|
Post by geode on Jul 11, 2018 17:56:19 GMT
Yes, it seems that way, Mike, and the "new approach", while it probably helped the series in the short run, in the long term it sort of soured it in reruns. Who the hell wants to watch those final three seasons now? MI was sort of a spy show, all about intrigue, much of it foreign, not The F.B.I.. Most people who want to watch the show, which doesn't seem to have quite as big a fanbase as many other popular old series of the same era, want to see the Martin Landau-Barbara Bain episodes anyway. There was a general consensus even at the time, and this nothing against Leonard Nimoy as Landau's replacement, that when Martin left the show it went downhill; and nobody I knew cared for the new "babes" they hired a regulars. Hot and all that, but not Barbara. I never cared much for Leonard Nimoy as a replacement, but for me the series had already taken a nosedive before that. I had avidly watched it when Steven Hill's Mr. Brigg's headed the IMF. For me it just wasn't as good without him and I watched it haphazardly until Landau and wife exited. I did as well.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Jul 11, 2018 21:35:54 GMT
I'm not sure if this thread should be in the '50s or '60s. Are there any fans here? I slightly prefer the hour long episodes to the half hour. Partly because I love that early-mid '60s TV era. Favorite episodes: Breakdown (AHP), The Creeper (AHP), Where the Woodbine Twineth (AHH), An Unlocked Window (AHH), The Magic Shop (AHH), The Jar (AHH). "Breakdown" remains my favorite episode. It introduced me to Joseph Cotten which caused me to watch what would become my favorite film when it came on TV...The Third Man. Other episodes that remain in memory include "A Lamb to the Slaughter" and the intriguing "Consider her Ways" from the hour-long episodes. Breakdown is a standout episode, I agree. Anyone who doubts Cotten's prowess as an actor should watch this one and see how his performance holds the viewer's attention riveted while doing, through much of the hour, nothing more than having the camera linger on closeups of his face. Astonishing job, and definitely one of AHP's finest.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jul 12, 2018 5:30:07 GMT
"Breakdown" remains my favorite episode. It introduced me to Joseph Cotten which caused me to watch what would become my favorite film when it came on TV...The Third Man. Other episodes that remain in memory include "A Lamb to the Slaughter" and the intriguing "Consider her Ways" from the hour-long episodes. Breakdown is a standout episode, I agree. Anyone who doubts Cotten's prowess as an actor should watch this one and see how his performance holds the viewer's attention riveted while doing, through much of the hour, nothing more than having the camera linger on closeups of his face. Astonishing job, and definitely one of AHP's finest. In addition we have Cotten's marvellous voice complimenting his performance.
|
|
|
Post by telegonus on Jul 14, 2018 0:46:44 GMT
Another standout Hitch half-hour, broadcast last night, and at least my third viewing, The Foghorn, maybe my favorite of all the half-hours. It's a haunting, elliptical episode, likely difficult for many to follow; I love it. Barbara Bel Geddes and Michael Rennie are superb, and perfectly cast in their roles. The short story it's adapted from, by Gertrude Atherton, is also outstanding.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Jul 14, 2018 13:11:14 GMT
Breakdown is a standout episode, I agree. Anyone who doubts Cotten's prowess as an actor should watch this one and see how his performance holds the viewer's attention riveted while doing, through much of the hour, nothing more than having the camera linger on closeups of his face. Astonishing job, and definitely one of AHP's finest. In addition we have Cotten's marvellous voice complimenting his performance. Absolutely. I think Hitch was one of the few directors who really appreciated what a marvellous instrument he was utilizing in that voice.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jul 15, 2018 12:46:58 GMT
Another standout Hitch half-hour, broadcast last night, and at least my third viewing, The Foghorn, maybe my favorite of all the half-hours. It's a haunting, elliptical episode, likely difficult for many to follow; I love it. Barbara Bel Geddes and Michael Rennie are superb, and perfectly cast in their roles. The short story it's adapted from, by Gertrude Atherton, is also outstanding. Since you mentioned this one I decided to watch it. I remembered nothing about it so this was probably my first encounter. The default about setting is to assume a contemporary time frame unless given evidence to the contrary. For fashion I quickly assumed it was set between 1910-1920 and from dialogue that the world is not at war so the earlier part of that range was likely. Most period piece shows set up a reason for being set I the past but this one seemed to go out of its way not to do so. It could almost have been set in 2018 except for costuming. This caused me to come to a conclusion about the ending. I was correct. I found this a passable episode because of its cast. You thought some would find it confusing, but I guess I found it too straight-foward.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Jul 15, 2018 13:34:43 GMT
Yes, Geode the tone (or tones, as the case may be) of the different UNCLE seasons are quite different. The first two seasons were more sophisticated, featured a dry sense of humor, seldom went over the top. I found the first season to be the best in this regard. Another show, Mission: Impossible, also changed, as it felt more serious and "international" (back lot style, but no matter)early on, while becoming somewhat more American in flavor, with the IM folks going after mobsters and counterfeiter types. In these cases, I don't think that the change to color was that big a deal; more like changing times. The move to all-color evening programming was in this sense emblematic of the way prime time television was changing rather than the cause of it. More OT, but very true about the UNCLE change in tone--going from a relatively adult spy spoof to near-comic book in the latter seasons. One show that did fall apart precisely because of the move to color was Dangerman (a/k/a Secret Agent); the star, Patrick McGoohan, had resisted the switchover from black and white, eventually had to give way, but felt that the actual content and tone of the scripts were being 'dumbed down' as part of this (he may have been right, if the last two episodes, filmed in color and later strung together into a feature-length film, are any reliable indication). He ended up leaving the series in preference to continuing in the new format. Of course, he also had his pet opus The Prisoner waiting in the wings: ironically, Patrick utilized an imaginative and evocative use of color design throughout that most unique series.
