Why only two seasons?
Just curious why this show, which in my opinion excellant, was only to run for two seasons. Well done, with effective stories, it deserved a longer run.
share[deleted]
I agree with you on the number of episodes in the two seasons. Perhaps someone can illuminate us on the reason for cancellation though.
share
Low ratings. If it had high ratings, it would've been renewed for a third
year.
This is one of the most uneven TV shows I have ever watched. Dreadful,
dull, slow, much to the time, with an occasional dip into a spooky offering.
But, frankly, after viewing them all on Youtube, I would never spend
the (overpriced) money for this show, as I would hardly watch any of
them more than once, maybe twice. Too many duds.
I agree with gbennett5, I'm not surprised by only two seasons! It really wasn't that great and most of the episodes left you hanging like WTH! Either didn't tie up any loose ends or just plain didn't make sense! Alfred Hitchcock Hour and Presents were a lot better! Even with Boris Karloff hosting.. it always bothers me that he doesn't chime in at the end to add some sort of closure!
This is one of the most uneven TV shows I have ever watched. Dreadful,
dull, slow, much to the time, with an occasional dip into a spooky offering.
But, frankly, after viewing them all on Youtube, I would never spend
the (overpriced) money for this show, as I would hardly watch any of
them more than once, maybe twice. Too many duds.
Yeah, that pretty much sums up my reaction, too. I waited decades to finally see this series, and I was chomping at the bit to see what Stephen King declared to be best horror-themed program he ever saw. Well, from what I've seen so far on YouTube, with few exceptions this series has largely been a disappointment. There didn't even seem to be all that many spooky episodes to so enchant the then youthful author. I think he needs to re-appraise this series because, in my opinion, there's been far more effectively produced horror shows than this. I would easily rate both "Kolchak: The Night Stalker" and the 30 minute series "One Step Beyond" above "Thriller". Even their adaption of the story "Yours Truly, Jack The Ripper" came out tepid. What was with the hipsters?! As for the noirish crime drama episodes, I was so bored with "Twisted Image" I just ended up skimming through the last half, and they don't even show the climactic gun battle at the end of "The Big Blackout"; we only get to hear about it. Very uneven series. share
Yes, Hitchcock, who had just expanded his series to one hour, made sure that "Thriller" was killed - and I gather the network wasn't sufficiently around it. The show was just finding its way, as early in the 1st season there were episodes that were decidedly melodramatic, without the edgy supernatural or murderous themes that developed later.
But as to the show quality? You have to remember - this was 1961 - 1962. How much from that era has anyone watched recently? Can anyone even sit through "The Twilight Zone" anymore? Almost all of the classic Rod Serling episodes now regarded as classic are unbearably slow and laughably innocent by today's standards. Virtually nothing stands up - and I am not even talking about the black and white photography which bothers so many (those not raised in what is now considered a "classic film" environment). Of all of those early tv shows, the only ones I have seen that actually make it are the Perry Mason episodes from the 1st season only, which comparatively move quickly - there was so much plot information needed, the shows are brisk - and Perry was, for that season only, morally ambiguous. Then it settled into a dull routine.
But "Thriller" was THE show to watch. It was a tough watch for kids in the 1960s - episodes like "The Cheaters" "Pigeons From Hell" "The Incredible Doktor Markeson" "The Grim Reaper" "The Hungry Glass" (these last two starring William Shatner), "A Wig for Miss Devore", "Parasite Mansion" and a few others were the absolute height of 1960s terror. Really. "Psycho" in theatres had lifted the boundaries and even television was following suit....but it was only "Thriller" that really picked up the ball and ran with it.
Watching them today may be a disappointment, but has anyone lately watched the 1968 "Night of the Living Dead", then unmatched for sheer terror and gore effects?
It's not entirely fair to judge those wonderful old episodes with what has happened since...but I acknowledge the experience cannot be recreated. Trust me when I say that "Thriller", at its height, for the two years it ran, was far and away above the grade of the Hitchcock show. Which may also have contributed to the reason why Hitch had it killed.
Can anyone even sit through "The Twilight Zone" anymore?
Trust me when I say that "Thriller", at its height, for the two years it ran, was far and away above the grade of the Hitchcock show. Which may also have contributed to the reason why Hitch had it killed.
I can believe that. Still, I like it when a show that enchanted you in your youth years later still has the ability to impress. And while I concede that Rod Serling could be a very uneven, overly pedantic sort of writer, there are a lot of "Twilight Zone" episodes that still carry a punch. I sincerely doubt there are many even today who could watch for the first time something like "Time Enough At Last" or "To Serve Man" and not appreciate the quality of the writing and performances. I think "Thriller" (from what I've seen so far) is a quality production that has it's merits, but what really hurt it was 60 minute running time. I think that's a major reason why "The Twilight Zone" works so much better. It was only when CBS expanded "TZ" to an hour that it, too, suffered quality wise, prompting the network to go back to a thirty minute format. share
Good answer - and by the way, The Twilight Zone's "To Serve Man" - I saw it in its premiere air date. Perfect example: that episode gave me profound nightmares for weeks....I couldn't sleep at all that night. I was 10. Thriller had the same impact. It did not have low ratings, I believe - in any event, all the kids at school watched it, it was widely discussed, etc. Now, I don't have the Neilsen reports from 1961 - 1962, but I can say if the show was do-not-miss in small town somewhere in the Midwest, then it probably had similar fans across the universe. Which is why Stephen King remembers it so.
