Murder Motel - Series 5 Episode 7 (Saturday 24th May 1975)

The story...

A businessman checks into a hotel. Soon afterwards two men enter his room and stab him to death while he is in the shower. While all this occurs the hotel manager Sam seems aware and regards it with utter indifference. Later Michael Spencer - an accountant - takes a room there while he investigates a possible fraud. He soon disappears to the consternation of his sister Helen who just has time to inform his fiancée Kathy before she too is confronted. Kathy comes looking for Michael and becomes embroiled in a tale of financial skulduggery and organised murder.

Review

Generally this has been one of my least favourite Thriller episodes and it's fair to say it has been seen by most viewers as a disappointing affair and its supporters are few and far between. However I must say on a very recent viewing I really enjoyed it and not in an ironic "so bad it's good" fashion. I'm always wary of radically revising conclusions and maybe next time I'll find it very disappointing again. What can be said is that there are definite virtues on show but there is one huge issue which may be decisive for many viewers and greatly spoil its credibility. Even in that instance though it's fair to acknowledge the strengths elsewhere. 

The most glaring problem is the performance of Robyn Millan as Kathy. Of all the central parts in Thriller hers is without question the least convincing display. She seems very unfocused, appearing dazed - "half-asleep" is a common opinion - and literally staggers late in the episode. Her character has had a terrible shock with the mysterious disappearance and ultimate death of her boyfriend - but the performance can't be seen as a convincing screen attempt to convey shock and grief. 

in fairness to Robyn it is now known that at the time of production she was under the influence of painkillers she had been taking following a car accident and so it was genuinely difficult for her to give a good display. However that raises the question of whether production either should have been delayed until she was in better shape or a different actress used to take over her part. Given the economics of production a delay - except maybe of a few days - was probably not an option so recasting the role would have been more realistic. Recasting a role at short notice isn't easy but it does seem to have happened with the first episode into production The Colour of Blood when the original actress to play Julie - the female lead - had to be replaced due to illness. This may have been problematic with an American guest star (although it's possible the original actress for Colour was American) and maybe the difficulties emerged too late for a replacement to be used. What is undeniable is that Robyn attracts the viewers' attention but for the wrong reasons. There is no doubt that such a literally shaky performance detracts credibility from the episode although how much is in the opinion of each viewer. The other actors to their credit seem unfazed in their performances and that does help to shore-up events on-screen.

Kathy (Robyn Millan) finds herself in a terrifying predicament

There are a number of echoes of Hitchcock - notably the murder in the shower, some angry birds and the use of dark humour. The concept of a hotel where guests are sent to be murdered is certainly an unlikely one. However it isn't totally implausible and within a production with elements of black humour like this a greater departure than normal from realism is acceptable. It must also be borne in mind that only two weeks earlier in Good Salary - Prospects - Free Coffin there was focus on an establishment where individuals were sent to be killed so it wasn't an entirely novel idea even for Thriller.

The black humour isn't overdone and generally works well except at the very end. Sam and his killers regard killing as if it were any job. They go through the motions and treat murder as routine. When Sam asks Roscoe and Terry to carry out another killing the two are irked in the same way as someone asked to do a little extra overtime. They bargain over the terms of contract killings in the way staff and customers might do over the price of an item. All this is done well. It isn't blatantly light-hearted in the manner of K Is for Killing but still raises a wry smile. There are also some funny lines - again in the style of black comedy - such as Sam's remark about one victim calling at "an inopportune time".

On a dramatic level there are some very tense scenes squarely in Thriller tradition. The killings are all handled well. The silent and expressionless approach of Roscoe and Terry makes them extremely unsettling, as does Sam going about his everyday business impassively while he knows they are at "work". A silent confrontation in a phone box between a frantic Helen Spencer and a chilling Roscoe is very well-done. Later an encounter between Sam and someone offering a potential threat to the enterprise is very strong. There are plenty of tense moments and good direction.

Oddly the ostensible star Ralph Bates disappears after just twelve minutes. This is the quickest exit for any star and leaves his character Michael largely undeveloped. Ralph Bates is the sort of prolific actor with a background in the genre who could easily have appeared in any Thriller episode so it has been speculated whether casting an actor called Bates in a thriller about a motel with various Hitchcock references was deliberate as part of the homage. Even if that is so it does seem unfortunate that he had such limited screen-time. Of the other characters hotel manager Sam is certainly a darkly comic figure and very well-played by Derek Francis. The private eye Lee is an excellent inclusion and especially enigmatic. When speaking to Kathy he offers the scepticism heroines often received from investigators but he does agree to help. He then proves himself to be a very clever if rather ambitious operator. Allan MacClelland's splendid acting contributes to a memorable character and one wishes rather more could have been made of him. Another intriguing character is that of the secretary Janice, skilfully depicted by Gillian McCutcheon. Once again though this strong part is too little developed.

The climax has some dramatic qualities but also limitations including a fall by a character that seems unintentionally comic rather than dramatic. However it is the very silly final shot that lets it down - the only case where the black humour overbalanced and damaged credibility. Overall this is a flawed episode but perhaps rather better than its lowly reputation deserves. It would certainly have been interesting to see the results with a stronger lead actress - maybe even if Robyn Millan had just been in better health and able to give a sharper performance - but for all that it still stimulates plenty of talking points.

The Next Voice You See - Series 5 Episode 6, Saturday 17th May 1975 (ITC movie title "Look Back in Darkness")

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...

Review

Quite deservedly this is one of the most popular episodes. It is a top-class effort - the last script written by Terence Feely (as always from a story by Brian Clemens) and is a splendid farewell.

