MovieChat Forums > The Twilight Zone (1959) Discussion > Four O'Clock

Four O'Clock

posted 7 years ago by Scarecrow88 (57)
26 replies | jump to latest

This was a revisit tonight as it was treated as background during the 4th but I must say its inclusion in the marathon over the likes of The Hitchhiker and Midnight Sun is surprising. Oliver Crangle and his witchhunt, dictating himself the seeker of those evil, researching and categorizing them, conducting his own library of "communists, subversives, thieves, and evildoers". On files, in alphabetical order, eyeballed through thick-lens glasses, visor and vest his costume, Oliver takes this job seriously. To many a hobby or extracurricular activity, for Oliver this is life, obsession, mission. Calling up the employers of folks he considers bereft of value, sizing up his targets through slanderous accusation, issuing letters to businesses and institutions he feels should adhere to his calculating indictments; Oliver is a one man crusade obviously resembling McCarthy and those of his ilk who went after those they deemed unfit to be called American and patriotic. Substitute "evil" as an oft-used derogatory term for all Oliver [McCarthy] considers worthy of punishment, plotting to get 'em real good when it properly comes to him, and it's Salem all over again.

It's certainly a pulpit ministry, this episode. Poisonous rhetoric and an obsessive quest to point out the supposed weaknesses and frailties of others, Oliver is quite a gratuitous cartoon sized up correctly by the wife of a young doctor he seeks to ruin for the death of a patient during a busy night and a FBI agent called by him to root out the wicked he has so doggedly stockpiled in his files. They see him in full bloom insanity, swept away in his hysteria, enveloped by his prejudice and devoured by his judgemental nature. At 4:00 they will all pay for their sins. They will be two feet tall. He is sure of this.

But ultimately the one so sure others were cruel, and deserved of whatever righteous judgement he felt positioned to choose, through phone call or poisoned pen, thumbing across pages with names and numbers, nose stuck in books and eyes grabbing whatever details his dark heart and foul soul could use as weaponry; Oliver was the perfectly fit subject for what 4:00 would bring. Superiority setting him off to look upon the masses from his apartment as lesions and sores, nothing more than oozing disease, Oliver failed to realize he was the true gangrene. His parrot had him pegged..."nut."

[–] AngularTurnip (3337) 7 years ago

From Focus On The Family to MSNBC our media landscape is full of Oliver Crangles -- finger-pointing zealots determined to rid the world of evil. Of course, they never stop to consider that when they're doing all their finger-pointing many of their own fingers point back at them.

I enjoyed your analysis. This episode had no business being played instead of "The Midnight Sun" or "The Hitch-hiker." With that said, the episode remains tolerable largely because Theodore Bikel makes a very endearing Crangle. The way he mocks his landlady with "Well I, Well I," just cracks me up.

In the radio version of "Four O' Clock" Pete mistakes Crangle for a snack and eats him. I expected this outcome when I initially watched the episode, especially considering how Pete eye-balls Crangle after Crangle is gnome-size. I thought that was a missed opportunity on Serling's part. Thankfully, the radio version adds this macabre turn-of-events, correcting Serling's oversight, and fashioning consequently a more satisfying experience.

Incidentally, why four o' clock? In Matthew 14:25 it says four o' clock in the morning was when Jesus approached his apostles while walking on water. And in Merriam Webster four o' clock is primarily an American annual or perennial herbs without any petals. That's about all I found.

[–] [email protected] (1732) 7 years ago

Yep, a totally predictable episode. But in this day of Blu Rays, why do people even bother with the marathons when
the series is cut to ribbons and the commercials are tedious and endless??

I haven't watched classic TV on cable in decades. Beats me as to why others do.

[–] AngularTurnip (3337) 7 years ago

Tradition.

[–] Tristan_Booth (405) 7 years ago

why do people even bother with the marathons when the series is cut to ribbons and the commercials are tedious and endless?? I haven't watched classic TV on cable in decades. Beats me as to why others do.

It has to do with knowing that other people are watching it at the same time. It creates a sense of community.

[–] AngularTurnip (3337) 7 years ago

That communal spirit was definitely enhanced when SyFy ingeniously decided during Prime Time this year to give audiences two "TZ" episodes and then vote as to which one plays next. And to make sure there were no hard feelings amongst those whose episodes didn't win SyFy played their picks later in the night (or, at least they were nice enough to during the New Year's Marathon).

[–] [email protected] (1732) 7 years ago

Uh, yeah. Okay. Uh...I'll just stick with my Blu Rays. Later.

