Reviews

This is an episode of "Thriller" from its sixth and final season. By this time the show was displaying signs of fatigue and it comes through in the uneven quality of this installment. All the same it is good fare and rather better than initial impressions might suggest.

Sandy Marshall is an American woman married to a successful British insurance agent. She is also confined to a wheelchair after a terrible accident in which her new sports car crashed. A heatwave has hit Britain but she is less than delighted. She cannot get out of her flat and her husband has gone away on business, leaving her alone. A number of local women have been strangled and she is very anxious. She tries to reassure herself but without success. Her friend Betty offers support and promises to meet her for a drink. However Betty never arrives and Sandy fears the worst. A visit from a personable neighbour, Tom, seems to offer protection - or does it?

The story premise above promises a very gripping tale but doesn't quite deliver. Essentially it is a "whodunit", not unlike the earlier "If It's a Man, Hang Up!" but lacks the latter's quality, never quite seizing the imagination. However there is much more there than might first be apparent. The final part of the story, mostly occupied by Sandy and Tom, is very good as both characters slowly lose their composure while the police finally feel they have their man. The conclusion is quite clever and delivers a fine twist which within a stronger episode would have been even more satisfying. It is spoiled a little though by a strange final shot which doesn't really wrap up events properly.

Characters and acting performances are quite good without reaching any heights. Tom Packer, well conveyed by Max Mason, is probably most interesting as Sandy's neighbour. Tom appears very friendly but there is more to him than meets the eye. He is capable of great perception, offering some powerful, if discomforting insights on her accident. His mother was confined to a wheelchair and this provides a bond between him and Sandy. However it does make him anxious and at times disturbing.

Bartlett, the caretaker (or janitor as he is referred to throughout in deference to the Americans!), is very intriguing and an obvious suspect. Not only is he lazy, not attending to problems in the building, but he has a disturbing fixation on mothers and babies, covering his office with pictures of them cut from magazines. A very creepy character very well-acted by Ronald Lacey. This role isn't dissimilar to the suspect caretaker in "If It's a Man" but is a rather more sinister figure.

TP McKenna, who appeared in the very first outing of "Thriller" returned, this time as the detective Frampton. The show almost always portrayed detectives in eccentric, somewhat ambiguous, lights and this is no exception. Frampton seems happy to let his assistant do almost all the work while he lounges around, scoffing at the "police college" theories offered. However he does hit on some smart insights. Not memorable but still interesting - like the story in general.

Carroll Baker as Sandy must have been one of the biggest American names to star in the show. She does a good job as the vulnerable and anxious Sandy. However she doesn't convey the same warmth and therefore inspire the same feeling as other "Thriller" "damsels-in-distress". Brenda Cavendish, best known for her part as Nell in the fifth series of "Public Eye", does well as Sandy's friend Betty.

The direction (by James Ormerod) and music are well up to the usual high standard. Altogether a capable if not outstanding outing which might have been more successful with better casting and a little improvement in the writing. Omitting the dreadfully wooden news reports would certainly have helped!

One of the final stories within the "Thriller" anthology. Although it doesn't reach any particular heights it is a very professional offering with much to commend it.

It opens with opera singer Tony Risanti decrying his own ability to a tramp he has met. He tells the tramp that he will kill him and use his body to fake his own death but the tramp is too drunk to take any notice. Soon after he knocks him out.

Action then switches to a starring performance by opera singer Anna Cartell. Anna seems to have the musical world at her feet and is soon to marry high-flying American diplomat Hal Bridie. So far, so good. The only slight problem is tension with her protective manager Sam when she tells him of her plans to retire when she marries Hal.

However when inspecting a new house she hears a man singing and is shocked to see her husband Tony whom she had presumed long dead. He tells her that he faked his death and now intends to return, spelling scandal for Anna and her husband-to-be. He will disappear though if she pays him - blackmail. In a struggle she pushes him and he falls and bangs his head. There is no response and she fears she has killed him.

From this point her composure disintegrates. Matters become far worse when she sees Tony at her concerts. She goes back to the house but can find no trace of his body. Eventually she tells Sam. He offers to help. It is help that will have a high price.

Although rather low-key this is still an intriguing tale. The operatic setting is an unusual one and quite well-done. Susan Flannery is a very engaging presence as Anna and the performances of Stuart Damon as Hal and Keith Baxter as Tony are good. The honours though are taken by Sydney Tafler as Sam. The English Tafler is a very convincing American and contributes impressively to an enigmatic character.

The US movie version is much the most likely to be seen. It opens with a very violent scene that bears only a tangential relationship to the later action and is out of tune with the understated attitude to violence of the show. This sort of liberty was rather typical of the American titles added in post-production and was ill-advised. However there is the virtue of excellent dark, atonal piano music over the end titles. The US version also benefits from a better title than the original British one with its clumsy alliteration.

The ending may come across as a little flat and undramatic, as well as being rather abrupt, but it has the virtue of breaking with the clichéd climaxes that typify the genre. Although there are better episodes to see this is still worthy of examination.