Blindness had been covered before by Brian Clemens in the film Blind Terror and the first series episode The Eyes Have It (also scripted by Terence Feely). Neither of these is a particular favourite of mine, although Eyes is an improvement on the film and very popular in the fan community. For me this story though is clearly superior to either predecessor. The virtues of both earlier efforts are achieved but the limitations are avoided. Blindness offers great potential for fear and suspense. In The Eyes Have It this is well demonstrated but the fact that the blind students were not themselves the target of the assassins limited the impact. Additionally the students had the benefit of being a group with a strong sense of solidarity which partly subdues the threat. On this occasion Stan Kay is most definitely the target. There are sighted people who can offer help, but no one who is blind and truly understands his perspective. This heightens the level of tension very effectively. In the film the blind Sarah was the target. However the episode avoids the film's pitfalls in which the miseries and terror inflicted on her border on the gratuitous. In general the unattractive goriness of the film is astutely avoided. The most effective thrillers in general are not graphic and the TV series almost always left matters rightly to the viewers' imagination.

Stan has already been through a dreadful experience with the murder of his wife. He was blinded in the same incident. In the intervening ten years he has adapted well - at least on the surface. He is a hugely likeable and talented man. One could understand him being bitter and cynical but he remains positive. However someone who has faced trauma - in this instance a double trauma - may never truly recover. Terrible memories and anxiety can recur. Any reminder can be devastating and that is exactly what he receives when he hears the killer's voice. Maybe only someone with a musician's aural sensitivity could have picked out a stray voice in such an environment. The moment when he makes this shocking discovery is superbly handled on screen. To the assembled guests Stan's loss of composure can appear to be just lack of professionalism or even drug-induced. He has no time though to dwell on his reputation. He is determined to find the man but how can a blind man do so? It's a great scenario but becomes even more powerful. When someone is searching, he might well soon find that the hunter becomes the hunted and so it proves. Very quickly the killer knows he is being pursued and Stan is now in terrible danger.

In addition to the efforts of Stan and the killer to find each other, there is also a fine whodunit. Who is the killer? What would he be doing at a society party? The episode cleverly challenges the stereotype of "the criminal", and "the armed robber" in particular. There is an assumption by Julie which many would share that it is inconceivable that wealthy individuals could be criminals or have a criminal past. However as Stan quite correctly says, "Criminals don't look like criminals these days." Wealth sometimes does derive from crime, and a criminal can buy themselves into apparent respectability. Almost playfully, reference is made to a whole array of characters having dramatically risen to financial success about ten years earlier. However with just a snatch of conversation the viewer is left confounded. When we see the killer in action we only see his shoes (a clear echo of Blind Terror) or his torso so we are none the wiser. Although this is a whodunit it is not a conventional one as the viewer has so many potential suspects (just about every man at the party) and so little to go on.

Only in the later stages is the killer revealed and in a very shocking way - for me one of the most chilling moments in Thriller. This then leads to Stan being sought-out by a particularly odious villain who seems to delight in exploiting Stan's lack of sight and trying to defeat his aural abilities. These scenes are almost painful to watch and there is a particular claustrophobia with the stalking late taking place in a wine cellar. Unlike other Thriller episodes where the villain tries to catch and kill the hero or heroine (the classic case being I'm the Girl He Wants To Kill but A Killer in Every Corner on a smaller scale) there is neither room nor need for chasing but the the tension can be just as great when the search is more slow and deliberate as here. The climax is certainly dramatic, poignant and it defies some of the usual cliches.

Julie (Catherine Schell) offers Stan (Bradford Dillman) a sympathetic ear

Stan is one of the finest characters in Thriller - a man of amazing strength and dignity. He inspires great affection but he is not alone in this respect. Stan's chaperone Julie is very warm and kind and the two are an excellent combination. Despite her initial scepticism she takes Stan seriously and tries both to help him find the killer but also save him from danger. The host Sir Peter also provides a warmth towards Stan that is very welcome. Some of the other attendees at the party are rather less supportive but they provide important contrast with some such as Ludo (played by a young Nigel Havers) coming across as spoiled brats while others are only too ready to suspect Stan's distracted behaviour as caused by being under the influence. The security chief Tamplin is initially abrasive and tactless but he eventually offers support but like Stan he is to find that the cat can become the mouse.

In acting terms Bradford Dillman gives one of the great Thriller performances. Catherine Schell and Geoffrey Chater (Sir Peter, a very different part to the distinctly dodgy, somewhat heartless character he played in The Colour of Blood) give him great support. Ray Smith is always a fine actor and does a sterling job as Tamplin, although his cockney accent is somewhat wayward and would probably have been best avoided. The direction by Robert Tronson is exceptional, especially in the final stages. Laurie Johnson's music if, of course, perfect. All these factors add up to an utterly memorable Thriller.

Notes

This had the largest cast of any Thriller episode with twenty-three credited actors, most of them playing guests at the party.

Robert Tronson also directed Geoffrey Chater in his earlier Thriller appearance.

Good Salary - Prospects - Free Coffin - Series 5 Episode 5, Saturday 10th May 1975 (ITC movie title "Mirror of Deception")

The story...

American student Helen Terek is sharing a flat with Wendy Phillips and Babs Bryant. Soon though Wendy is gone when she sees an advert for an exciting job involving travel, just getting in her application before Babs can do so. Helen isn’t too surprised that Wendy doesn’t get back in touch – she’s got used to the transitory nature of relationships with flatmates.

