MovieChat Forums > Kolchak: The Night Stalker (1974) Discussion > This Friday on "Kolchak: TNS" ep 04 "The...

This Friday on "Kolchak: TNS" ep 04 "The Vampire"


Aired Friday 8:00 PM Oct 04, 1974 on ABC

Carl is up against a beautiful, but extremely vicious, female vampire. This is a situation with which those of you who have seen the first TV movie will be familiar. Kolchak has a surprising encounter with Ichabod Crane. (Well, close enough, it's Ichabod Grace...)


CAST

Darren McGavin
Carl Kolchak

Simon Oakland
Tony Vincenzo

William Daniels
Police Lt. Jack Matteo

Suzanne Charny
Catherine Rawlins

John Doucette
Deputy Sample

Jan Murray
Ichabod Grace

Larry Storch
Swede

Kathleen Nolan
Faye Kruger

Milt Kamen
Gingrich

Jack Grinnage
Ron Updyke

Anne Whitfield
Girl

Army Archerd
Man

Selma Archerd
Woman

Noel De Souza
Chandra

Bill Baldwin
1st Reporter

Alyscia Maxwell
3rd Reporter


CREATED BY

Jeffrey Grant Rice


TELEPLAY

David Chase


STORY

Bill Stratton


DIRECTED BY

Don Weis

reply

Well, it seems I'm the first this week. I'd say The Vampire begin nicely (for "Kolchak: TNS" standards), but ended too abruptly.

This time they didn't have to shoot scenes in LA in the summer and say it was Chicago in October, as Kolchak was supposedly in Los Angeles. Come to think of it, if the series is shot in California, they might as well set the story there. But I liked that the monster of the week was not in Chicago, which means that the supernatural may occur anywhere (especially considering the two TV movies took place in Las Vegas and Seattle, respectively), and Chicago is not the only places these monstrosities choose to appear just because Kolchak works there.

Anyway, after tricking Vincenzo to assign him to do the interview of a guru in California (I think Kolchak even made up the names of some books about Transcendental Meditation he supposedly had read in order to intimidate Updyke), Kolchak gets in Los Angeles where he befriends a pretty redhead (Faye Kruger) who works as a realtor. The lady was also known for winning the prize of best Samantha Stevens (Elizabeth Montgomery) impersonator. Well, not really, but I thought she really reminded me of the star of Bewitched, and that hairdo (probably a highly fashionable style in the 1960s/1970s) helped that effect a lot. I liked her and thought she was a much better counterpart for Kolchak, unlike that obnoxious Monique. In fact it even occurred to me that if the character had continued, she could've become a romantic interest for the hero. I have to admit it concerns me that they portray the protagonist as quite an asexual character.

While Kolchak was in Hollywood, he was more concerned about solving the murders committed by a female vampire (and he was the only person to have figured out the truth from the get-go, certainly because of his experience with Janos Skorzeny in the first TV movie) than interviewing the supposed guru who was getting married or something, which, frankly, sounds like a very insipid story to send a reporter all the way from Chicago to cover it. And the solution Kolchak finds is so typical of him: he convinces Faye to work on his story in exchange for a break in the profession of journalism, an idea he has when he learns that she has studied journalism and would like to work in the field.

I was, in fact, more interested in that part than the hunt for the vampire simply because by keeping the vampire so "mysterious" as the writers always do, they fail to develop her as a character, who becomes more of a gimmick for Kolchak's exploits. Faye, on the other hand, had a backstory, was developing as a character, and the actress had enough charisma for that to happen.

It turns out Faye is not very good at reporting and Kolchak learns that he cannot delegate his work just to the first person he meets in a strange city. As she is writing the article, she asks him if magically has one or two Ls, where the apostrophe would go in "it often loses its own charm" (it's or its'??? Answer: none). And when describing the guru's house she goes into detail talking about plumbing and other architectural aspects as if she were, well, a realtor, which she is.

That part was promising, and I know Kolchak has a bad professional reputation with a lot of people (including Vicenzo) in terms of discipline and following orders, but one reason his boss relies on him is that he must be a good reporter and an excellent writer, and it would be a shame if Kolchak risked losing that because he chose an incompetent to do his job.

As for the murder investigation itself, I thought it was a nice surprise that this time he met a very understanding police captain who gave him all the help he could and was the first to follow Kolchak's advice as far as supernatural matters were concerned. Well, well, not really. Different city, same police attitude. The guy in charge, lieutenant Matteo, even called Kolchak idiotic.