This installment of "Thriller" aired at the end of its brilliant third series. Unfortunately it is way below the standard of the five preceding episodes but it is still very sound and profits from further watching.

Bernard Peel (Christopher George) is an American businessman living in England, married to an exceptional corporate lawyer. He returns home from a party one evening, has a drink and falls asleep. He is woken by the doorbell and is alarmed to find the police. They tell him they have been tipped-off about an incident involving him and his wife. He is utterly incredulous. An inspection of the house shows evidence of a violent incident and of a female visitor, but Bernard denies all knowledge. Matters get far worse when the boot of his car is opened and his wife's body is found.

Bernard is arrested by the police for the murder of his wife. He strenuously denies responsibility and calls in the services of the foppish but remarkably skilled private investigator Matthew Earp (Dinsdale Landen). Earp approaches the case with typical incisiveness and is true to his word that he will prove who killed Jennifer Peel.

On screen this is a rather pedestrian outing, never generating the tension and edge of many other stories. However it is very professional, and doesn't embody some of the glaring weaknesses of some other lesser episodes. Its great virtue is the return of the marvelous Matthew Earp. Earp is a deliciously witty and entertaining figure but never just a comic presence or a caricature. There is also a very sharp brain, and he is a brave and skilled fighter as the climax demonstrates. Dinsdale Landen's performance, as in Earp's other appearance in "An Echo Of Theresa", is perfect. There are also some neat exchanges with Gifford (Edward Hardwicke) the detective who quietly resents Earp's involvement as well as his enormous fees.

Christopher George does a fair job as Bernard Peel. Hans Meyer has a nice part as a director of Peel's business who is clearly suspicious of him and unhappy about being down the pecking order. There is a note-worthy appearance by Richard Todd as Tulliver, one of Bernard's colleagues.

1974 was a big year for the martial arts and they make an appearance here, with karate being employed by one unlikely assassin. Unfortunately they also make for a very silly piece of art-work on the American end-titles in which a fist above Peel's head appears to be pulling his hair! These "artistic" end-titles were almost always appalling and are best avoided.

The climax features an extraordinary twist that is a great bonus - one of the most striking in the show. Maybe if the preceding hour had been more memorable this could have been one of the better installments of a great programme.

Although this installment of "Thriller" is generally popular with fans I've never been keen on it and consider it one of the weaker ones. All the same it is a pretty professional job and does have its merits.

American Robert Stone comes to England searching for his brother who went missing shortly after arriving in a quaint village and meeting a beautiful young woman called Dominie. At the village pub he gets a warm welcome but when he visits Dominie's stately home he gets short shrift from the housekeeper. Fortunately for him Dominie is more welcoming.

An attraction develops between Robert and Dominie but it is uneasy. She has been hurt by what she sees as past rejections. It is also clear that her guardian, a German cum-English "gentleman", Jonathan Lanceford is not keen on the relationship at all. Robert gets the message from other quarters that his presence isn't wanted but he persists. He isn't frightened off even when Fred, a local rat-catcher who had given him some interesting information, dies in a mysterious accident. The signs are that Robert could be next...

The story premise is quite promising but somehow the result on screen doesn't really work. There is an Edgar Allan Poe theme running throughout, with Jonathan Lanceford obsessed with the writer. This is an interesting angle but doesn't make the impact expected.

The performances are, for the most part unremarkable, although quite competent. There are two major exceptions. Anton Diffring is very impressive, making Jonathan very sinister. Russell Hunter does a very good job as the permanently drunk but revealing Fred. The direction is quite good, particularly in some night shots and light and dark are well-handled in scenes in the dark recesses of the house and the accompanying party. At no point though was this as unsettling as it could have been.

An irritating aspect is the use of unconvincing rural accents in the village pub. This is an echo of the yokel scenes in the village store in "A Place To Die", an episode from the previous season also written by Terence Feely. On a more positive if trivial note it is refreshing to see a pub full of working class beer drinkers in a show otherwise dominated by privileged people downing spirits. "Thriller" was not noted for its humour but there is a rare joke here. Robert is asked how they deal with foxes in America. He dryly replies, "Well in our country the foxes shoot back"!

The final scene I find one of the worst endings to a story - it is horribly cheesy and out of keeping with the very serious action beforehand, in particular detracting from a fairly effective climax.

Overall then a mixed bag. I would recommend checking other installments of "Thriller" first but this is still worthy of attention.

The opening episode of the third series of "Thriller" set off a run of five marvelous stories. This is one of the better known ones as it received a commercial video release in 1994. All the same too few people have seen it, and they have certainly missed out, although maybe not for much longer.

Mark Walker is an attractive, charming young man who marries two older women - and then kills them. He is very clever because he disguises their deaths as tragic accidents - drowning in the bath. His only problem is the solicitor acting for the first woman, who suspects him of murder but cannot convince the police.

While visiting a health club he meets Stella, a very attractive young woman whom he pursues simply for pleasure. However he very soon is attracted by an extremely rich older widow called Angie. Everything seems to be going to Mark's plan, and it looks as if he will soon be a wealthy widower for the third time. However Mark is a hunted man, and not necessarily in the way he expects...