A couple of months later the same job advert turns up. Babs is excited to see it and with a shade of schadenfreude speculates that the job has reappeared because Wendy got fired. This time around Babs gets in her application and is successful. Soon after she moves out, Helen gets married to her English boyfriend Charley. The pair seem very happy although Helen is a little surprised not to have heard back from Babs. However she becomes much more worried when she sees the same job advert again; even worse when she visits the Embassy to get her passport changed and meets a member of staff called Babs – Babs Bryant – whose background is the same as her former flatmate. She starts to believe that something awful has happened to Babs and Wendy, her new husband unable to settle her mind…

Review

This episode doesn't quite live up to the great expectations of its excellent story idea. However it remains a valuable and thought-provoking effort.

It was the third and final of the espionage stories. Espionage was perhaps not the best material for Thriller and for me only Night is the Time for Killing ranks (just) above the average although all three were sound efforts and not far below the norm. As with the other two examples impersonation is the technique used by the villains. Once again their country of origin is never specified but it seems safe to assume that they represent the Eastern Bloc. A virtue of this vagueness is it allows for conjecture and avoids stories getting bogged down in Cold War propaganda. Carter and Gifford are intended to blend in as thoroughly English but are enemy agents. Carter though seems almost too English and has a rather odd, ultra-refined accent that could easily be that of a foreigner trying rather too hard to pass as a native.

The plan is an extraordinary one: to replace Britons with lookalikes who can then act as spies. Women with few friends and family are deliberately targeted. Quite why women are chosen is unclear. Maybe the instigators feel they are less likely to be suspected as spies but it was probably to satisfy the standard Thriller theme of "women in danger". Conversely though, it does mean that women get to break the stereotype by acting as assassins. The replacements take the same name and personal history as their victims, such as the Babs Bryant impersonator, but are not exact copies. It's a clever idea but does raise a few questions. Although these are women with few connections there might still be some, like Timothy Bryant, asking after them. There is no guarantee that the agents will get jobs with real spying potential. However, as Gifford notes, they have been told that any information is meaningful.

The brilliant teaser sets up this idea. We never see the replacement for the tall blonde but we do see those for Wendy, Babs and ultimately Helen. The scenes in which the women are disturbingly confronted by their replacements and then killed are very powerful, especially that of Babs in which Babs Two runs through her victim's whole personal history while Babs moves from excitement and astonishment through to horror. The nervousness of two of the female assassins - who had not killed before - are also very well depicted.

Gifford (Julian Glover) gives some advice to the woman about to "inherit" the role of "Babs Bryant" (Gillian Hawser)

There is an interesting contrast in attitudes between the two villains. Carter appears to find the whole business unpleasant but necessary. He regrets, "I wish they didn't have to be so young." He never lets slip his charming and dignified exterior. Gifford on the other hand seems to enjoy what he is doing - a delight that Carter finds sickening. Maybe Gifford has become hardened by violence and this is his way of coping. Perhaps he has managed to depersonalise the victims to avoid any pangs of conscience. In a very revealing exchange Carter protests, "They're human beings!" and Gifford retorts, "On the other side!" These may be ordinary young women to others but they are just members of the “enemy” to him and no pity should be extended. A parallel might be to contemporary terrorists with Gifford representing the attitude that anyone in the enemy country is a legitimate target. These tensions between the pair are excellently demonstrated. One annoying aspect though is how Gifford continually repeats Carter's remark about him being, "a pig". However as he points out to Carter maybe his brutality is very necessary and he does seem to play a key part in giving the assassins the resolve for their deadly tasks - Carter insists he could do such things if necessary but Gifford has his doubts.

Wendy and Babs are both vulnerable because of their isolation and quest for what seems a great opportunity. Like the shy and lonely Jenny in Lady Killer they are easy prey for deceivers. Helen's remark about departing flatmates being, "ships that pass in the night," reflects the fleeting and fragile nature of many apparently strong relationships when one person moves on to another job or partner. Helen though is rather more perceptive than her flatmates. She spots the warning signs as the advert reappears and realises their silence may well be involuntary. In true heroine style she picks up on danger signs despite the derision of her new husband Charley and sticks to her beliefs despite his opposition. The friction this causes between them is starky portrayed, and her independent sprit leads him to suspect the influence of "Women's Lib,", a topic never far from the surface in the minds of many 1970s male screen characters. .

Linking to chauvinistic male attitudes, Timothy Bryant (Babs' brother) initially invites hackles with his awful chat-up of Helen but once he appreciates she is unavailable he makes a very valuable contribution. He is wise enough to see there may be something strange going on and gives her much-needed support. His meeting with Carter is electrifying. Inspector Bruff offers a diplomatically sceptical perspective, in neat contrast to Charley, before being won around.

The final minutes are quite strong. There is a struggle which doesn't entirely work on screen but there are a couple of striking twists in terms of who will save the day. In this respect it's a little like the climax of If It's a Man - Hang Up! a few weeks earlier where there were a couple of very late surprises as regards who was the ultimate villain and who was the ultimate hero. Both conclusions are well done overall but perhaps a little rushed.

Although the story is generally a fascinating one it doesn’t best serve some of the characters and the performances. The central couple of Helen and Charley Masters are not particularly appealing on screen and this limits the scope of actors Kim Darby and Keith Barron. Helen spends almost all the episode in negative emotion mode, understandably very worried about the fate of her former flatmates or in conflict with her new husband who not only disbelieves her but is angered at her concerns. While these emotions are entirely justified given the story they do make her character rather dour. Worse is Charley who comes across for most of the action as selfish and unsympathetic. Although the pair get married within the episode their spells of happiness are brief and so the couple are rarely at ease. While the sceptical partner wasn’t unknown in Thriller (e.g. Bruce Nelson in A Place To Die) earlier examples came across as rather more supportive and less antagonistic. The hostile reaction of Charley might be quite realistic in terms of how many partners would respond but all the same it can be somewhat relentless for the viewer. Both actors give capable displays but would have benefitted from more light as well as shade in their characters.