I have the full collection DVD, and the other night, I rewatched "The Cheaters" and "The Hungry Glass". Yes, okay - they're old. By today's standards, impossibly slow. The scripting dullish and the guest stars (actually pretty top grade - in addition to a lot of Shatner, there is Mildred Dunnock, Henry Daniell (who worked everywhere at the end), Jack Weston, Constance Ford, Edward Arnold, many others) uneven - sometimes they are fabulous. The music is by Jerry Goldsmith and is usually fabulous - much higher grade than you'd expect, but then this was the era when you had Nelson Riddle's great Route 66 theme, and Henry Mancini's classic Peter Gunn theme - tv music back in the day often a far, far grade above today's dim product.
But I am quite sure few can watch Thriller today with any sense of admiration or understanding without the underpinnings of deep understanding of classic television had come from. I mean, in the day, we weren't that far removed from Milton Berle, I Love Lucy, My Little Margie, I Married Joan, Your Show of Shows, December Bride, /i] all the Desilu product...and by the early 1960s audiences were demanding more for the first time, with shows like [i]Route 66, Dr. Kildare, The Defenders, Perry Mason, The Twilight Zone, One Step Beyond (impossibly dull today), The Dick Van Dyke Show, The Andy Griffith Show, many more. Tastes were changing. And I doubt any show on television had showed blood before. Gore effects? For the era, Thriller was stomach churning simply because nothing but nothing had pre-existed. And most of the episodes had bleak, bleak, bleeeeeaaaaakkk endings.
So when I read criticism about the show's slowness and other problems, I have to sadly concur that without a full appreciation of the turbulent 1960s, when we were barely emerging from the bland, racist, neurotic, and deeply troubled postwar 1950s - remember, much of the country still was segregated, fer crissakes, and everyone was afraid of The Commies - you just have to understand that Thriller was deeply in the Zeitgeist. Maybe it was so wonderful because Hitchcock did kill it - it died young. But ratings problems? Quality problems? Not scary enough? Bosh. You just don't know the 1960s. Understandable if you were not there.
Trust me. Thriller was the show not to miss. After all, it inspired Stephen King, didn't it? And no doubt thousands more.
[deleted]
'I have to sadly concur that without a full appreciation of the turbulent 1960s, when we were barely emerging from the bland, racist, neurotic, and deeply troubled postwar 1950s - remember, much of the country still was segregated, fer crissakes, and everyone was afraid of The Commies - you just have to understand that Thriller was deeply in the Zeitgeist.'
-----------------------------------------------------
Yeah,naturally let's find a way to incorporate politics and war and segregation and racism and constipation into why a tv show worked or didn't work, so we can feel on-top-of it. Every decade is known for being 'turbulent', it seems.
[deleted]
I agree with Sandfree's assessment here. Thriller is best appreciated in the context of the times. As a result, those not born in the second generation to grow up with television might erroneously compare the series to those of later decades. For its time, Thriller's best episodes are bone-chilling delights, and the black and white cinematography creates that dark and suspenseful mood that so enhances the ambiance of the horror film genre.
shareI'm far younger than the second generation to have TV, and I really enjoy Thriller. I watch every weeknight on MeTV. I think commenters here are underestimating the show, but to each her own.
shareCan anyone even sit through "The Twilight Zone" anymore?
I just have to ask - are you just going out of your way to be daft?
There are a handful of 'Thriller' episodes I've enjoyed, and it's certainly better than 'Night Gallery', but not as good as 'Alfred Hitchcock Presents'. I need to see more of 'Outer Limits', and 'One Step Beyond.' But 'TZ'? Sorry, but that show is still the gold standard. And yeah, not all of the episodes are great, and some are pretty dated, but when 'TZ' had a winner - it had a winner.
From "Where Is Everybody", to "To Serve Man", the writing on 'TZ' was top-notch. And it has episodes that I think people will be enjoying for decades to come, because they are just so well done. 'Thriller'? Not so much.
share
Can anyone even sit through "The Twilight Zone" anymore?
What a ridiculous question.
Yes, of course people can sit through 'The Twilight Zone' today. It is a great series. Not every episode is brilliant, but I can easily sit through, and enjoy most of the series. And indeed, it's on every night on MeTV, so I get a chance to watch it, and enjoy it.
Now try and say the same thing about 'Thriller'? MeTV was showing it fairly recently, so I had a chance to see a number of episodes. Ok stories, but not nearly as good as 'TZ'.
Sorry, but 'TZ' really raised the bar pretty high. 'Thriller' just doesn't match up. Not saying that 'Thriller' isn't a good series, but I have never found it to be in the same league as 'TZ'. share
This is actually BS, sorry. It was not at all uncommon, in this era especially, for popular shows to simply end or be replaced for one reason or another. The Munsters and The Addams Family were both very popular, but each only had two seasons. Gilligan's Island was one of the most beloved shows on TV, yet it only had three seasons.
In the case of Thriller specifically, it was actually a fairly popular show. The reason it got cancelled, simply put, is because Alfred Hitchcock had it cancelled. I love the man as a director, but in a severely dick move, Alfred Hitchcock Presents was set to become The Alfred Hitchcock Hour, and he felt it "just wouldn't do" to have TWO hour-long mystery/thriller shows on TV. IE He didn't want the competition. He wanted his show to be the only game in town.
That is the unfortunately truth. Otherwise, Thriller likely would have received at least a third season.