SpuffyWeb
Sadly Over-hyped
Humaira Grant
It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.
Dana
An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.
editor-107
I loved "Ace Of Wands" when it was on, but was never allowed to see it unless I was at my grandmothers in Brighton (rare) when my parents no longer had control over what was on "the box".Sadly, one of the things that crippled it was the level of complaints. As it dealt with magic and was a children's show, Thames TV was besieged by complaints from British fundamentalist Christians who kept demanding that it was pulled. Briefly, it held the World Record, according to Guinness, as the most complained about TV show in history and newspapers were filled with damning letters about it. However, in this day and age, in this era of Harry Potter, it seems laughable for such a response to such a tame, well meant and well produced show, entirely free from sex and violence. Sadly, this pretty much stopped any large scale merchandising of "Ace Of Wands" by Thames.
gregory_quinn
Idling around a few weeks ago I searched for Ace of Wands online and found a short video clip. I was prompted to buy a region 0 DVD of the surviving episodes (I live in the US now). But in 1970/71 I was a spotty kid in a London, UK School not having such a good time, so escapism like this show was great. I never really did watch shows about kids, I wanted to see grown up situations, like Dr. Who and Ace of Wands. What I noticed about the show after receiving the DVD was that Ace of Wands is actually still quite watchable - some shows from the early 1970's I certainly can't watch now. I guess they mixed it up for the kid audience, so it was never dull. For some reason, my memory of the show was that it had a lot of atmosphere, but the sets were bad and the acting dire. On re-seeing the shows, that's certainly not the case. All the acting is good, and the sets were perfectly good for what I'm sure was a low budget venture. Michael Mackenzie as Tarot is very good in the lead and in no small way carries the show; at 6'2" he towers over most of the relatively short UK cast, but isn't aloof in the way he plays the role. I'm puzzled why Mackenzie didn't achieve lead status in UK films or other TV shows. No one ever really knows the reason for why one actor become big and others languish. The first two series were wiped, which is a shame because I preferred Judy Loe and Tony Selby. Nowadays, it's not that unusual to see a UK star do children's TV. In the 1970's, it wasn't exactly a mark of accomplishment, and perhaps both actors felt career-wise it wasn't a good idea to hang around. Petra Markham (sister-in-law of Vanessa Redgrave) and Roy Holder are good enough in their roles in the third series though. The stories often used to hinge on telepathy between Tarot and his assistant (Loe or Markham) and some were quite inventive. The show was replaced on ITV by the "Tomorrow People", which can actually be streamed on Amazon (I'm sure this is due to their status of being shown in the US - Ace of Wands wasn't). I'm hoping Thames sold the show to another European countries and that someday the wiped episodes will surface. In the meantime, what's available is a good idea of what the show brought to kids in the early 1970's.
jc-osms
I suppose everyone has one television programme from their childhood which stays with them down the years and evokes instant nostalgia at the slightest remembrance. Well for me "Ace Of Wands" is that show, as, aged about 10 I would rush home after school to watch it before going out to play with friends.Of course, the groovy, spacey, psychedelic theme tune, by later Status Quo side-man Andy Bown was a great hook for starters, but I remember the stories too as being exciting and imaginative, each episode invariably ending Dr Who-style, with a cliffhanger of some type.Michael MacKenzie was Tarot, a magician/conjurer hero long before the days of Jonathon Creek, leading his companions in and out of danger, the peril usually supernatural in some way. I duly bought the boxed DVD of the surviving third series and of course it's not as good as I remember, with iffy special effects, dodgy sets and some unconvincing acting. But you know, nothing can take away the nostalgic glow I get just remembering it again and would dearly love to see the sadly wiped first two series.That, however, is a mystery that even Tarot himself couldn't solve these forty odd years since...
screenman
Here was another series from that late 1960's to early 1970's period of inspirational television creation.The lead character, 'Tarot', was a handsome young bloke who was gifted in the art of conjuring and 'magic'. Each week, assisted by his charming associate Lulu (or something similar) he found his peculiar talents called into service to deal with a variety of suspicious and seemingly supernatural issues.Although it was very entertaining, I don't think the idea was explored half as far as it might have been. He really could have engaged with a supernatural world and become a kind of 'Dr Who', of the paranormal, an 'Amazing Mr Blunden' for the 20th century. When you think how long the 'Timelord' has lasted, with his now international fan base, it gives some idea of how successful 'Tarot' and the 'Ace Of Wands' might have been if only it had caught on. I suspect a serious anti-hero was lacking.But production values were, as usual, telly-tacky, and the idea badly conceived. It lasted for less than a year. What could have been a megabuck franchise in the long-term, with a universally popular hero, faded into obscurity instead. Such is the British way.It had a catchy little theme tune too.