Almost every aspect of this production is brilliantly done. The story is captivating and features an extraordinary and very poetic climax. That climax is based, it has to be said, on a rather large plot hole but there is no doubting that it is superb to watch.

There is an array of great characters. Mark Walker is a very complex man. Obviously he is dangerous and ruthless but he does have real charm and it is clear that he is coping with a very traumatic event from his past. Late in the episode the turn of events makes us sympathies for him - a mark of fine narrative. Stella and Angie seem very different - Stella is elegant, refined and calm while Angie is loud and unattractive. However both share an independent spirit. Oliver Mason, the solicitor, impresses with his dignity,incisiveness and determination. Freddy the barman is an avuncular, very likable figure. The various other characters are very effectively done.

The acting is splendid. Michael Jayston as Mark, and Helen Mirren as Stella are the obvious candidates, with the latter especially impressive. However the supporting cast is extremely strong. Particularly worthy of mention are Michael Gwynn as Mason, Arthur English as Freddy (a very good straight performance by a comic performer) and Richard Hampton as a very steely detective. John Sichel's direction complements things perfectly.

The brilliant (if improbable) climax also has the bonus of raising a very interesting moral dilemma. A future DVD release is quite possible so hopefully you'll be able to enjoy this and try to work out that dilemma for yourself!

A middle-ranking outing of Brian Clemens's "Thriller" series. While not one of the best it is still very effective.

An excellent teaser leads into a young woman (Babs) spotting a great job opportunity, involving lots of travel, in a newspaper. To her consternation her flatmate has already found the job and snapped it up. Nothing more is heard for some time until the same advert reappears. Babs and her other flatmate Helen assume that their friend got fired, which they regard with a little glee. This time Babs has an unobstructed run and gets the job. She also doesn't make contact later and Helen is a little worried when she visits the employer's office and finds it empty. Her worries multiply considerably when she visits the American Embassy to change her passport details and finds a woman there answering to exactly the same description as Babs. Helen's new husband Charley believes it to be just coincidence but Helen disagrees and starts to investigate.

This is one of "Thriller"'s espionage episodes. The "employers", if that's quite the right word for them, are certainly not what they seem. The two men fronting this organisation, Carter and Gifford, are a curious pairing. Carter is a genteel man who seems to find his organisation's activities ghastly if necessary. His colleague Gifford is the man who does the dirty work, and seems to delight in doing so. There is a clear tension between the two that works extremely well. Both characters are highly memorable. One irritating aspect though is Gifford repeatedly using the word "pig" after Carter describes him as one.

There are other good supporting characters. Babs's brother, a journalist, briefly but powerfully appears inquiring into her disappearance. After a rather cringe-worthy entrance in which he tries to chat up Helen, who he assumes is single, he gets down to business. It is soon apparent that he knows rather more about Carter than the latter would like and there is a great scene in which the two, and Gifford, meet. Hanley is the head of security at the embassy who is a disconcerting and rather enigmatic figure.

Julian Glover (Gifford) and James Maxwell (Carter) are both fine, helped of course by great writing. Other performances are quite good without anyone being truly memorable. Kim Darby is not the most magnetic of "Thriller" heroines as Helen Masters but she still performs soundly. Keith Barron, who plays Charley, is of course a very familiar TV face and voice. The writing and direction are up to the usual standards with the murder scenes especially chilling.

The story is engaging but certainly picks up momentum towards the end. The climax is generally impressive with a number of twists, let down a little by one inadvertently amusing sequence and an ending that isn't as polished as it could be. On the whole though a strong piece of television.

I first saw this film many years ago and was struck by the fact that for a "comedy" I found it not just utterly unfunny but couldn't actually see much attempt at humour at all. The tone just seemed very bleak and depressing.

Unfortunately I don't see any need on review to be more generous. This is not to say that all comedy must be "laugh-a-minute" but this is very limp. I suppose the humour is supposed to be gently satirical, poking fun at the attempts at social climbing of Hancock's screen wife and the snobbery of the local dignitaries. However if this is so it really likes bite. Some of the more obvious attempts at comedy such as the scene in the ice cream parlour I find very irritating.

Possibly the film might be taken as an early attempt at comedy-drama. However as drama it also fails to hit the mark - it really is hard going. The contrast with Hancock's excellent previous film "The Rebel" is all too stark, and not just in the switch from vibrant colour to black and white. Maybe the often outlandish world of modern art made comedy easier in the earlier film but the problem is much deeper than that. In his TV shows Hancock had shown he could make great comedy out of mundane circumstances. The absence of Galton and Simpson as writers would appear to be the key problem. Hancock never made much impression without them.

This film will strike most viewers as evidence of Hancock's sad decline in the 1960's, although other comments suggest it does work for some. However there is much still to delight in his earlier work - a great legacy - and it is best to stick with that.

I really liked this as a TV series in the past. I haven't seen an episode in many years and this film is the only evidence I've encountered recently. It is a desperate disappointment.

This feeling isn't that surprising. In the 1970's most major British sitcoms were turned into film versions, every time with inferior results. The best of these sitcoms, like "Steptoe and Son", "Porridge" and "Rising Damp" still managed to produce quite good films. However the results with the second rank comedies were generally poor. This is such an example.

