the kissing and pawing may have been an issue but he managed to get through it all during those Rank years.  And the fact the character Joanna had the same name as his real life wife, Joan... well... every little bit helps!

In the end, it all comes down to the old argument:  THE BOOK or THE MOVIE!



February 13, 2021

OBSERVATION: What Book is Charley Chase "Reading"?

I have always loved this image of comedian Charley Chase. Not sure why exactly, but I do. So when I saw an original print for sale for a relatively sane price, I HAD to get it.

I scanned and started cleaning up various imperfections in/on the 90+ year old print. I then started wondering what he was reading. Since I now had a nice print, I tried to scan the book alone and see what could be seen.

The page seems to have separate, listed entries, like in a reference book. There are no paragraphs. It doesn't appear to be a Bible (I don't think Chase was a very religious person). So was Chase "reading" a reference book?  A book of motion picture information?  Biographies of actors, directors, etc?  Did the photographer just grab any book he had on hand to use as a prop? 

DOES IT REALLY MATTER??

Nope... but these are the things that grab my attention...


February 7, 2021

OBSERVATION: The Prisoner "Chimes of Big Ben" Ship Painting

Ever since The Prisoner first aired on television in 1967… FIFTY FOUR YEARS AGO… people have been arguing whether or not the main character, Number Six, was actually John Drake, aka Danger Man and/or the Secret Agent

Personally, I lean toward the opinion YES, Six is Drake… UNLESS the two characters were simply just that similar to Patrick McGoohan himself.

I am not into long, drawn out arguments on ANY topic, especially ones where there are only a handful of people who could ever settle things. There may not even be that many, since we no longer have McGoohan to ask. Does his wife Joan know? Probably, but I bet she won’t tell, either. Maybe some day his daughters will spill the beans.

I am rather new to the Prisoner world, and recently fell into the what-does-it-all-mean trap when I began to wonder why a massive copy of a painting depicting a sea battle was so prominently featured in the Prisoner episode “The Chimes of Big Ben”.

Six and Nadia have escaped the Village and are in an office Six "knows very well" in London, apparently that of Fotheringay, played by Richard Wattis, who was one of John Drake’s bosses in the first incarnation of Danger Man (... so why does Fotheringay leave Six alone with the colonel if it is his office and he is senior enough to know of Six's reappearance?). There are quite a few ship-related items on the shelves. Largest is a big print of a sea
battle. You can’t help but see the thing!

Now, Sir Francis Drake was an English explorer, sea captain, privateer, naval officer, and politician. So was that artwork of a Drake sea battle? Hence a hint to Six being Drake?

Using various online reverse-search tools, I discovered that the original painting was painted in 1799 by Philip de Loutherbourg. It is called “The Battle of Camperdown” and does not depict Francis Drake, but a battle between Admiral Adam Duncan and Dutch ships. The painting measures 5x7 feet.

A black & white engraved print was made by James Fittler in 1801. It is this print that is depicted behind Number Six.

And so my theory that all of the office’s nautical doo-dads were a hat tip to “Drake” seems to be “blown out of the water”. Still… the prop people put an awful lot of ships and things on that set…

No doubt, Prisoner fans have already beat this dead horse senseless after FIVE DECADES…


Now.......... what's the deal with THIS painting??




Philip James De Loutherbourg, The Battle of Camperdown (1799)
Photo © Tate
CC-BY-NC-ND 3.0 (Unported)
https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/de-loutherbourg-the-battle-of-camperdown-t01451