Probably for most viewers the most memorable characters and performances will be by the villains. James Maxwell gives the best display as the enigmatic, ambivalent, even sympathetic Carter, contrasting well with Julian Glover who is typically strong in his role as the brutal Gifford. Martin Read is impressive in his cameo as Tim Bryant but again might have been better served by not having to spout the dreadful chat-up dialogue in his first lines. Helen’s unfortunate flatmates Wendy and Babs also run the emotional gamut from excitement and joy to bewilderment and ultimately horror and are well-performed by Janina Faye and Susan Dury respectively.

In general a little reworking, maybe broader characterisation and performances and more innovative direction might have turned an average episode into a fine one. The results remain though very entertaining by general TV standards.

Notes

Although over thirty actors appeared more than once in Thriller, Susan Dury (playing the real Babs Bryant) was the only one whose character was murdered on both occasions. She had previously appeared in Killer with Two Faces and it may not be coincidence that the director each time was John Scholz-Conway who may have felt she "died beautifully" in the earlier outing and cast her again for a similar role. James Greene also appeared in both these episodes, each time playing a policeman.

It seems odd that Inspector Bruff's detective colleague (seen with him at the US Embassy) is not credited even though he is prominent on screen and has a few lines of dialogue. At the same time an actor is credited as "Police Driver" even though he only appears briefly in the background and has no dialogue. it is possible the driver originally has more dialogue which was cut from the broadcast episode.

The ITC Movie version was named "Mirror of Deception". Opinions will vary but I prefer this more enigmatic title to the more attention-grabbing though less subtle original one. Generally I prefer the more intriguing titles such as Someone at the Top of the Stairs and An Echo of Theresa to the more graphic ones including words such as "Kill", "Death" and variations thereof which predominated. While such episode titles are certainly eye-catching they are perhaps "overkill" (pardon the pun) for a show already called Thriller. 

The opening titles for the movie also overlays dialogue from the original episode onto a new scene of a killing (a similar approach was taken in the "movie" version of Killer with Two Faces). There is a photograph of the intended victim (below - and not played by Susan Dury, just how the credits rolled at that point!), a rare case of a face being seen in a movie version but as this was an extrapolation of events in the episode (we know other victims were killed and replaced by agents) the depiction is plausible. The end credits play over a freeze-frame rather than an artistic montage as in most versions.

The Crazy Kill - Series 5 Episode 4, Saturday 3rd May 1975 (ITC Movie title "The Fear Is Spreading")

The story...

Garard and Filton are two escaped convicts. Filton seems relatively unthreatening but that certainly can't be said for Garard who is a certified psychopath and a great danger to the public. To make matters worse Garard soon steals a shotgun and the pair go looking for a hideout, killing two police officers along the way. The place they find is occupied by a distinguished doctor and his partner. Garard makes it quite clear that blood will be spilled if either of them raise the alarm. Meanwhile a young American journalist - Tracy Loxton - is heading to visit the doctor's wife to discuss her priceless collection of poster art. She could not be calling at a worse time...

Garard (Anthony Valentine) threatens Dr Henson & Hilary (Denholm Elliott & Claire Nielson)

Review

Checking recently I discovered that on the Internet Movie Database this is the third highest-rated episode of Thriller, surpassed only by A Coffin for the Bride and The Double Kill. It's clearly then made a strong impression upon viewers and those high-ratings aren't based on just a handful of votes but over a hundred. This is one of those cases where my rating differs a little - for me it is a strong outing but not one of the very best - but there's no right or wrong with ratings and it's fascinating to compare with the wider cohort of viewers. While I'm not quite as won over as the general audience it is certainly a highly impressive episode and quicker-paced and more gripping than the previous week's Won't Write Home Mom - I'm Dead, also penned by Dennis Spooner from a story by Brian Clemens.

One of the key features here is the appearance of two proletarian convicts as villains. Thriller occupied a predominantly middle-class world - perfectly exemplified by the wealthy Hensons - and even its villains were usually middle class, refined and well-spoken. That is certainly not true of Garard and Filton whose accents mark them out as intruders in a social as well as a physical sense. Garard clearly likes the luxuries that Henson has to offer such as silk ties and linen shirts but he is an outsider. Later in the story Tracy's unexpected arrival leads Garard - equally unexpectedly - to impersonate a role as Henson's butler and it is a role he clearly enjoys, as well as being a quietly entertaining diversion for the viewer. A villain brandishing a shotgun a la Garard is a sight more typical of The Sweeney than Thriller. Working class villains resurfaced with a vengeance a year later in Kill Two Birds. In the later story gang leader Gadder bears some similarity with Garard - both are dominating and happy to use violence. However the psychopathic Garard is cut more from the traditional Thriller cloth; Gadder by contrast is a professional acquisitive villain with a very rational mind.