It is difficult to turn a 25-30 minutes format into a workable feature film. The writers and producers always took the characters out of their original situation and then struggled to keep quality and pace going for 90 minutes. Here the characters are sent to Blackpool for part of the film (a holiday being a standard plot device) and then pad the rest out with a marriage. Where "Nearest and Dearest" especially struggles is its lack of real comic quality. The best sitcoms had really well-drawn characters and were capable of social comment and even pathos. It is one of those sitcoms that relies very heavily on innuendo, which has not fared well over time. There are the habitual comic confusions of the time over sex, with any suggestion of pre-marital action provoking apoplexy in those more traditional times. It also has the standard inclusion of some large-breasted young women for laughs, an approach we have rather transcended.

Other humour comes from Nellie's malapropisms. These are quite amusing in small doses but lose their impact over time. Most frustrating is the use of stupid behaviour in a feeble attempt to amuse.

There are some funny lines and the film will certainly hold some nostalgic interest for fans of the series and of the seventies in general. However after seeing this it is hard to seriously see those days as the halcyon ones they are often portrayed - certainly not in terms of comedy. I think we should be thankful that our modern favourites are not subjected to this sort of demolition on the big screen.

The penultimate outing for "Thriller" is in my opinion its worst, rivaled by "Kiss Me and Die" and "Murder Motel". It was a sign that this splendid series had run its course, at least at that point.

The action opens with the fatal stabbing of a teenage girl in a forest. The murder is unsolved after five years so her uncle and guardian, Arnold Tully, visits the office of J. Baxter, a private eye. When he gets there he meets J. Baxter's wife, Jody. and assumes she is the private eye before she can explain. She takes on the job anyway. She finds that everyone assumes the killer is a local actor called Peter Ingram, but there has been insufficient evidence to charge him. While Ingram is an unpleasant figure with an unhealthy interest in women, Jody is not convinced of his guilt. Jody makes good use of some apparently trivial details but her search for the killer leads her into danger.

Although this story outline could have led to a good episode the actual results are very disappointing. Almost all the characters are dislikeable, with only Jody attracting any positive feeling. While Tully has clearly had a tragic past his obsessive attitude towards his niece is rather creepy and, if not pedophile, is certainly too close. Ingram is one of several characters, including Tully with a tiresome preoccupation with the theatre. The detective George, played by Brian Blessed, is rather boorish. Mrs. Fitch, Tully's Cockney housekeeper, is dismally deferential in a way more suited to the Victorian age. Jody's semi-estranged husband Johnny has nothing useful to contribute.

The acting performances are sound but fail to give a mediocre offering a necessary lift. This is despite the presence of renowned actors such as Blessed and Freddie Jones as Tully, although neither is a favourite of mine with their expansive styles. Joanna Pettet as Jody is quite effective and certainly makes an attractive sight for the male viewer.

Attitudes to women in "Thriller" were frequently patronizing and predatory but here these tendencies become overbearing - the treatment of both the murdered girl and Jody demonstrate this. Given the grim murder storyline the presence of some supposed humour in the interchanges between Jody and Johnny is quite out-of-place. The final scene is a sickly piece of nonsense that would better suit "Hart To Hart".

That last scene is a shame because the climax to the murder story was quite well done. It ends in a fairly low-key but quite poignant fashion. It breaks from the often-clichéd dramatic confrontations that ended many episodes, although a little more "bite" wouldn't have gone amiss.

This is really for "Thriller" completists only but hopefully it makes more impact if you do encounter it.

This was the final episode of "Thriller"'s first season. It is the least effective but it is still pretty good and has more to commend it than first seems.

The action starts with the sudden and mysterious death of Tony Mansell's wife. Some months later he unexpectedly decides to write to Modernmates, a marriage bureau. Almost as soon as he sends the letter he receives a reply from the seductively-voiced Clara Panton. When they meet they immediately hit it off. That same afternoon Tony asks her to marry him.

The marriage is a happy one. However Tony's housekeeper and secretary are both suspicious of Clara. There are a few strange events and small accidents. However later things take a much more violent turn. Tony's secretary feels she must investigate while he seems totally unaware of the terrible danger he faces.

This installment has some very powerful elements but it doesn't really seize the imagination or frighten in the way that some other supernatural outings such as "Nurse Will Make It Better" and "A Place To Die" do. This is chiefly due to the central character of Clara. Clara, played by Diane Cilento, can be very disturbing, notably when she is casting her spells (these scenes are very skilfully directed). However her over-the-top dress, make-up and jewellery - she literally rattles at times - make her hard to take entirely seriously. A more understated look would have helped. An interesting comparison is with Diana Dors's witch in "Nurse" who was a far more unsettling figure. Maybe the difference is partly due to the acting, although Cilento turns in a decent performance all the same.

The casting perhaps is the main reason for the failure to turn a good episode into a great one. All the performances are sound but nobody really excites. The story is certainly a strong one from the impressive Terence Feely. The climax is quite good but hampered by mediocre special effects. Another notable feature is a brief but important role for William Dexter as an eccentric witch-craft expert with a broad Welsh accent - very unusual to hear any accents in this sort of production.

