The Protectors (1964) User Reviews

Solid Early 60s Stuff

[seveb-25179 · 6/10 · 21 June 2023]

IMO This series has about the same production values as the early series of the Avengers, i.e. Scenes are shot inside a studio, rather than on location. The action / fight scenes are also on a par with early Avengers, i.e. Reasonably well concieved, but shot in one take with no second chances.

However I disagree with the other reviewer about the quality of the actiing, I don't find it wooden at all, but I do agree that no-one in this show has that X factor of star level charisma, as supplied by Patrick McNee (Stead) or Honor Blackman (Mrs Gale) in the Avengers.

The swinging 60s didn't really kick-off in the mass conciousness until around 1965/66, so it's no surprise not to find much evidence of it here. The Avengers was ahead of the curve in that regard, which is part of the reason why it is considered a classic while this series is almost forgotten.

But if you enjoy Cathy Gale era Avengers you will probably find some entertainment value in this.

Could have been great.

[kps-03495 · 3/10 · 3 June 2023]

Appearing in 1964 at the beginning of the "swinging London of the 1960's", this series had potential greatness written all over it but unfortunately fell flat in just about every way. Not taking advantage of the times, this series could have been made in 1954 rather than 1964 and you wouldn't notice any difference. Only the final episode has any location shooting and showed any culture of the times (music and dancing in the club).

Although clearly suffering from little (if any) budget, unfortunately its problems run far deeper. Of the three principal characters, only Andrew Faulds (Souter) has any sort of charisma (and even that's in short supply). The other two (Michael Atkinson and Ann Morrish) simply don't have anything that would hold the viewers interest. More wooden than Gerry Anderson's puppets of the same era, they just don't have...well...anything! Compared with contemporary series, Roger Moore's "Simon Templar", Patrick McGoohan's "Drake" and Patrick Macnee's "Steed" are eminently more likeable and charismatic.

The humor (what there is of it) is forced and just not funny and the acting of the principles is well below par. The cardboard sets don't help much either. The fight scenes (of which there is at least one and sometimes several in almost every episode) are simply laughably bad.

It's embarrassing!

Having said all of this, I must also mention some of the better points. The stories (for the most part) are not too bad, some even quite good. But the real redeeming feature is the acting of the guest stars. For the most part this is far superior to the principles and makes many of the episodes worth watching. In fact you could cut out the main characters and still have a workable story.

I wanted to enjoy this series, but it just could have (and should have) been so much better.