SHELEG@SRI-AI.ARPA (10/24/85)
From: SHELEG@SRI-AI.ARPA Sigh......just as I feared. Hitchcock Presents has gone right down the toilet. Could anyone even hope to explain just what the heck Buck Henry's story was all about? First off, unlike Night Fever, a story ruined for the sake of a surprise ending, this story was nothing more than a vehicle for a surprise. It was bearly a story at all because the plot (which made no sense) was jealously and completely hidden from the audience until just seconds from the end. Furthermore, the surprise itself made no sense! What did her ability to speak French have to do with anything?? After all, she was still commited to an insane asylum. The only possible use for her French is to surprise the audience (at first) and then give them another good "gotcha" at the end. Even a possible hack I've thought of doesn't seem to work. What if the speaking French is to cover HIMself? I mean, to actually hold a sharp knife (which has already proven itself as a murder weapon) so close to a woman raving (in a persona which has proven itself a casual murderer) at least BORDERS on criminal negligence. Perhaps he could use the shock he supposedly felt as a reasonable excuse for his momentary lapse, his brief lack of response when she grabbed yet again for the murder weapon. No, sorry. Does he really expect us to believe they could be so certain the intended victim would be standing within (and would continue to stand within) arm's reach of the murderous lunatic in the witness stand that their entire plan would be based on it? (I don't think anyone would buy the "I was too much in shock" bit after 15-30 seconds) And just what WAS their plan? Remember, they don't actually get away with anything. I agree that if a murderer has NO hope of being found innocent, he might find it much better to be adjudged insane. But it's hardly a good thing (More like the frying pan instead of the fire). Finally, all this is badly (and cheaply) wrapped up by someone mumbling something like "With all her money they'll let her go." For that matter, why not just get a shotgun and blow the two guys away, because "With all her money, they'll let her go." Just thinking about this shockingly poor excuse for a story is getting me depressed. Are they TRYING to make the new Twilight Zone a cruel joke which sullies the reputation and memory of Rod Serling? (I admit he did a good deal of sullying of himself with Night Gallery.) I have a friend who, when he sees something particularly bad, shouts AWFUL...AWFUL! (A parody of shouting AUTHOR! after excellent works(Yes, even I find that a bit cruel and crude.)) These words apply perfectly to the new Twilight Zone. I've saved the worst for last. Did anyone else bother watching Amazing Stories (Ha!) all the way to the end? Talk about doing *NOTHING* with a premise. I can just see the author. "What would happen if someone from the days of the Alamo were to be suddenly brought to the present?" What the author found out was that he had NO IDEA what would happen! (And neither did the actor playing the part!) The character mearly looks at modern things and either stands wooden (displaying neither shock, emotion, or anything else) or else ignores it completely. Yes, it could very well be true that the only way for the boy to deal with the situation is by just not dealing with it. It is also true that paint dries. I don't want to have to watch it for half an hour. They should have just thrown away the script and improvised (You think maybe that's what they did?) I guess it's back to books for me, -Bob PS Actually, there is a positive side to this. You SF lovers won't have to put up with my reviews anymore. ------- -------