To conclude, while this would certainly not be my first choice of "Thriller" viewing it does have considerable merit and is worth just over an hour of your time if chance arises.

A middling but still impressive episode of "Thriller" towards the end of its final season. In style it is very different to the others. It focuses largely on disputes between rival professional, proletarian criminals and while there are elements of the usual series many of the characters and basic storyline would not be out-of-place in "The Sweeney" or other hard-boiled police production.

The story opens with Charley returning home after ten years in prison for bank robbery. He comes in saying, "Charley's home and Charley's rich," to his friend Busby. However he then finds that Busby has been killed. Some rival criminals, led by the refined but ruthless Gadder, appear. They know that he still has money and want a share of it. Charlie makes an audacious escape but is injured in the process. He gets away to Dorset but has been followed - and not just by Gadder's mob. He is trying to get to his brother who has a garage and cafe there but can he avoid the dangerous Gadder? Also heading there are two American tourists who prove to be in the wrong place at the wrong time...

The title suggests that this is about the two tourists, played by Susan Hampshire and Gabrielle Drake. In reality their parts are small and unmemorable. They are really just pawns in the bigger drama of criminal infighting. Although these criminals are certainly prepared to kill their basic motivation is money and they are very different to the show's usual array of psychopaths. These characters are extremely well-drawn, most of all Gadder, excellently played by Dudley Sutton, whose vindictiveness and quiet menace is great viewing. Charley, very well-played by David Daker, is a rather more sympathetic figure but still violent in self-defence and pursuit of his missing money. His brother Sonny, in a strong performance by Bob Hoskins, is more sympathetic still. Although he is prepared to help Charley it is clear that he is essentially law-abiding and wants to stay out of trouble. However he is put in a terrible situation.

There are some other fine characters and performances. Sonny's hapless wife (Rita Giovannini) is terrorised by Gadder. Kemp (John Bailey) is an alcoholic, struck-off doctor, a pathetic individual who has the misfortune to get embroiled in these affairs and likewise is menaced by Gadder and his mob. Granville Saxton plays an enigmatic, sinister-seeming vagrant who seems to be looking for trouble.

Unfortunately there are also weak characters and indifferent performances. Sally and Tracy, the two tourists are dull, and Tracy is infuriating with her inane chatter. Although the characters are American they are played with unconvincing accents by English actresses. Obviously this was done to appease the important US market but I do wonder what Americans thought of such "impersonators". This happened in some other stories and was usually less than satisfactory. Much better to hire genuine Americans or settle for English characters.

The police roles are fairly unimpressive. Most are still adequate but a rural constable, played by John Flanagan, is feeble. With an embarrassing accent and slow-wittedness one gets the impression that this was meant to be at least a partly comic role, which doesn't fit with a tense drama. It also wastes John Flanagan who had shown his talents in "The Double Kill".

One detective also delivers the line that Charley is an old-time criminal who "was only violent to his own sort, never the public." I'm not sure how someone can rob banks without threatening and harming the public but old stereotypes die hard. Discussion between the officers does though raise interesting debate about whether they should care about a violent squabble between criminals - the sort of debate that might surface in "Sweeney"-like dramas.

There are still some tense, traditional "Thriller" aspects to this installment. Robert Tronson's direction is good. There is far more location filming than in other stories which also gives a different air to the action and is very welcome.

The dramatic climax is pretty strong and poignant. It's just a shame that some slips in quality prevent this from being one of the best. However it is still of high quality and would have particular appeal to fans of more conventional crime drama.

This is a below-par installment of the excellent "Thriller" but it is still good viewing and a cut above standard fare.

In the story Abby is an American who arrives in the UK looking for her boyfriend Doug. She comes to a village where she believes he stayed but can find no trace. She has a telepathic link with him, and still hears him call her name; she is worried but still has hope. Also in the village is a bohemian group of mainly American artists, most notably Alan Smerdon, a half-cousin of Abby's she hasn't seen since childhood.

Abby has high hopes of Doug visiting Alan for his birthday party, especially as his sister was also due to come. However neither of them arrive and she then fears the worst. She starts to investigate with dangerous results.

This episode is rather low-key and never quite catches fire, although it always retains some interest. Probably the main drawback is an unappealing set of characters. The American artists are meant to be hippies which puts the story some years out-of-date and there are some unconvincing American accents. The acting generally fails to excite much interest, with Suzanne Neve as Beryl, an English artist, particularly flat. Pamela Franklin does do a decent job as Abby. The direction isn't bad, with some interesting effects, but this doesn't significantly raise the tension.

There are some interesting insights. The bohemian lifestyle of the artists attracts criticism from other characters, most incisively Abby. She highlights their hypocrisy in criticising bourgeois materialist values while happily living off the wealth of their parents.

Although I have been rather cool about this story this is a relative judgment and it still a good way of spending an hour of your time if you come across it.