[–] Scarecrow88 (57) 7 years ago

More or less as background while spending time here chatting about the episodes selected for the marathon. I have the series on DVD so I rewatch them uncut during the year.

[–] Scarecrow88 (57) 7 years ago

I read that the radio story ended that way. I believe there was even more morbid conclusion to Night Call as well.

[–] [email protected] (1732) 7 years ago

I see the point, but it would be great if SyFy ran the shows uncut, even if it meant oddball starting times. True
fans would be tuned in anyway, and casual viewers would be just as hooked if they suddently tuned in. But
even still, I can't deal with the commercials anymore. When I was a kid, and we didn't have a choice, we
dealt with it. But now that we do, I can't bear them. They're even more louder and obnoxious than ever
before. Same thing with, say, The Wizard of Oz. Restored on Blu Ray, who on earth would bother with a
commercial-laden TBS broadcast?

But then one might argue that sitting alone in our "in-home theatres", with no outside contact is
unhealthy. To me, I LOVE the aloneness with these shows. As for community, I love watching newer shows
and new movies with friends.

To each his own.

[–] AngularTurnip (3337) 7 years ago

Mining humor out of "The Twilight Zone" ( a brilliant show but let's face it: a very quaint one too) while alone is a great deal of fun; it's even more enjoyable doing it with a bunch of others.

[–] [email protected] (1732) 7 years ago

When I'm watching a classic show or film on Blu Ray, I couldn't possibly care less if "strangers" are watching it
at the same time or not. Just last weekend I watched the Blu Ray of "Jaws" and was so enthralled by
the restoration (Spielberg has stated that the film looks better now on an HD TV than when originally
screened on 35 MM in theatres back in '75, but I digress...). It's the film/show, not the "company" of
strangers. I can also enjoy an art/indie film in an empty theatre by myself. On the other hand, it's fun
to see a major comedy while laughing with others in a theatre. Depends on how you look at it.

Again, to each his own.

[–] pankoeken (469) 7 years ago

If you love being a sad little loner so much why are you on here boring everyone by prattling on about how you love being a sad little loner? It's almost like you're being disingenuous but I digress.

[–] [email protected] (1732) 7 years ago

"Sad little loner??" That's YOUR perspective, spermbag. I merely pointed out the joys of watching the
show on Blu Ray in privacy - sans cheesy commercials; sans cut episodes. I also pointed out the
opposite viewpoint of "community" viewing. But, of course, you resorted to an attack, which only
reveals that YOU are a "sad" viewer who revels in watching butchered "reruns" on the tired SyFy
channel, so you can then rush to comment on...hoping (in your mother's basement, no doubt) that
other "community" losers will respond. Pa-the-tic.

[–] [email protected] (5854) 7 years ago

I didn't get the "sad little loner " comment either. I also enjoy watching my dvds of classic shows without the painful commercial interruptions.

I do like to introduce the younger generation, like my niece, to some of the classic sitcoms. But for me, the experience of watching some of these classics is akin to reading a good book. I don't NEED a crowd around me to enjoy it!

And sometimes, just being practical, some people need to ask questions and interrupt. It ruins the enjoyment of an episode.

I know some men who are football FANatics and if you ask a question during a game they want you penalized and thrown out of the room. lol And football has no dialogue!

To each his own. I too prefer to watch my favorites without distractions.

[–] Tristan_Booth (405) 7 years ago

sometimes, just being practical, some people need to ask questions and interrupt. It ruins the enjoyment of an episode

This, of course, is the beauty of an online community because no one can interrupt your viewing if you choose not to look at the computer until after the episode ends. Yes, there are commercial interruptions, but those who own the DVDs can choose to watch the same episode on DVD that others are watching on television. Everyone is still watching the same episode at the same time. Personally, I own the DVDs, but I just watch marathons on television, using the commercial time to look at the recent posts.

[–] [email protected] (5854) 7 years ago

Oh I also agree that the "online community" experience is fun too. If someone watches the DVD in order to watch what others are viewing on TV, that can be fun. It's great to participate in the on-line discussions during commercial breaks

But some people don't get into marathons. Not trying to be argumentative here, I just don't get how that makes one a "sad, little loner" is all I meant.

I love the friendliness and fun exchanges of going on-line and discussing a show I love. It's just that not everyone views these shows in the same way.

[–] Tristan_Booth (405) 7 years ago

some people don't get into marathons. Not trying to be argumentative here, I just don't get how that makes one a "sad, little loner" is all I meant.

Well, of course, I'm not the person who said that. (I prefer it when everyone is polite on discussion boards.) I'm actually something of a loner myself, and I don't find that sad, but I'm obviously not a total loner or I wouldn't get anything out of watching while others are watching.