(As a side note, I thought William Daniels, who played Matteo, sounded awfully like Linus Roach, who played ADA Cutter in the last seasons of Law & Order and now is in Vikings, playing a king. Sometimes I could swear I was hearing Roach when Daniels spoke.)

I have to say I loved the final confrontation scene in which Kolchak faced the vampire by setting a field of bushes on fire and burning a large cross, a local landmark he happened to have to pay for. However, the cross burning ritual has so many different interpretations that I doubt they's use that today. Imagine if Kolchak was trying to kill Blackula, for instance...

In the end, the story was apparently discarded (well, again...) just like that, the story about Faye Kruger was also halted (she went back to the real estate business and pretended her stint in journalism never happened), and we don't know how Kolchak handled the whole guru interview situation. Did he rewrite Faye's story? Did he have any information about the guru at all? Would Vincenzo accept Kolchak's shoddy attempt at reporting something he made no effort to write well?

In other words, there were a few promising situations that could've had consequences, but as the episode was running out of time and that particular monster had been killed, it's as if the story didn't deserve proper development and a proper ending.

One last detail: didn't Kolchak lose his equipment (camera and cassette recorder) in a fire in his first confrontation with the vampire? Then how come at the end of the episode he leaves the hotel with Faye and comes back to pick up his equipment. Did he have a spare set? That seems unlikely.

"The Vampire" gets 7 misspelled words typed by a hard-working, but untalented, reporter wannabe.

reply

Nothing new or earth shattering here:
Lucky for Miss. Monoz that the vampire is a slow riser. Nothing like being able to get away by foot when dealing with a hungry vampire.
Nice that the monster of the week was a woman this time. When I hear a vampire episode I visualize a male vampire.
Kolchak has learned that reverse psychology works on Vincenzo. It appears Updyke is not a dumb man. He saw right through Kolchak.
Was clever the way they exaggerated the sound of Kolchak digging through his paper money to find some coins for the bellhop.
Good job of having us assume the man is the vampire as they roll around the floor and then finding out it was the woman.
This is an episode of old friends from that era. John Doucette, Jan Murray, Larry Storch, William Daniels and a cameo by Army Archerd. I remember him randomly showing up on so many shows.
At first I thought they were talking about the record hot spring Chicago was having to explain Kolchak’s convertible. Then off to California he goes. Not sure what the whole heat wave was pointing us to.
Not a bad episode but I think the most damaging part was the actress they picked for the vampire. Being as this was an important part in an episode called “The Vampire” it brings my score down.

6 out of 10

reply

The Vampire

Carl Kolchak first came to believe in the supernatural in 1972 when he covered a rash of serial murders in Las Vegas. The killer turned out to be one Janos Skorzeny...and he was a vampire. By the time it was over, Kolchak thought the story had been neatly wrapped up (along with his career). He was wrong. One of Skorzeny's victims has just awakened by the side of the road where Skorzeny buried her two years ago. She is no longer human.

That connection from The Night Stalker (1972 telefilm) to Kokchak: The Night Stalker (1974 series) is neither overtly stated nor alluded to by Kolchak himself, so anyone who hasn't seen the original film won't need to feel they're missing anything, but it does help explain Kolchak's sudden urgency to be on the scene when he hears that a string of homicides from Vegas to L.A. has left victims with "an inordinate loss of blood". If you haven't seen the telefilm, it just looks like a reporter's zeal.

On learning of the murders from an old friend (TV comedy stalwart Larry Storch as "Swede" Breitowski), and hearing that Vincenzo needs a reporter to fly to LA to get a story on a celebrity spiritual leader, Kolchak secures the assignment by pretending not to want it. Updyke volunteers, and has read up on the subject - just a little - but Kolchak knows how to play his boss, and though Updyke sees through it he's helpless to do anything about it. Too bad for both him and Vincenzo, because Updyke would actually have written the story - Kolchak has no interest in the guru, it's just a plane ticket to him.