Garard has already killed before arriving at the house. The Hensons will be next if they slip up. He is a truly intimidating figure. Even his sidekick Filton is not safe from his brutality. Filton comes across as a rather pathetic personality. It isn't exactly clear why the pair are together - maybe they are friends, although Garard's behaviour towards him is often anything but friendly. Perhaps Filton is along for the support or skills he can offer (for example he does show some electronic know-how to tune into police communications). Whatever the reason his position is a precarious one. He is described as "small fry" and his offending background is not clear. However his rather disturbing remark to Hilary that he is inside for "looking after the ladies - a little too well" - suggests he is a sex offender and may be rather more dangerous - at least towards women - than his shambling demeanour implies. Indeed both he and Garard at times respond to Hilary in ways that suggest that sexual violence is a possibility - or a threat. The two are a neatly contrasting pair. Anthony Valentine is excellent as Garard while Juan Moreno, returning from his mute role in A Place to Die, performs well as Filton.

Hilary finds herself uncomfortably close to a shotgun

The hostage scenes are extremely tense and very well done. Much credit goes to Denholm Elliott for a first-class acting display as Dr. Henson. Claire Nielson is also very impressive as his partner Hilary. The pair are on a knife edge, knowing that an indiscretion could be fatal. Our sympathies are with them but maybe the opening scene should have signalled that these are more complex characters than might be supposed. Later excellent writing backed by excellent performances brings an extraordinary twist and we see them - and indeed Garard and Filton - in a very different light.

Into all this has stumbled American journalist Tracy Loxton, aiming to interview Mrs. Henson. She is unaware of the danger of Garard until well into the action while Dr. Henson and Hilary are very clearly at risk. Later though the risk to Tracy becomes all too clear and it takes an unconventional course. Tandy Cronyn as Tracy is not the most memorable of Thriller heroines - indeed it is clear that Denholm Elliott and Anthony Valentine are the stars and the captivating performers here - but she gives a sound display and makes a particularly good impression in her later scenes, particularly with Denholm Elliott.

The police enquiries take up quite a large part of this story, as they do in The Colour of Blood and File It under Fear. The police characters are nothing exceptional but there are some notable aspects. Brook (played by Alan Browning) is one of the few conventional, competent detectives in the show. He is a tough, straight-talking, authoritative man in traditional police drama mode. However even he has a weakness with attacks of malaria about which he is clearly sensitive. His Inspector is all too happy to seize on this matter and more generally question his judgement. The dissension within the senior police ranks is a fascinating sight rarely seen but probably quite realistic. The Inspector clearly resents the intervention of Brook and the consequent loss of authority. However Brook proves to be correct while he is shown up as complacent and petty. The Sergeant snipes at the Inspector in an obvious attempt to curry favour with Brook who takes him to task for this attitude. The constables get on with their jobs without getting embroiled in such politics. The deaths (off-screen) of two of their colleagues bring them together but their superiors remain at odds. Although these aspects are fascinating they are not sufficiently compelling, particularly given the amount of time devoted to the police characters.

These reservations do not prevent this being a very engaging and tense outing. Maybe it would have been useful to have had another Dennis Spooner story in the final series to reduce Brian Clemens' workload and show if he could build further on this fine script.

Won't Write Home Mom - I'm Dead - Series 5 Episode 3, Saturday 26th April 1975 (ITC movie title "Terror from Within")

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.

Review

This was Pamela Franklin's second Thriller apearance in quick time in early 1975. Her earlier episode Screamer is controversial but generally well-regarded, although I find it disappointing. This outing gets a less favourable reception from fans on the whole, commonly considered one of the show's lesser episodes. Indeed that was generally my view but on very recent viewing (the first time in many years) I was very impressed and feel it has a lot more to offer than it might first seem,

Prolific TV writer Dennis Spooner (a long-time colleague of Brian Clemens) supplied his first script on-screen for Thriller here with the other - The Crazy Kill - airing the following week although in each case Clemens wrote the story outline as he did for all Thriller episodes. The basic story is certainly a very good one - a young woman arrives in an isolated small town to find her boyfriend missing. The presence of a telepathic link between them adds another dimension. Most viewers have found the actual results on-screen underwhelming, chiefly because the episode is seen as very slow. It certainly is slow although that can also be seen as atmospheric or useful in developing a mood of unease and I would tend to subscribe to the latter on recent viewing. Each viewer draws their own conclusions - which can change over time - and there is no right or wrong about whether an episode satisfies viewers but often it is useful to revisit a production to see how it comes across years later. Sometimes (maybe most of the time) opinions are little changed but occasionally they become notably more or less favourable.

The episode revolves around the heroine's concern about a missing person. This is a noted similarity with the Series 2 episode One Deadly Owner but in both cases the teaser makes clear that this person has actually been murdered and the hope they might be found alive and well is a forlorn one. The episode title here makes even more emphatic that the person concerned is dead. This is made more poignant here because the missing person is not a stranger to the heroine but her boyfriend. It's an interesting question whether the episode might have been more effective if the fate of the boyfriend (Douglas) hadn't been made clear in the teaser and viewers also held out hope he would return. While that would have its advantages it would also mean that the episode would lose some of its melancholy character - events here (and in One Deadly Owner) can become sadder because viewers know that he is dead and ultimately Abby is going to discover the tragic truth. There is of course still mystery about who killed him - and why. It might also be argued that, with this being Thriller, viewers would always suspect that the missing person had been killed so there may have been little value in not making this clear from the start. The teaser itself is a good one to draw attention as we see Doug frightened and anxious before being stabbed by an unknown assailant, then falling against the piano keyboard to create a jarring, discordant sound. 

The hippy artistic community is a weak spot. By the mid-1970's hippies had faded away but the message hadn't always got through to TV producers. The "American" ancillary characters such as Hank are rather stereotypical and of limited value. It is an irony that the episode with the highest number of American characters should contain not a single American actor. Thankfully these ancillaries are not seen that often. Their presence early on does help to create a contrast between their high-spirits and hedonism and the seriousness - even sadness - of Abby. They also provide a contrast with the intense and simmering Scottish sculptor Frank.