|
|
|
Post by telegonus on Jul 15, 2018 16:50:32 GMT
Another standout Hitch half-hour, broadcast last night, and at least my third viewing, The Foghorn, maybe my favorite of all the half-hours. It's a haunting, elliptical episode, likely difficult for many to follow; I love it. Barbara Bel Geddes and Michael Rennie are superb, and perfectly cast in their roles. The short story it's adapted from, by Gertrude Atherton, is also outstanding. Since you mentioned this one I decided to watch it. I remembered nothing about it so this was probably my first encounter. The default about setting is to assume a contemporary time frame unless given evidence to the contrary. For fashion I quickly assumed it was set between 1910-1920 and from dialogue that the world is not at war so the earlier part of that range was likely. Most period piece shows set up a reason for being set I the past but this one seemed to go out of its way not to do so. It could almost have been set in 2018 except for costuming. This caused me to come to a conclusion about the ending. I was correct. I found this a passable episode because of its cast. You thought some would find it confusing, but I guess I found it too straight-foward That's interesting, Geode. The presentation of the characters and events in The Foghorn struck me as so vague and dreamy as to raise the issue of whether the main character was simply making the whole thing up or if the narrative actually occurred. That the framing setting seemed like it was institutional, anything from a madhouse to a nunnery, raised questions in my mind. Also, the camera kept the Bel Geddes character at somewhat of a distance till near the end, and I was aware of this, and I couldn't help but wonder why. It's not like it was set up to be a story about an eighty year old woman. In the final moments this became clear. On the other hand, upon repeat viewing certain things did become clear, such as the early mention of a telephone call, which meant it had to be after 1900,--but how long after?--and this was a virtual red herring aspect of the story given the literal fifty years that had elapsed from the time of the story itself and what we learn from the doctor about how long Bel Geddes had been ill. I found this somewhat of a stretch thinking back on it but it works for the viewer who's simply watching the episode rather than trying to determine its time frames. I can only wonder how this all played when the show was first broadcast in 1958. Overall, I thought it was outstanding.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jul 16, 2018 10:26:08 GMT
Since you mentioned this one I decided to watch it. I remembered nothing about it so this was probably my first encounter. The default about setting is to assume a contemporary time frame unless given evidence to the contrary. For fashion I quickly assumed it was set between 1910-1920 and from dialogue that the world is not at war so the earlier part of that range was likely. Most period piece shows set up a reason for being set I the past but this one seemed to go out of its way not to do so. It could almost have been set in 2018 except for costuming. This caused me to come to a conclusion about the ending. I was correct. I found this a passable episode because of its cast. You thought some would find it confusing, but I guess I found it too straight-foward That's interesting, Geode. The presentation of the characters and events in The Foghorn struck me as so vague and dreamy as to raise the issue of whether the main character was simply making the whole thing up or if the narrative actually occurred. That the framing setting seemed like it was institutional, anything from a madhouse to a nunnery, raised questions in my mind. Also, the camera kept the Bel Geddes character at somewhat of a distance till near the end, and I was aware of this, and I couldn't help but wonder why. It's not like it was set up to be a story about an eighty year old woman. In the final moments this became clear. On the other hand, upon repeat viewing certain things did become clear, such as the early mention of a telephone call, which meant it had to be after 1900,--but how long after?--and this was a virtual red herring aspect of the story given the literal fifty years that had elapsed from the time of the story itself and what we learn from the doctor about how long Bel Geddes had been ill. I found this somewhat of a stretch thinking back on it but it works for the viewer who's simply watching the episode rather than trying to determine its time frames. I can only wonder how this all played when the show was first broadcast in 1958. Overall, I thought it was outstanding. I guess it is my interest in history that causes me to wonder where and when I am when a show starts. Sometimes period pieces that are adapted are just being true to the setting in the original, which may have been published a long time before. In this case the original short story also seems to cover two time frames, with the central character a young woman, and then a much older woman. All in all it is a