[–] [email protected] (5854) 7 years ago

Oh yeah sorry. I didn't mean to imply that you came up with the "sad loner" comment.

There are some shows and movies that people to watch with others. In fact I will probably be going to see the new Planet of the Apes movie tomorrow with my sister. Not that I really want to see it, but SHE doesn't want to go to the theater alone! She can never get anyone to go see those movies, so I go with her. She loves the Ape movies.

I like to watch comedies with others. It's often funnier when others are laughing too.

But when it comes to the old sitcoms and TZ, I don't know many people who get into them like I do. They think I'm nuts for watching I Love Lucy so often. I've gotten into the habit of watching those old shows alone and then coming here to discuss them to death, lol.

[–] pankoeken (469) 7 years ago

I'm sorry I hurt your feelings. A happy little loner then. Considering you posted multiple times on a thread to say it's stupid to watch the marathon and when it was explained why others enjoyed doing it you snidely replied. "Uh, yeah. Okay. Uh...I'll just stick with my Blu Rays. Later." you sure are extremely sensitive.

Also we're all REALLY impressed you still collect an obsolete digital formal. Can you please say Blu Ray a few more times? Those first 50 times were not sufficient.

I don't understand why a person like you makes smug condescending comments and then feigns OUTRAGE when someone replies in kind. Sorry if this post hurt your feelings too. On the positive side, there's no one around to see you pout.

[–] Scarecrow88 (57) 7 years ago

I think there was one year they did. The times were off but it was a breath of fresh air. A couple years ago, during New Year's Eve and Day, SYFY ran the complete series in order. I do the aloneness during the year and revel in the community activity the holiday marathon brings those two times a year. 🚀

[–] AngularTurnip (3337) 7 years ago

They not only showed the complete series they threw in "Twilight Zone: The Movie" too. I was glad they did since I hadn't seen the movie's best segment -- the George Miller-directed "Nightmare at 20,000 Feet" -- in ages and was reminded what a masterful piece of cinema it is. Not very many remakes rock but in this case not only does Miller equal the Richard Donner-helmed black-and-white version he may in fact top it. (The fact that the remake confines the monster mostly to the shadows, something the otherwise excellent original glaringly elects not to do, is what puts it potentially ahead of the '63 version for me.)

[–] [email protected] (1732) 7 years ago

Nice try. But the TZ movie - a cheeseball disaster - is totally forgotten. And the remake of "Nightmare at
20, 000 Feet" is utterly awful, with a horribly, over-the-top performance by the ham-fisted John Lithgow.

[–] Scarecrow88 (57) 7 years ago

Admittedly I'm not too wild and crazy about the movie, and it's Vic Morrow segment continues to this day to leave a bad taste, but I loved the score, opening with Albert Brooks and Aykroid, the colorful theatrics of Dante's madhouse taking It's a Good Life into gonzo territory, and Miller just throws the subtlety out the window with in-your-face direction. Lithgow certainly went the no-restraint route, giving quite a full-bore performance.

[–] AngularTurnip (3337) 7 years ago

Lithgow might out-Shatner Shatner if that's even possible.

I loved Dante's segment up until the cop-out ending. If it weren't for that ending it too, like Miller's segment, would rival the original. Dante was very smart to tell the story of Anthony Freemont from the perspective of an outsider. Helen Foley accidentally hitting Anthony with her car and then electing to make up for it by driving Anthony back home and staying for dinner, where she meets Anthony's other "guests," puts an eerie spin on a familiar story, and also provides a through line that the plotless '61 version lacked.

The Jerry Goldsmith score is indeed great (but then again his scores often were, including the scores he wrote for specific episodes of the original "TZ" series like "Back There," "The Intruders," and "Nervous Man in a Four Dollar Room).

Aykroyd and Brooks made a superior pair (and, boy, did they look young). I especially liked when they started recounting old TV theme songs. (Brooks take on the "National Geographic" theme, replete with made-up lyrics -- "look at that old man he looks like an old ape" -- amuses me every time.) The green monster Aykroyd eventually turns into is pretty ridiculous but then so too were a lot of the monster costumes in the original "TZ" (none more so than the gremlin in Mr. Donner's "Nightmare at 20,000 Feet").

[–] db20db (17235) 7 years ago

That episode was actually referenced by DiNozzo ( who happens to be a film buff ) in an episode today of NCIS. He referred to it as, " classic Twilight Zone. "

[–] AngularTurnip (3337) 7 years ago

Indeed it is.