Abby (Pamela Franklin, right) with artist Beryl (Suzanne Neve)

The other members of the community are rather better. Alan and Beryl (an English woman) are the central pair. Like the rest of the "community" they are funded by their wealthy families. However both of them try to stress that they have rejected materialistic values and are now trying to create something meaningful. Abby notes the hypocrisy of them saying this while happy to live off their parents' money - a practice of some middle class "radicals". 

Frank is a sculptor (although his sculpting largely consists of him continually scraping a small block of wood. In fairness convincingly depicting creative work on screen is difficult). He is on the fringe of the community and - like Abby - he is uncomfortable with their ways. Artistic life seems to have mellowed him and led him away from aggression but it doesn't seem to have extinguished all combativeness which never seems far from the surface. He is offended by the snide comments of the snobbish bank clerk about the artistic community. Maybe he has some loyalty to it but equally he doesn't challenge Abby's criticisms of Alan and Beryl. 

Identity theft is a distinctive angle taken up by the story. Today it is very topical and highly sophisticated but in the 1970's little skill is required for the subterfuge - a faked signature of Alan Smerdon seems to be sufficient. Abby hasn't seen him since childhood so she is none the wiser. Whether Abby's boyfriend Doug was killed because he had stumbled upon the fraud is unknown. Much of the episode is occupied with Abby wondering about the fate of Douglas, hoping that he will turn up but being disappointed. She cuts a very melancholy figure in what is generally a very bleak tale, not just in its themes of loss and uncertainty but also in the cold, lonely and harsh winter landscape.

The telepathic link between Abby and Douglas makes this a seemingly supernatural story (although it's not impossible Abby is imagining he is contacting her) and possibly more could have been made of the subject. It is largely restricted to her hearing him whisper her name, almost pleadingly. The lack of any further detail makes his fate rather enigmatic from her viewpoint but it limits its potential within the episode. Maybe if there had been more communication between them before his disappearance it could have been explored further. This story could easily have been rewritten without the telepathy altogether as a conventional mystery but it would have been best to make full use of an intriguing angle.

The performances, leaving aside the minor hippy characters, are sound. Pamela Franklin is typically dependable and Ian Bannen broods along capably. Oliver Tobias and Suzanne Neve are good value as the central artists. The direction by James Ormerod is distinctive and impressive. Light and dark are very well-contrasted throughout and there are a lot of location scenes including night-time ones that are especially effective. There is also some striking use of visual effects with a few scenes shot through coloured filters. Although the daytime outdoor scenes don't offer the same potential for directorial flair the cold, wintry landscape and bare trees do contribute well to the bleak atmosphere. 

James Ormerod directed three episodes including the last to be broadcast in the UK - Death in Deep Water - and there are certainly similarities between this and the latter in extensive use of remote location scenes and general emphasis on "atmosphere" rather than pace. The later outing has generally had a much better reception among viewers, perhaps because of its more daring story elements and "noirish" feel and while Death in Deep Water is probably the better episode - indeed one of the best in my view - this one is underestimated.  As mentioned earlier the teaser and the theme of a missing person draw parallels with One Deadly Owner but there are other similarities. Both also involve a Rolls-Royce which is somehow connected with murder and in each case there are shots highlighting its luxurious interior and of it driving at night. It may be no coincidence that Series 5 producer Ian Fordyce had directed One Deadly Owner and he may have contributed ideas to James Ormerod here, especially as it was Ormerod's first Thriller episode. All these elements add up to an instalment that is certainly not one of the show's greats but which has rather more to offer than it might first seem. 

Notes 

Perhaps due to the presence of Ian Bannen but maybe also the cold, wintry landscape I can't escape thinking that this episode is set in Scotland! This is despite the fact that he is the only Scottish character. Other viewers may have cases where they find it hard to shake some curious idea about where an episode was set or other events within it.

The ITC movie version was renamed "Terror from Within", a misleading title given the low-key events on screen although it may provide a valuable reference to the voices (supernatural or imagined) that Abby hears. This is somewhat similar to the other renamed episode featuring "Terror" - "Anatomy of Terror" (originally An Echo of Theresa) which was also similarly slow-paced and more about mystery.

On Friday 2nd September 1983 this episode (in its movie version) was broadcast by four UK TV regions (Border, Yorkshire, TSW and Channel) - the most of any episode on a particular date.

The Double Kill - Series 5 Episode 2, Saturday 19th April 1975

The story... 

Hugh Briant - an American living in the UK - seems to have an ideal life living in a huge house loaded with valuables, married to a wealthy English woman called Clorissa. However things are not as ideal as they seem. Hugh is going around bragging not just about the treasures in his home but also its lack of security. He seems to be asking to be burgled - and indeed he is. He has grown tired of his wife and sees a burglary as an opportunity to find a man who will dispose of her. The first burglar who comes along blanches at the idea of getting involved in murder but the second - called Max Burns - is a different prospect. At first Briant thinks he needs to blackmail Burns into committing murder but it soon becomes clear that Burns is actually happy to do the deed for suitable reward. 

Briant returns home to find that the deed has been done but not only has Burns not followed the agreed plan but he has framed him for the murder. To make matters worse Briant is dealing with a detective who is only too prepared to believe in his guilt....

Review

An extraordinary episode which draws universal acclaim and certainly one that competes for the pinnacle of Thriller. It is excellent viewing for the first-timer but a delight for those who have seen it before as they see the finely crafted pieces slot into position. The best episodes often have some longeurs or limitations of some small sort but not this one. It is remarkable how it maintains inspiration throughout.