The "Thriller" anthology is excellent but this outing was the start of a relative decline that continued with one very fine exception throughout the final season. Fans are divided on this episode but I consider it to be one of the weakest. It is still respectable television but pales in comparison to its counterparts.

It opens with a businessman checking into a hotel. Soon after-wards knife-men enter his room. We next see him dead in the shower with blood running down the plughole in an obvious echo of "Psycho". Later an accountant moves in, investigating a possible fraud. He soon disappears to the consternation of his sister who just has time to inform his fiancée before she too is dispatched. She comes looking for him and becomes embroiled in a tale of financial skulduggery and murder.

The performances are quite flat and uninspired. However the chief problem is the story. It seems uncertain whether to be a straight drama or a comedy-drama. The Hitchcock parody, which also includes shots of screeching birds, suggests an attempt at comedy but it is never done whole-heartedly; at the same time the story doesn't really work as a straight thriller.

This is epitomised by the character of Sam, the hotel manager, played by Derek Francis. Francis was a fine comic actor as he had splendidly demonstrated in an earlier and very successful comic story "K Is For Killing". There are flashes of the same quality here but they aren't fulfilled. There is one truly memorable moment when Sam eliminates an over-inquisitive private eye. Sam says, "He called himself an opportunist. Unfortunately for him he called at a most inopportune time." This private eye is played by Allan McClelland. It is a small role but a very enigmatic and intriguing one that leads to some strong scenes.

The ending to the story includes a very silly final shot that symbolises its confused identity. However viewers are still advised to give it a look as there are others who have liked it.

This is a quite brilliant piece of TV drama that sadly has been little seen but deserves a wide audience. Part of the exceptional "Thriller" series, this is one of the very best and would make my top three.

In the story Stan Kay is an American jazz pianist visiting the UK. On a routine call to the bank there is an armed robbery in which his wife is killed and he is blinded. Ten years later Stan returns to the UK and is about to play at an upmarket party. While playing he hears the voice of the robber from the past. He is totally shaken and determined to find him but how can a blind man do this? Unfortunately Stan finds that he is not the only one who is determined to find his man...

This episode is close to flawless. The storyline is truly intriguing. Various suspects among the apparently upstanding party crowd are cleverly signalled. However the performance makes it really special. Stan's dignity and,later, vulnerability are superbly communicated by Bradford Dillman. The direction by Robert Tronson is inspired and makes the latter part of the action, in which Stan is being stalked by the man he can incriminate, almost unbearable to watch. The final minutes are incredibly tense. The last scene is marvelously poignant. One really feels for Stan, whose blindness is handled skilfully and sensitively, really heightening the drama.

All the key acting performances are expertly done. Special note should go to Catherine Schell as Kay's elegant and supportive assistant, Terence Sewards and Ray Smith. Welshman Ray employs a sometimes shaky Cockney accent here but carries his role as a bluff, distrustful security guard with aplomb. There is also a small but significant early role for Nigel Havers as a drunken, lecherous party guest.

The excellent script was the last one for the show written by Terrence Feely. There was a slight fall in quality after this until the great finale "Death In Deep Water", also starring the fine Dillman. If you do get the opportunity, don't miss this neglected gem!

A film featuring lesbian incest and violence could easily descend into a sensationalist mess. This film avoids such pitfalls and is exceptionally good.

The atmosphere throughout the film is extremely dark and is absolutely fitting for such a disturbing tale. Very rarely do any of the characters smile. Tension, guilt and suspicion are present throughout. Most of the film takes place in dark interiors and even the outdoor scenes are marked by grim weather.

There are only four significant characters and all are splendidly written and acted. The direction and design are very strong. Very sensibly, explicit sex and violence scenes are avoided to allow concentration on character and atmosphere.Particular commendation should also go to Stephen Warbeck for his melancholy, sparse, music which fits the action perfectly.

This is a notable film in another respect. No male character is seen at all - there are a couple of male voiceovers but otherwise this is an exclusively female performance. This is a bold move, but very successful. "Sister My Sister" should certainly appeal to any discerning viewer who appreciates thoughtful drama.

While this is not one of the best of Brian Clemens's "Thriller" anthology it is still a very capable effort and is worth seeing if you have the opportunity.

The story opens with an attempt to kill an East European defector. It then switches to a young American woman, Helen Marlow. She is booked onto a luxury train journey to aid her recovery from a nervous breakdown following the death of her fiancee. An Australian traveller, Bob, befriends her but it is tough going as she is still very depressed. Her distress becomes much worse when she seems to see a dead passenger. Bob and others assume she is hallucinating but she is quite convinced. However there are people on the train who are not what they seem, and who have murder on their mind...

This is one of the stories with an espionage theme. It bears similarity with "Good Salary - Prospects - Free Coffin" that aired only four months later. Both episodes centre around elaborate impersonation schemes. These plans are rather stretching credibility but are necessary to a solid story. A key figure in all this, and "star of the show" is the brilliant character of Hilary Vance. Vance is an elderly diplomat, cultured and witheringly sarcastic, demolishing the hapless train staff with his wittily-delivered complaints. Vance is extremely entertaining and very funny, but it is a very natural humour that doesn't detract from a serious story. The character of Helen Marlow is also well-handled. Her depression is quite authentically projected.