Where the earlier three episodes allowed some mystery for us and Kolchak to discover, 'The Vampire' lets us in on the killer's identity from the beginning. Even the story title mocks a concern for spoilers. Her name is Catherine Rawlins, and we watch her progress even as Kolchak is still winging his way across the continent. Her introductory scene is possibly the creepiest single image from the series as her hands rise from the earth by the stalled car of a motorist. It's a blood-curdling moment. In life, she worked L.A. and Vegas as a prostitute. Returning to L.A. in death she kills her former roommate, steals her clothing, and makes herself attractive to a pimp who will put her right where she can find easy victims. By implication Rawlins must be able to pass for human, including speech, but never appears onscreen as anything but a feral animal caught in the act of feeding. Woe to whoever catches her, because she's violent and stronger than human. Skorzeny was kept silent as well in the movie. It's an effective approach, minimizing what humanity she once had.

A police investigation is led by William Daniels as Lt. Matteo, bringing to the role the same imperious irascibility he displayed in 1776 and St. Elsewhere. Excellent casting -that's two in a row, following James Gregory, as authoritative foils both strong and amusing. Matteo is working on a theory that the killings are being conducted by Satanists using vacuum pumps to drain the victims of blood for use in rituals. It's preposterous in the details, but at least presents down-to-earth perpetrators. He's about to run headlong into Kolchak who keeps throwing vampires in his face. Matteo doesn't have the patience for it. Do people really get 'run out of town' by police?

Here's a bit of a problem as Kolchak for the first time starts to sound like a loon even to us, the audience. We know he's right, of course, but what does he do to convince Matteo? Walk him through the logic? Ask Vincenzo to tell Matteo what happened two years ago in Vegas? No, he rants. Rants about stakes and hammers and the undead. Rants like a true believer thinking the conviction of his passion alone will convert everyone else regardless of reason or fact. If you're already in a hole, stop digging. Kolchak is so carried away he can't stop digging with Matteo. He can't get it through his head that others have to go through the same process he did, from skeptic to believer.

Again, it's a testament to Darren McGavin that we cheer on and enjoy Carl Kolchak even though he treats those around him in spectacularly selfish and thoughtless ways. To remain in L.A. he has to placate Vincenzo with his given assignment. To do that, after a token stab at covering it himself, he bamboozles a one-time journalist wannabe into writing it for him. I have a little trouble with this as well, on a couple of levels. Faye the realtor was for a brief time a genuine journalist. Her mind bends to estates these days, and drafts a piece detailing the property the guru used to live in...and I wonder whether she shouldn't know better. It's comic relief, of course, and we are meant to understand that she is now a realtor because as a writer she made a better estate agent. No writer's instinct, then, but...not even a fundamental understanding of covering a story? It may be a quibble, but the more I see of the episode the less these interludes in 'The Vampire' play for me. Vincenzo should immediately spot that the submitted piece was not written by his own reporter: another quibble. K:TNS is precariously balancing between character-driven humor and goofiness, and I have to say that camp has never been my favorite flavor. Speaking of character, I'm leery of Kolchak's intention to sign his byline to Faye's writing. It's grossly unethical, of course, and a *beep* thing to do...but even granting that Kolchak is willing to sink to any dirty trick to get a story, I had always thought his own work was something he held sacrosanct. This isn't the same Carl who shared a lunch with Jane Plumm.

Much of the humor elsewhere is spot on, as when Carl flashes his INS credentials at a janitor and makes like a fed, having been mistaken for one a few hours earlier. There's the look on the face of a doorman when Kolchak pulls up in front of his hotel and sends a woman to his room with the instructions to "Start without me" before driving off. There's an awkward scene wherein Kolchak arranges for the escort service to send Rawlins to his room, and they send someone else. She's a little alarmed, and a lot blase about whatever kink this sad bastard waving a cross at her must be into. He's drawn a cross on the door in lipstick. It's sort of humorous in a nervous, uncomfortable way but not exactly comedy. Nor is the horror-stricken shock on Matteo's face when he finds Kolchak having just driven a stake into the heart of a young woman. He could only be thinking that her death is his own fault for not realizing this lunatic reporter was crazy enough to kill someone and not merely a nutter to put on a plane. No, this show may be about the boogeymen of our childhoods but it ain't for kids.

"The multiple listings had described Catherine Rawlins' house as a baronial retreat. It was actually a decayed turn-of-the-century mansion waiting to be turned into a condominium, and it would appeal to a special type of client: someone unconcerned with earthy comforts...and it was secluded. Who would go near it? Only a vampire. Or some fool looking for her." 'The Vampire' concludes with one of TNS' patented sequences of fumbling in the dark where no sane person should be to find the monster-of-the-week in its lair, and a confrontation. This is one of the better ones with Kolchak leading the vampire into a trap he has set with a local landmark. It does suffer from being repetitive, though, echoing closely the same finale in The Ripper. For a formulaic series, this is something to avoid relying on. I've seen pics of the cross on the hill but a quick (lazy) search turned up nothing.