An intruder in the house in the teaser maybe suggests an attempt on the life of the sleeping Clorissa but things turn out to be rather different. The burglar doesn't even need his own weapon as he discovers a gun. He is immediately discovered not by Clorissa but by her husband. Hugh is actually in the room in the darkness. He appears to have been laying in wait, switches the light on and, cool as a cucumber, invites the burglar to kill him. The intruder though cannot do it - he is not a man of violence. Hugh decides to let him go because "You're not the man I thought you were" and the viewer can see matters are rather peculiar. Why would anyone behave in this way? What sort of man is he looking for? 

All is soon revealed. Hugh and Clorissa are not getting on. They seem to have little in common. She is clearly dissatisfied with his drinking and gambling. There is a real edge between them. Their marriage is on the edge of breakdown. However it is only when a second intruder breaks in that we see his real intentions. Hugh catches Max Burns but the outcome is very different to the first time. Max proves to be a far more challenging customer and maybe even at this point Hugh should have realised he had miscalculated.

All is not well between Hugh & Clorissa Briant - but Hugh thinks he has a solution

Individuals seeking the death of their spouses is a staple of the murder-mystery yet was used surprisingly little in Thriller. Once the Killing Starts is the other main example in the show but the circumstances here are unusual. In the earlier episode the motivation is the common one - the murderer is motivated by his desire for another woman. Money is another frequent motive. Here though the motivation largely appears to be Hugh's boredom with his wife and marriage. Although Clorissa is very wealthy, money doesn't seem to be a factor, although it may lie behind the scenes. There is no sign of "another woman" although Clorissa's remark about Hugh's dalliance with a member of the former house staff suggests Hugh is capable of womanising. This is the only episode where marital discord is openly depicted. Even in Once the Killing Starts the Lanes appeared to be content - the Professor's desire to get rid of his wife was well-hidden.

Hugh intriguingly seems to have connections with the criminal world, either in the past or even the present. His dialogue with Max makes clear that he understands about trade in stolen goods. His composure in the face of danger and his ambitious murder plan hint that he may have been down this road before. He may be a man who has experienced or dealt violence. So much is left open to speculation.

After this elaborate build-up the story more than lives up to expectations. Burns has deliberately framed the attack to incriminate Briant. However Max Burns is not the sole source of his problems. He had not banked on the tenacious - but deeply unscrupulous - Superintendent Lucas. Lucas seems determined to nail him as the killer. It says so much for the story and the performances that one has sympathy for Hugh. This is a man who organised the murder of his wife and has been correctly identified as a killer by Lucas. However he is innocent of this attack. He has been stitched-up by Burns and Lucas and there seems no way out. Even worse Burns is exploiting the situation for his own gain and to add insult to injury it becomes clear that he and Clorissa were far from strangers to each other. Briant is left in a terrible predicament - albeit one he has ultimately brought on himself.

However there are yet more extraordinary twists in store thanks to an indiscreet comment that seems to offer hope for Briant. The police are also able to make a breakthrough in a remarkable way and the scene is set for one of the greatest climaxes in the history of Thriller. 

There are just so many great characters and performances. Gary Collins made three very fine appearances in the show (all as villains) but this has to be the very best. Stuart Wilson though may even be better as Max Burns. He is exceptional in conveying Burns's menace and vindictiveness. Peter Bowles is a real turn-up as the duplicitous Lucas. He is best known for charming, somewhat slippery characters, usually in comedy, but this is an exceptional "straight" performance although Lucas's toying with Hugh can raise a smile. Lucas ranks with Dexter in Come Out, Come Out Wherever You Are as the most memorable Thriller detective. Like Dexter he acts in a grossly unprofessional manner but believes the end justifies the means. His methods are unacceptable but he is right - Hugh is a killer.  Penelope Horner is excellent as Clorissa, a very sympathetic figure who clearly has had to endure much from Hugh. 

Of the ancillary characters the principled Detective Player is highly impressive. It is a great contrast to see him in action with the unorthodox and cynical Lucas. John Flanagan gives a very fine account. The part of Paul provides a little humour through his plummy voice and drunken behaviour. This minor role - very important at the end - is quite effective but it is surprising that James Villiers gets second billing when other actors had far more substantial parts.  

Of course the deceptions near the end may be a little hard to take for some ultra-realistic viewers. However such behaviour is not inconceivable and such allowances set up a top-class story. However even without these it would be a superb effort. There is so much to appreciate here. This is certainly one of those episodes highly recommended for anyone new to the show but it has so much to offer everyone.

Notes

The unknown rock instrumental playing on the radio in Max Burns' flat can also be heard in Death To Sister Mary during a party scene. It is also heard frequently in the serial The Siege of Golden Hill, also produced by ATV and broadcast a few months after this episode.

If It's a Man - Hang Up! - Series 5 Episode 1, 12th April 1975

The story...

Suzy Martin - an American model based in London - seems to have everything going for her. That is until she starts to receive disturbing, threatening phone calls from an unknown man. Suzy's predicament intensifies when her brother Peter is knocked down and killed by a hit-and-run driver; while the police believe it was an accident she is convinced it was a deliberate act by the phone-caller who had mistaken Peter for a boyfriend. The calls do not stop and there seems a real risk of her being physically attacked so a policeman involved in her case called Henry Venner persuades her to spend some time at his country cottage for her own safety. However is Suzy really going to be safe there?