There is some good acting, most notably from Charles Grey as Vance and Judy Geeson as Helen. The climax is quite sharp, with an impressive final line from Helen. It is interesting to see Duncan Preston as part of a newly-married couple who turn out to have matters other than romance on their minds. Preston later became a frequent face on TV, usually in comic roles such as accompanying Victoria Wood. Jim Smilie very much looks the part as the smoothie Bob. His charm maybe comes a little too easy and reflects the more traditional image of the sexes that permeates so many "Thriller" episodes. All the same his role is well-done and contributes to a superior piece of television.

"King Lear" is not one of my favourite Shakespeare plays (sacrilege indeed!) but I must say I find this film version immensely impressive and the best film version of Shakespeare I have seen.

The key to this is the direction of Peter Brook. Unquestionably this is an "arty" avant-garde production that has echoes of Bergman and Beckett as other reviewers have noted. For me this works extremely well. The choice of a barren Danish landscape in winter, the use of black and white, and unusual decision to eschew music all contribute to a very dark and bleak atmosphere. The director keeps viewers on their toes and presents a despairing tragedy.

There is nothing theatrical about this - quite rightly as this is a film version. The performances are restrained and measured. The acting is very strong - Patrick Magee particularly stands out as a very menacing Cornwall while Susan Engel and Irene Worth are fine as the manipulative elder sisters.

My only real reservation is that the climax of the film is rather rushed, with the numerous deaths needing a little more reflection. The suicide of Goneril is though extremely powerful. Lear's death is always poignant but the direction of it doesn't work completely.

Opinions are very mixed on this film but I certainly think it deserves attention. It would especially appeal to followers of Bergman and anyone who is struck by a dark tale.

A truly-exceptional series that has largely disappeared into obscurity. This is despite it achieving considerable critical and popular approval when broadcast in the 1970's. It is one of the few British series to have achieved success in the USA and it is not difficult to see why it achieved such popularity.

Unlike most series, "Thriller" was an anthology of separate stories, without recurring characters or situations. This allowed great flexibility in terms of style and story-writing but unfortunately made it more difficult to achieve a long-term identity.When broadcast in the USA and given a rare repeat in the UK in the 1980's it was billed as discrete movies, further eroding its identity.

The show had a very unusual length of just over an hour of action. This allowed more chance to develop stories and explore characters, to great effect. However it also created scheduling problems and has probably helped to kill the chance of further repeats. Unlike better-remembered but unquestionably inferior productions of the time, it was shot on video-tape. Once again artistically this was a great success. It made the action darker and more claustrophobic. Unfortunately this also made repeats less likely with filmed action usually seen as more likely to win wider viewer-approval.

Most credit must go to Brian Clemens. He created the series, wrote most episodes entirely and provided the outlines for all of them. His writing was first-class, and well-supported by guest writers such as Terence Feely. He produced highly intriguing, unsettling, often frightening stories. Astutely, violence was largely kept off-screen and the exact motives of characters were frequently well-hidden. Viewers were forced to use their imaginations, making for deeper and more satisfied viewing. Characterisations were very sophisticated but suitably enigmatic. Most stories featured extraordinary twists and some terrifying scenes.

Direction could still have set things back but was immensely strong. A small team of directors kept true to Clemens's intentions and added great atmosphere. Laurie Johnson's music was perfect - extremely chilling and unnerving - and cranked up the tension spendidly. However the producers also knew when to use silence to powerful effect. They were utterly aware that less is often more.

Acting was very fine. The British performers included many of the leading lights of the 1970's and beyond. Unusually almost every story featured an American actor. Although this was almost definitely to help American sales, it brought an extra dimension. The Americans were able to offer more stylish and classless displays than their more traditional and austere (but still exceptional) British counterparts.

There were inevitably some limitations. The depiction of women was very old-fashioned and often patronising, with far too many references to grown women as "girls". There was an over-emphasis upon portraying women as pretty but helpless, dependent on men to save them. However there were some strong, perceptive and assertive female characters. Generally the view of England is very traditional and deferential, focusing on affluent figures in ostensibly idyllic surroundings. Its world-view was more of the 1950's than the 1970's.

Story-development is a little formulaic. For example, many episodes end with men cradling distressed women. However it should be remembered that "Thriller" was intended for a popular audience and not for the avant-garde, and some predictability goes with the territory and is often part of the fun.

The American versions feature filmed titles and music added long after original production by different companies. The music is sometimes very effective but the titles are unnecessarily long, often amateurish or crass, and alien to the main episodes.

However these are minor points. "Thriller" triumphs irrespective of these reservations, and no production is perfect. Any sophisticated viewer lucky enough to see an episode should be hugely impressed with what is seen. One hopes that stories will appear on DVD or video or receive a repeat broadcast so everyone can see what they have been missing!

Another episode of Brian Clemens's "Thriller". It is a highly atypical offering from that very austere, dark series. It has had a mixed reception from fans. However to me it is just as brilliant and even if it might not work for everyone as a thriller it would not disappoint anyone looking for comedy.