What to rate it, having set The Ripper at 7 for a standard? I don't think the Faye scenes live up to that but the horror does, and I like that the story varies (if slightly) from the formula. Okay then, 6.5 tubes of lipstick blessed by a priest.

Asides:
Kolchak's narration tells us this takes place in Spring, and later the more specific date of May 6th is given. A week ago it was October! (They Have Been, They Are, They Will Be... was set on the first day of the '74 World Series).

By now we've all seen the nightmarish image of a corpse digging its own way out of the soil it was buried in. This got me wondering when that image might have been put on screen for the first time. It was seen in Zombi 2 (Lucio Fulci, 1979), and Michael Jackson's Thriller (1983), in Return of the Living Dead (Dan O'Bannon, 1985), and Mario Bava's Black Sunday (1960 - highly recommended), and before then must have been a vivid description appearing in printed fiction. Oddly enough, George Romero never used it in his Living Dead films but I think he might have in Creepshow. I asked the good people of the IMDb Horror Board, and while it may or may not be the earliest example I was pointed toward "Misterios de ultratumba" aka The Black Pit of Dr. M (Fernando Méndez, 1959) (Thanks, seth_yeah!) Psychotronicbeatnik made the astute observation that it likely was first used by the pulp comics like Eerie or Creepy, and AlamoScout210 came up with this: https://d1466nnw0ex81e.cloudfront.net/n_iv/600/769983.jpg, and tommix42 is recommending a later story by Richard Matheson and his son Richard Christian Matheson titled Where There's a Will.

Another repeated music cue I like comes in at about 44:23 on the older DVD.

reply

Having read Simian_Jack and Madp's entries I realised that Kolchak doesn't actually do any research into vampires in this story.
In previous like the Ripper and Zombie we saw or it was mentioned how Kolchak came to the conclusion that a extra normal entity was killing.
He is not only suspicious right from his first scene but determined to get to LA and investigate.
From what others have written this makes sense given his experience in the movie (which I have not watched). Although to be honest it didn't bother me. Given his experience in the 3 episodes and how well know the features of Vampire attacks would be, I didn't even question that he quickly came to that conclusion. I do hope this is a one off as if Kolchak continues to make the leap to the strange solution without at least exploring the likely and the mundane first but with an open mind, I think the series could suffer.
With that out of the way, it's off to LA.

So this time Kolchak is trying to balance covering the story he has been sent for with the one he wants to cover. I loved his conversations with Vincenzo, especially when Tony reveals he's figured out where the "phone interference" is coming from. This remains one of the highlights of each story so far and I hope it continues.
Faye Kruger who Kolchak cleverly drafts in to write his piece is pretty well acted and I would vote for her replacing Monique (who is happily absent). It was amusing how her article ended up just like a home listing.
I also enjoyed when Kolchak drops her off at his hotel gives his room number and says "get started without me" to a querulous look from the hotel porter.

The Vampire is once again a mute antagonist much like the Ripper or the Zombie.

As Simian_Jack wrote:

Skorzeny was kept silent as well in the movie. It's an effective approach, minimising what humanity she once had.


It's interesting as the pimp and the man who was trying to pick her up both have interactions with her but we never see her speak even in these mute scenes. Maybe uses her looks to attract men before she becomes more feral. A long distance from the romanticised vampires.

There is another press conference which puzzled me as it seems they were holding it at the crime scene. This was backed up by one of the reporters commenting there didn't seem to be evidence of a struggle, (odd as we saw the struggle earlier). The police lieutenant didn't seem very in control of the conference, with questions just being blurted out right, left and centre.

Finally with have the big confrontation. Visually it was spectacular when the large cross was ignited. I'm not sure how Kolchak got out of this one. He was caught red handed burying a stake in the body of a woman. Even if that body was a 3 year old corpse. He's still got some explaining to do. Vampire v body snatching and a strange occult ritual in front of a burning cross.

7 lenient police officers out of 10

reply

I’ve had a busy weekend so this will be shorter than usual this week. Hope to do better next time.

