edward@ukma.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) (01/06/86)
Huh? I don't get it. What was the twist? Did she imagine it? Was the reporter involved? (I have a knack for missing the key 5 seconds of mystery shows.) -- Edward C. Bennett ihnp4!cbosgd!ukma!edward "Goodnight M.A."
cc-30@cory.BERKELEY.EDU (Sean "Yoda" Rouse) (01/07/86)
In article <2454@ukma.UUCP> edward@ukma.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) writes: >Huh? I don't get it. What was the twist? Did she imagine it? Was the >reporter involved? (I have a knack for missing the key 5 seconds of >mystery shows.) ***** SPOILER WARNING ***** If you haven't seen this episode, and you don't want to know what happened, don't read on. Samantha imagined the FIRST attack to gain attention. After that, another girl who lived across the street said that she was attacked snd that she stabbed the attacker, who was wearing a ski mask, in the neck with a hair buret (or something). Samantha thought that Debbie was lying about the attack for the same reason that she did. Anyway, later Debbie comes over during a storm claiming that the attacker is after her, but Samantha doesn't believe her, and reveals to her that she lied. Debbie leaves the house, pounds on the door, and Samantha finally opens it only to find Debbie dead. She then gets scared and grabs a knife. She opens the back door to find the reporter saying that he's here to protect her. He goes upstairs, Samantha follows. He grabs her & she pulls at his shirt, revealing the stab wound. He then tells her that she shouldn't have lied and that she forced him to make her a part of the story, and then he kills her. How's that? We (my family) had it figured out when she spoke with the reporter. -Sean "Yoda" Rouse ARPA: cc-30@cory.berkeley.edu.arpa UUCP: ucbvax!cory!cc-30
brown@nicmad.UUCP (01/07/86)
In article <2454@ukma.UUCP> edward@ukma.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) writes: >Huh? I don't get it. What was the twist? Did she imagine it? Was the >reporter involved? (I have a knack for missing the key 5 seconds of >mystery shows.) She imagined the attack in the park. But she used that as a way to get noticed. But, the real attacker knew that he didn't attack her. The twist is that the real attacker is the reporter. -- ihnp4------\ harvard-\ \ Mr. Video seismo!uwvax!nicmad!brown topaz-/ / decvax------/
wiebe@ut-ngp.UUCP (Anne Hill Wiebe) (01/08/86)
WARNING: spoiler for this episode!
Well, I understood all of that, but I still don't get the ending.
They showed another girl watching it all on TV; is the idea that
this guy gets his kicks from killing girls but they get THEIR kicks
from pretending to be attacked? I guess maybe I get it but I don't
like it all that much. It needed more of a punch at the end. Or
something. Not as good as earlier episodes (remember the rapist/dancer
episode? the prisoner escape-by-coffin story? Brrr!)
- Annesas@leadsv.UUCP (Scott Stewart) (01/08/86)
In article <11365@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>, cc-30@cory.BERKELEY.EDU (Sean "Yoda" Rouse) writes: > In article <2454@ukma.UUCP> edward@ukma.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) writes: > > >Huh? I don't get it. What was the twist? Did she imagine it? Was the > >reporter involved? (I have a knack for missing the key 5 seconds of > >mystery shows.) > > ***** SPOILER WARNING ***** > If you haven't seen this episode, and you don't want to know what > happened, don't read on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Samantha imagined the FIRST attack to gain attention. After that, another > girl who lived across the street said that she was attacked snd that she > stabbed the attacker, who was wearing a ski mask, in the neck with a hair > buret (or something). Samantha thought that Debbie was lying about the > attack for the same reason that she did. Anyway, later Debbie comes over > during a storm claiming that the attacker is after her, but Samantha doesn't > believe her, and reveals to her that she lied. Debbie leaves the house, > pounds on the door, and Samantha finally opens it only to find Debbie dead. > She then gets scared and grabs a knife. She opens the back door to find the > reporter saying that he's here to protect her. He goes upstairs, Samantha > follows. He grabs her & she pulls at his shirt, revealing the stab wound. He > then tells her that she shouldn't have lied and that she forced him to make > her a part of the story, and then he kills her. > > How's that? We (my family) had it figured out when she spoke with the > reporter. > > > -Sean "Yoda" Rouse > > ARPA: cc-30@cory.berkeley.edu.arpa > UUCP: ucbvax!cory!cc-30 I don't think the above was the answer to question asked. I too figured out that the reporter was the killer. But I was confused about the very ending, which may be what the original author was asking. At the end, they show another girl watching the news report. After the story is over, she is shown in close up and smiles. Why? Scott A. Stewart LMSC - Sunnyvale P.S. Does anyone think that Samantha made up the story of being attacked just to gain attention. The way it was filmed, I thought she actually believed, while she was running, that she was attacked. Later she realized that it didn't happen but had already told the police. When the reporter showed interest, she then realized how much attention she could gain by talking to him.
terryl@tekcrl.UUCP () (01/10/86)
> Huh? I don't get it. What was the twist? Did she imagine it? Was the > reporter involved? (I have a knack for missing the key 5 seconds of > mystery shows.) > Well, yes and no, she didn't imagine it; however, she did make it all up. Yes, the reporter was involved, he was the one doing all of the killings.
terryl@tekcrl.UUCP () (01/10/86)
> Well, I understood all of that, but I still don't get the ending. > They showed another girl watching it all on TV; is the idea that > this guy gets his kicks from killing girls but they get THEIR kicks > from pretending to be attacked? I guess maybe I get it but I don't > like it all that much. It needed more of a punch at the end. Or > something. Not as good as earlier episodes (remember the rapist/dancer > episode? the prisoner escape-by-coffin story? Brrr!) > - Anne That's been my complaint all along about "Alfred Hitchcock Presents". Not enough shock/twist at the end to make the story worth watching, except for a few noticeable exceptions (as mentioned above). As an aside, I posted an article about one of the four episodes that aired last summer, and said that John Carradine had starred in it. Someone pointed out (politley, I might add) that it wasn't John Carradine, but John Huston. Well, they just reran that episode, and much to my amazement (and embarassment) it was John Huston, not John Carradine as I reported.