fairly accurate adaptation except for updating it to a contemporary time, presumably of 1958 versus that in the short story that is presumably of the early 30s when it was published. We can't see the costuming in the short story but other clues box in the time element, in particular Alcatraz. It is referred to as a prison, but with a military aspect. That most likely puts the earliest date at 1912 when the army prison opened there. So the filmed story probably adheres closely to original in the early time frame. The big "reveal" for me is not about being institutionalized, but her age. The short story makes less logical sense than the filmed episode. This depends on the character's relative ages. If the presumption of both has having her in her mid-20s in the main scenes, she would only be about in her mid-40s in the short story in other scenes. In the AH show she would be in her mid 70s. In IMDb user reviews some people are rather clueless in regards to setting. One thought it was set during the height of the Gold Rush in the 19th Century which is impossible with the telephone reference and rhe costuming, or even regarding the freighter and probably some foghorn references. Another said the couple should have visited Coit Tower which would not exist until about 20 years later. Costuming and hair styles should be accurate in period pieces in my opinion. Sometimes no attempt is made. One of the worst was "The Dirty Dozen" ...I don't remember the women's costumes and hair styles bothering me when I saw it in first release. But now the mid-60s fashion and hair looks very "dated" and its use in this film is glaring. By most series standards this is a pretty good show, but I think by the standards of AHP it is rather mediocre.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jul 16, 2018 11:20:17 GMT
Yes, Geode the tone (or tones, as the case may be) of the different UNCLE seasons are quite different. The first two seasons were more sophisticated, featured a dry sense of humor, seldom went over the top. I found the first season to be the best in this regard. Another show, Mission: Impossible, also changed, as it felt more serious and "international" (back lot style, but no matter)early on, while becoming somewhat more American in flavor, with the IM folks going after mobsters and counterfeiter types. In these cases, I don't think that the change to color was that big a deal; more like changing times. The move to all-color evening programming was in this sense emblematic of the way prime time television was changing rather than the cause of it. More OT, but very true about the UNCLE change in tone--going from a relatively adult spy spoof to near-comic book in the latter seasons. One show that did fall apart precisely because of the move to color was Dangerman (a/k/a Secret Agent); the star, Patrick McGoohan, had resisted the switchover from black and white, eventually had to give way, but felt that the actual content and tone of the scripts were being 'dumbed down' as part of this (he may have been right, if the last two episodes, filmed in color and later strung together into a feature-length film, are any reliable indication). He ended up leaving the series in preference to continuing in the new format. Of course, he also had his pet opus The Prisoner waiting in the wings: ironically, Patrick utilized an imaginative and evocative use of color design throughout that most unique series. I haven't watched "The Prisoner" since it was first telecast, and at that time I didn't associate it with this earlier show so I was surprised to find two or three years ago that some people think "Number 6" was John Drake.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Jul 16, 2018 12:13:18 GMT
More OT, but very true about the UNCLE change in tone--going from a relatively adult spy spoof to near-comic book in the latter seasons. One show that did fall apart precisely because of the move to color was Dangerman (a/k/a Secret Agent); the star, Patrick McGoohan, had resisted the switchover from black and white, eventually had to give way, but felt that the actual content and tone of the scripts were being 'dumbed down' as part of this (he may have been right, if the last two episodes, filmed in color and later strung together into a feature-length film, are any reliable indication). He ended up leaving the series in preference to continuing in the new format. Of course, he also had his pet opus The Prisoner waiting in the wings: ironically, Patrick utilized an imaginative and evocative use of color design throughout that most unique series. I haven't watched "The Prisoner" since it was first telecast, and at that time I didn't associate it with this earlier show so I was surprised to find two or three years ago that some people think "Number 6" was John Drake. That's probably the biggest legend connected to the series, and one PMG seemed to enjoy teasing fans who were looking for clues/meanings within the show about. There are entire camps devoted to pitched controversy regarding the He was Drake/ He wasn't Drake idea, lol.
|
|