The good news is that our intrepid reporter gets out of town for this story. Would stretch credibility to have all 20 monsters in Chicago. Bad news is that they go overboard on the whole concept of his being out there. They couldn’t just have him get the interview with the guru like he’s supposed to and then con Tony into letting him stay a few more days on some premise. No, first he’s got to dupe Vincenzo into sending him there using reverse psychology – the opposite of last week where Vincenzo did the same to him. Then he misses the interview and has to trick a real estate lady who had talked to the guru into doing the article and even sending it out without proofreading it. Then he tries to hoodwink Tony into believing there’s a bad connection on the phone every time he calls. And of course there’s the cop of the week to harass him – a couple of them if you count the first guy with the dog. It’s overkill in my book. I can’t just enjoy him chasing down the vampire without his having to dodge all kinds of other obstacles.

And though the final scene of lighting up the landmark cross and trapping the vampire in the ring of fire was great, why would a vampire have rented a place near just a large cross? I mean, it was within running distance of her home obviously; it had to be quite conspicuous even in the dark. That just seemed a little too convenient. (Not to mention the staggering bill he would have to pay to replace it, as he indicated at the end.)

Random thoughts:
The real estate agent's name was Faye Krueger. Almost sounds like Freddy Kreuger; amusing coincidence.

What a shoddy businessman Ichabod Grace is. Kolchak specifically asks for Catherine Rawlins and this bozo sends someone else and still expects $200?

The lines I remembered most from earlier viewings of the episode were both from Vincenzo. One is when he asks Carl if it’s really true the guru’s mansion has “copper pipes throughout.” The other is where he tells Kolchak “When I brushed my teeth this morning, you were still alive. Then after I shaved, you were a dead man. Turn off the electric shaver, Carl.” Then Kolchak has to meekly turn it off. This time around, I also enjoyed the line where Carl asks Faye if she used “nary”. She says yes, why is that bad? “It went out with methinks,” he replies.

William Daniels was very good as the cop; always is. He’s also the best voice for a talking car ever, hands down. I got a kick out of seeing John Doucette as the first cop. I’d seen him recently on THE TIME TUNNEL (yes, I’m watching it again – 50th anniversary and all) as the proud, dignified Ulysses, and now here he is doing the hick sheriff routine. Quite a range on that guy.

I don’t have time to go back and recheck, but the vampire murdered her own sister, then stole her clothes so she’d have a wardrobe going back to her job as a hooker? I know she’s a vampire but I thought at least they still had some semblance of family. Guess it depends on what vampire lore you are going with. The whole superhuman strength bit was well done, especially the way she tossed that football team around like tenpins.

And that poor girl at the beginning. Flat tire in the middle of nowhere, and when she stops to fix it the vampire starts to emerge. She runs for her life, but it’s futile because…oops, no it isn’t. She survives. Good for her!

Okay, got to rate this. Tempted to just give it a six, but I’ll go with 7 fireplace pokers to be cleverly put into the shape of a crucifix to save your life.

reply

The first thing I thought of when I noted the name of the vampire - Rawlins - was the 1979 TV Movie "Vampire," starring the Exorcist's Jason Miller; Richard Lynch was the blond, aristocratic vampire. Miller's character's name (and that of his doomed wife) was ... Rawlins.

reply

I saw that! Due for a rewatch, cuz I don't remember much but thought it was good.

reply

It was a really good TV movie that hasn't been released on DVD. :( Lynch was a very scary vampire.

reply

This the rare Vampire/Hooker story written by David Chase.

OK For some reason it's imperative that the INS in Chicago send a reporter to L.A. to do a story about a famous guru who is really just a stand in for the Maharishi Yogi. Kolchak finds out from Corporal Agarn that there's a string of weird Vampire deaths in Vegas & L.A. so Kolchak cons Vincenzo into sending him out to L.A. Kolchak goes out there and learns that the guru has flown the coop so he cons the real estate lady into writing reports about the guru meanwhile Kolchak pursues his real desire to investigate the vampire case.

Kolchak continues to investigate and falls in conflict with K.I.T.T. who is now a police lieutenant. He tells Kolchak not to do something but in typical Kolchak fashion he does it anyway. Kolchak attempts to confront the Vampire and there's a decent scene in a hotel room but the vampire hooker gets away.

