The Next Victim - Series 6 Episode 2 (Saturday 17th April 1976)

The story

Sandy Marshall is an American woman married to a successful British insurance agent. She has to use 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?

Review

The story description above suggests classic Thriller territory and even the title was suitably chilling. Unfortunately the results on screen have generally disappointed viewers including myself although - in common with a number of other "lesser" episodes - I have found it far better than I remembered on more recent viewings. Clearly it does have some limitations but it also has virtues that shouldn't be overlooked

The general viewer feeling is that something seems to be lacking in terms of writing, characters, performances and general direction here. There are virtues such as some particularly good direction early on from the killer's perspective, but there is a lack of consistent quality Maybe the problem was that this was exactly classic Thriller territory and finding new inspiration was difficult. 

The teaser presents a murder and the body count early on is high. This in itself was probably not a promising sign. The best examples of Thriller might have just one or two killings throughout and much more emphasis on suspense and fear. This is a whodunit but the suspects are not so well presented this time and are barely seen after the first twenty minutes. The obvious candidate is the caretaker Bartlett. This figure, very well played by Ronald Lacey, is lazy and indifferent about his work. More disturbingly he has a dominating obsession with mothers and babies, and the police theory is that the killer is "mother-fixated". He is a shabby, deeply unsettling person and the killer dresses similarly in a brown overall and jeans. There is an interesting comparison to be made with the caretaker Murchison in If It's a Man - Hang Up!. Murchison was another obsessive but far more affable and eager to please (and literally smarter!) Maybe this is a sign of this story trying to up the ante and create a more shocking scenario. Sandy's husband Derek and Spiros attract limited suspicion but there is no other significant suspect until the arrival of Tom Packer halfway through. If It's a Man and File It Under Fear a few years earlier applied the whodunit formula far more successfully.

The heroine and prospective victim is a pivotal figure in this sort of drama but Sandy Marshall doesn't make as much impact as her predecessors. A disabled target adds a fresh dimension. Blindness had been examined as a way of increasing vulnerability and lack of mobility opens up new options. Sandy can see danger but she has little chance of escaping from it. She is clearly anxious and understandably so. The character should work extremely well but comes across as a little underwhelming, although there is an improvement in the final part when she is trapped with the man she believes is the killer. Carroll Baker probably had the most prestigious film background of any US guest but that is not necessarily a recipe for a fine Thriller heroine. Possibly we are too used to seeing younger actresses in these roles. Maybe offering a return to one of the most impressive US guests such as Carol Lynley, Skye Aubrey or Lynda Day George would have been the better option.

Sandy (Carroll Baker) faces a terrifying ordeal

The two detectives have a lot of screen time. The intention was to set up a clear contrast between the older, irascible, sarcastic Inspector relying on intuition (Frampton) and the younger, educated, "scientific" policeman (Small). Needless to say the intuitive detective is the one who gets the answers. Decades ago this combination wasn't quite as clichéd as it has now become but it's still a little predictable. Frampton does fit the usual Thriller mould of the quirky investigator. He seems happy to sit back while his junior detective does all the spade-work although appearances are a little deceptive as he is applying some analysis while Small serves up suspects. He does make some darkly amusing asides and interesting observations including that the rush of killings suggests someone who has just "snapped" rather than had long-standing issues. 

Things do improve somewhat with the arrival of Tom Packer. Tom appears to be very friendly and helpful towards the edgy Sandy but she remains disconcerted by him. Tom reveals a deep devotion to his mother, who was also in a wheelchair before her death. This creates a bond of sorts with Sandy but his level of attachment becomes disconcerting. He reveals both intriguing perceptiveness but also lack of tact in the inferences he draws about Sandy's "accident". He makes some provocative points about scams and how accidents often hinge on serious negligence that gets overlooked or condoned.

There is an impressive twist in the climax (perhaps a little rushed) and a certain irony in how things turn out. There is also some good direction as Sandy tries to make an escape in an unconventional but necessary way. In a better story the twist in particular would have received great acclaim but due to the modest overall quality it doesn't make full impact. Following this, the final shot is simply of police and an ambulance stationed outside the apartment block - this should have either been excised or followed-up with the police dealing with events inside. It is indicative of an untidiness which occurs at various points in the story. Other examples are painfully wooden news reports (even worse than those for The Eyes Have It) and a collection of barely-seen, ill-defined characters, most of whom could easily have been removed and one or two developed further. Indeed Harold Bennett (who had appeared in A Place To Die) is credited but does not appear suggesting some editing was going on or some late script changes but if so it seems to have been inconsistent. Perhaps both the script and the filming were rushed or needed better management - whatever the reason these aspects stand out for the wrong reasons. 

Perhaps this would have been much more successful if produced a year or two earlier with the show at its peak. It definitely had strong facets that could have been exploited better. There had rather been a treadmill of production (Series 6 was produced in Spring-Summer 1975 for US broadcast shortly after though not shown in the UK for almost a year) with barely a break for Brian Clemens and the production team and maybe six months or a year away would have refreshed minds and led to some stronger outcomes for the final outings. 

This also proved to be the last of the more traditional Thriller stories. The remainder of the final run saw experimentation in setting or style, possibly because it was felt the traditional formula needed a rest or had gone as far as it could. It is a shame this last "conventional" offering could not have been better.

Notes

It seems odd that the newsreader is not credited despite having a fair number of lines and appearing on screen. Unusually for Thriller some stock footage (of holiday traffic and crowded beaches) appears during the news reports.

Harold Bennett is listed as "Blind Man" on the credits but doesn't appear on screen - possibly the only example of a credited actor not actually featuring in the show. This may have foxed the producers of the Australian box set who highlighted him as one of the featured actors, noting his Are You Being Served? fame. This anomaly may reflect the general editing issues with this episode. Quite what part his character might have played is unknown but it's possible it was as a neighbour Sandy frantically sought-out for help only to discover he was blind.

A newspaper report Sandy reads about the murders reads refers to a "lady killer". It seems highly unlikely a genuine news report about murder would have used this flippant term (otherwise used about men who easily attract women) so it's possible this was an in-joke referring back to the first episode Lady Killer. 

Anita Sharp-Bolster was the oldest actor to appear in Thriller, aged almost 90 when this episode was produced in June 1975.

The arrangement of names on the bells outside the apartment block seems to refer to "Martin Marshall" - the writer of A Thriller in Every Corner!