Tycoon David Garrick narrowly escapes an assassination attempt. He is fairly unruffled by this but his playboy son, Sunny, is very concerned. He recruits unconventional private detectives Arden and Suzy Buckley to investigate. David Garrick is pretty unpopular so there is no shortage of suspects. It becomes evident that the prospective killer has hired professionals to do the job who will ruthlessly eliminate those who frustrate their plans. Who wants David Garrick dead - and why?

The story outline is actually remarkably conventional and certainly this could have been handled straight with minor adjustment. A straight adaptation would certainly have been interesting to see. However the execution is an inspired comedy-thriller. As his work on "The Avengers" showed, Clemens (though writing here with Terry Nation) could write drama with wit and fine comic touches. In this story the Buckleys, as a duo, bear a passing resemblance to Steed and his ladies but them being a married couple provides a new twist. Their banter is marvellously funny but they are also pretty effective at what they do. Their unflappability makes a nice contrast with the otherwise intense "Thriller" heroes. They are truly likeable, lacking the arrogance and vindictiveness of the usual screen detectives.

They are backed by a superb set of supporting characters: David Garrick - a man with little time for his son, literally or metaphorically; Sunny, his effortlessly suave, charming son; refined criminal broker Shelby Grafton and his silent bimbo girlfriend; nervous informer Charley Wilson; Mrs. Gale, David Garrick's elegant but unfaithful girlfriend; and a young Northern hit-man. Most noteworthy is Garrick's estranged, demented wife who swings between childish innocence and disturbing, aggressive outbursts. Her character is more in the "Thriller" tradition and provides fine contrast with the more comic figures.

The acting is excellent. Stephen Rea (in an early role) and Gayle Hunnicutt are splendid in their central roles. Gayle employs an impeccable English accent, although her character is American.Christopher Cazenove, also making one of his first appearances, exudes charm through his voice and demeanour and was just made for these roles. It is great to see Peter Dyneley in the flesh - best known as the voice of Jeff Tracy in "Thunderbirds". Derek Francis is exceptional as the unscrupulous Grafton.

All the other roles mentioned above are beautifully-handled. The true honours must go though to Jean Kent who is utterly convincing as the shattered Mrs. Garrick.

There are many splendid scenes, stylish dialogue and sharp direction. All rests though, as always on the superb script of Clemens and Nation. One wonders whether there could have been more mileage in this format and the characters of the Buckleys - a show was mooted but never got off the ground. It may have been hard to sustain such quality in the long-term. Maybe it was best to have this one example. It certainly is an absolute pearl and deserves to be seen!

This film, actually an episode of the British anthology "Thriller" has been little seen and tends to be little regarded, with the comment above more positive than most. I actually think it is excellent and remarkably thought-provoking. If you are fortunate to see it you might be pleasantly surprised.

Oxford Professor Michael Lane is indulging in an affair with one of his young students, Stella. They want to be together, but how? Without Stella's knowledge Michael kills his wife, setting-up an elaborate scheme that makes it seem she has been killed by an intruder while he was meeting a colleague. He is delighted when the plan seems to work, with the police none the wiser.

However somebody knows his secret and he starts to receive disturbing blackmail notes, with the words cut-out of newspapers. His affair continues but he becomes more anxious and suspicious. These suspicions lead to another murder but the notes keep coming. Can he silence his accuser?

This is a fine, very intriguing story. The small cast allows the few characters to be very well-drawn. There are interesting insights into religion rarely seen in "Thriller", with the Professor a confirmed non-believer and his wife a devoted Catholic. The themes of anxiety and suspicion are very well-developed. All the main cast give strong performances. Patrick O'Neal is very convincing as the Professor. Gerald Sim plays Petersen, who exudes gentlemanly decency, although that doesn't stop Michael suspecting him as well. Quite possibly the best display is by Gary Watson as the enigmatic Inspector Rush. Rush appears to suspect nothing but it is evident he knows much more than he lets-on. Angharad Rees and Michael Kitchen play Stella and George (another student) capably and later became very frequent television faces.

Typically for "Thriller" the direction by John Scholz-Conway is splendid but probably even better than normal.There are some very poignant shots of a photograph of the Professor and his wife. The movie version - the only one likely to be seen - has the benefit of some very chilling music at the beginning and end, while Laurie Johnson's music during the action is powerfully unsettling as always.

The ending is absolutely extraordinary. For me it an absolute masterstroke but it is fair to say others have found it quite incredible. It certainly will get you thinking about the vagaries of the human mind! Could such things happen? Watch .. and judge for yourself...

My positive comments above only refer to the first two series. Having now seen episodes from the final two series, I'm afraid to say that they are hugely disappointing. This is largely down to cast- changes, particularly among the pupils but also the teachers. The new characters are unimpressive, with the exception of the aggressive PE teacher Mr. Dix, played by Glynn Edwards, who shows some style.

Maybe the writers were also running short of ideas by this stage, with many of the stories and scenarios becoming stale and silly. There are still occasional flashes of form, but the impression has to be that the show should have quit with its stock high after the first two fine series. These are still worth checking-out.