If you hadn't seen the movies you would be at a loss to explain Kochak extensive knowledge of vampires.

Meanwhile Vincenzo is pissed because his article about the Maharishi sounds like a real estate promotion. Vincenzo yells at Kolchak and for some reason he's no fired. Maybe Kolchak is blackmailing Vincenzo.

Kolchak finally confronts the vampire/hooker in some elaborate fire pit with a cross that looks like a Klan rally. For some reason he's allowed to drive a stake into her heart with the police casually looking on.


This show is formulaic and cheesy. It's the same cheesy show every week with a different monster. The special effects suck, the print quality looks like crap and the show is horribly dated. The plots are convoluted and It looks like a 1970's porno. I have no idea why people think this show is so great. Some of the hooker/vampire themes were amusing and the show would have made more sense if it was set in Hollywood.

I give it a 5/10

reply

madp:

I liked that the monster of the week was not in Chicago, which means that the supernatural may occur anywhere (especially considering the two TV movies took place in Las Vegas and Seattle, respectively), and Chicago is not the only places these monstrosities choose to appear just because Kolchak works there.


Yeah, is Chicago built over a Hellmouth? It must mean that these supernatural threats happen all the time, just about everywhere, and Kolchak is only scratching the surface. It just takes someone like Kolchak who has opened his eyes to it to know it's happening. Even Superman can't be in all places all the time.

I still suspect that they flew McGavin to Chicago for a day to shoot footage of him tooling around that city for stock inserts. That shot of him on the L in The Ripper looked genuine - L.A. has no elevated rail that I know of. The producers of K:TNS did send a crew to film the INS exterior, and there's a shot of McGavin seen from one of the office windows as he approaches on the sidewalk below. Seems likely they might have got a few on the road with his Mustang while they were at it.

I have to admit it concerns me that they portray the protagonist as quite an asexual character.


Sticking strictly to the series he does come across that way. He was supposedly pretty hurt by the loss of his love in the first movie, but I can't say he was demonstrably attached to her in spite of his (highly unromantic) proposal off marriage to her. As a kid I was oblivious to this angle.

didn't Kolchak lose his equipment (camera and cassette recorder) in a fire in his first confrontation with the vampire? Then how come at the end of the episode he leaves the hotel with Faye and comes back to pick up his equipment.


Good catch! He did fish it back out of the fireplace but it looked to be ruined.

lorkris:
Nice that the monster of the week was a woman this time. When I hear a vampire episode I visualize a male vampire.


Don't wanna get ahead of the show, but I agree on the first part. They come close to playing a sexist trope though in making her a prostitute. I like that they handle this in a way that puts it across as a matter of practicality to the character, and that while we know she is in the business of seduction it is not glamorized. Usually female vampires are treated as sex objects.

Cloister: I hope you enjoy the show enough to check out the two movies at some point! I didn't even know they existed the first time through, caught The Night Strangler half a decade later, and the original Night Stalker many, many years late. They're well worth it!

He was caught red handed burying a stake in the body of a woman. Even if that body was a 3 year old corpse. He's still got some explaining to do.


The supernatural always seems to be his 'get out of jail free' card, doesn't it? I can only guess that Matteo didn't want to deal with the answers on either a professional or a personal level. People tend to have that reaction to the unknown: look away, bury it, rationalize what they can. It's the bane of Kolchak's existence but it also keeps him from being prosecuted.

brimfin:
...they go overboard on the whole concept of his being out there. They couldn’t just have him get the interview with the guru like he’s supposed to (...) It’s overkill in my book. I can’t just enjoy him chasing down the vampire without his having to dodge all kinds of other obstacles.


Thank you! I knew there was something that bothered me about it, beyond Kolchak's ease with a lack of ethics. Like Cloister pointed out, this week Kolchak already knows all about the threat he's dealing with and the only work he has to do is track her down. Astute observation. That's typically the driving force of his investigation and it moves the stories forward. Instead, this week we get the story being stymied. No one minds because it's amusing, but still...

I don’t have time to go back and recheck, but the vampire murdered her own sister, then stole her clothes so she’d have a wardrobe going back to her job as a hooker?


That went a little too fast for me too. Rechecking, it's when Kolchak questions the apartment janitor or caretaker...he tells Kolchak the murdered Kortner girl had a sister named Catherine (the family name was Rawlins) who moved to Vegas and disappeared. I was calling them roommates before.