Review

Whichever way you look at it, this is an exceptional episode. It is certainly exceptional in a factual sense. It was the only original story made in an extended format to fit a ninety minutes slot (seventy-five of screen-time).  The original extended version also had its own unique titles and score using strings and brass. However a shorter version using the conventional Thriller music has been available as well in addition to the ITC movie version. As a result it has a complicated history covered more fully in Martin Marshall's excellent book A Thriller in Every Corner.. In terms of quality fans are divided but it probably has more supporters than detractors and in my view it is one of the strongest and most entertaining instalments. The review will concentrate on the extended version, which seems to be the one that aired originally in the UK in 1975 although there's no particular difference in quality between the longer and shorter ATV ones.

Voyeurism is the key subject of this story. Suzy is a model and as such is being observed all the time. As a woman she is aware - and uneasy - about being judged in terms of her appearance. The stalker though is going much further. Not only is he spying on Suzy in her most private moments but he is terrorising her. She knows she is being watched and his phone calls are very frightening. How far will he go? The story focuses on a common fear of women. The heavy breathing and tormenting voice of the stalker even from the start are very disturbing, with skilful direction adding to the fear.

This is a whodunit, and a classic of its type. An assortment of suspects is arrayed very quickly. There are two would-be / ex-boyfriends in photographers Greg and Terry both of whom are angling for Suzy, but how far will they go? The fact that the two see each other as bitter rivals both in a professional and romantic sense adds to the intrigue. The caretaker Murchison perhaps fits the stalker stereotype more closely: a middle-aged man, infatuated with Suzy but clearly out of her league, and already seen to eavesdrop on her. Italian student Bruno has no past history with her but does show an interest. However his attitude seems ambivalent. He remarks on her being "smug" and that she should not live alone: he cannot be discounted. Later the young policeman Henry (or Hal) joins the fray. Hal appears to be very supportive but struggles with anxieties about his disfigured face and relations with women. He is smitten by Suzy but may not be as faithful as he seems. Of course such is the formula that one should doubt whether any of these suspects is the guilty man. In the whodunit the obvious suspect is rarely guilty - or is this one of the exceptions? Innocent or not, none of them inspire total confidence. If it isn't one of them, who could it be? Formulaic it may be but the suspects are still lined-up with great aplomb by Brian Clemens. Excellent suspenseful direction and fine acting makes the results very convincing and satisfying.

Suzy with photographer Terry Cleeves - one of a number of suspects in her case

Carol Lynley does a great job in conveying Suzy's terrible predicament. She does not know with whom she can feel safe. She can no longer live her own life and feels dictated to by her pursuer. She knows he is not a man to be ignored after the murder of her brother. He even cruelly toys with her devotion to her dog Toby. He clearly knows a lot about her and how she can be manipulated.

One of the most fascinating aspects of Suzy is her feminism. Thriller was a very traditional programme and this is the only example of an openly feminist character. Refreshingly Suzy stands up for herself and leads an independent, single life - until the stalker makes it impossible for her. She is assertive in resisting both Greg and Terry and maintains her right to write for a feminist magazine. She picks up on Hal's lazy remark that, "All women are late." In other episodes these sorts of generalised sexist remarks passed uncorrected but not here. There is of course the arguable contradiction about a feminist working as a model but Suzy feels quite correctly that support for women's rights does not have to be at the expense of physical attractiveness. Intriguingly Carol Lynley expressed similar feminist viewpoints and had a similar professional background to Suzy, so it's possible that this influenced the casting or the writing of the part.

Another likeable aspect of Suzy is her open-mindedness. She is a beautiful woman who could pick almost any man but she is happy to consider a relationship with Hal despite his facial disfigurement. She appreciates his personality and supportiveness. The anxiety of Hal about his appearance is though an understandable one, rarely covered in film and TV. In a society obsessed with physical attractiveness someone like Hal can feel neglected and unhappy. She helps to build his confidence but never in a patronising way.

Away from the main story there are some interesting relationships. Betty's play for Greg is notable. She appears to offer him support given his frustrations with Suzy and altercations with Terry. Maybe a romance is on the cards or is Greg still more focused on Suzy and keeping his ex-wife onside? Sue Holderness early in her career makes a strong impression as this enigmatic character. Unusually the policemen featured are constables with no senior ranks involved. The banter between these officers (Richard Lovell and Hal) is also highly engaging - friendly but still with a competitive edge..

The final stages as Hal takes Suzy to hoped-for refuge are very well-done and it soon becomes apparent that Suzy hasn't found a place of safety. The closing minutes are both nerve-racking and poignant and involve so many twists that even at the end one wonders if another one may come. 

Overall Shaun O'Riordan's direction is first-class but the acting performances are uniformly impressive. Gerald Harper was the billed British star but he has very fine support. David Gwillym, always a fine actor, deserves particular credit as Hal - protector or persecutor? In a very small role Michael Cronin will stand out to many viewers as the future "Bullet" Baxter, the very firm but fair PE teacher in Grange Hill. There is a great deal to appreciate here. Probably the shorter version - appearing erroneously as the "official" one on the DVD set - is a little better for the viewer as it is tighter and has the benefit of the superior woodwind score but it is excellent to have the choice of two very impressive versions. The new titles and music produced for the extended version when it premiered also show the very satisfying results that can occur when these are produced at the time by the original creators with the original cast as compared to those added long afterwards by different companies for the ITC movie versions. It is certainly a shame that no other extended editions were made - this one shows there was potential in a longer format even if the standard length probably fits Thriller the best.

Notes

The ITC movie version was the only to be given an on-screen copyright date other than 1974 - here given its correct production date of 1975. All the others were billed as being made in 1974 even though most were made in 1973 and 1975.