JohnQ:
...a story about a famous guru who is really just a stand in for the Maharishi Yogi.


Ahhhh, okay. Good, context! As the script never suggests a hint of scandal about the...ah, Amerta Mera (?) it doesn't make much sense that Vincenzo would send his best muckraker and crime reporter on the story. Still doesn't. Kolchak may be better read on the subject (or pretending to be) but it's still a waste of resources unless Vincenzo is hoping Carl can dig up a scandal. Must've been a slow news week.

Sorry you're not enjoying the show.


reply

From Simian Jack:

Ahhhh, okay. Good, context! As the script never suggests a hint of scandal about the...ah, Amerta Mera (?) it doesn't make much sense that Vincenzo would send his best muckraker and crime reporter on the story. Still doesn't. Kolchak may be better read on the subject (or pretending to be) but it's still a waste of resources unless Vincenzo is hoping Carl can dig up a scandal. Must've been a slow news week.

Sorry you're not enjoying the show.


The show just seems so cheesy. I've heard people rave about this show for years so it's kind of a let down. The whole premise seems kind of convoluted. All of sudden there's a monster outbreak in Chicago and some reporter for a news service is the only person who catches on? It feels more like a cartoon or comic book type of story. It's not really horror show, it's not a drama and it's not really a comedy so it's caught in the middle somewhere. It's not really geared towards adults and it's not really geared towards kids.

The show is very formulaic and cliched, it's basically a monster of the week type of show. The make up and special effects are lousy. The show is filmed way too dark, presumably to because the special effects aren't very good. Kolchak is always in trouble from his boss and does outrageous things yet he never gets fired. Kolchak gets a tip from somebody and immediately deduces out of thin air that it's some type of monster. He's an expert on all things supernatural and knows exactly what to do. He has unlimited access to police departments and crime scenes. The ending is always some MacGyver like trap set up by Kolchak. Then there's usually an official cover up about the monster in question.

I think it would have worked better as a straight comedy/farce set in Los Angeles. Or a straight horror show set in Los Angeles.

I think this kind of idea works better in a movie of the week type of format.

reply

by JohnQ1127 » The show just seems so cheesy. I've heard people rave about this show for years so it's kind of a let down.

Well, I agree with you in many points, and I have to admit I voted for this show mainly because of its reputation, as I wanted to know what the deal with it was.

I just hope next time we pick a show that is good. Just that, good. I mean, not "good, considering how old it is" or "good for its time" or "good compared to other shows of that time." And not a show that is only interesting if seen through the rose-colored glasses of nostalgia, or because folks remember it from childhood. I hope we pick a show we all enjoy for what it still is now, like we did with Firefly, Journeyman or Day Break.

Sorry if I sound grumpy, but I have a cat in the brink of death. Just 16 months old. Run over by a car.

reply

Sorry if I sound grumpy, but I have a cat in the brink of death. Just 16 months old. Run over by a car.


Oh man, sorry to hear that.

reply

From Madp:

Well, I agree with you in many points, and I have to admit I voted for this show mainly because of its reputation, as I wanted to know what the deal with it was.

I just hope next time we pick a show that is good. Just that, good. I mean, not "good, considering how old it is" or "good for its time" or "good compared to other shows of that time." And not a show that is only interesting if seen through the rose-colored glasses of nostalgia, or because folks remember it from childhood. I hope we pick a show we all enjoy for what it still is now, like we did with Firefly, Journeyman or Day Break.


I just find a lot of these hour long procedural/formula type shows from the 1970's very boring. It's the same basic show every week. There's a formula, there's no surprises. There's no overall story arc for a season. There's no continuity from episode to episode. One week it's October the next week it's a May. There's no growth of the characters as they basically do the same exact thing. There's no examination of the character's life or background. The budgets were usually low so there's very little supporting characters. The special effects are weak. There's no consequences to actions. The characters always survive etc.

I wonder if Kolchak would have been a cult classic had it lasted 2-3 mediocre seasons? I think part of the charm of a show like this was that it was never in syndication and unavailable on VHS or DVD for 20-30 years. So there's a bit of a mystery surrounding the show as people would talk about it 5-15 years later in nostalgic terms. I never watched it was a kid so I don't have any nostalgia surrounding it.

I just think it's goofy and cheesy. Most of the time, there are solid reasons why these shows were cancelled after 1 season.

reply

by JohnQ1127 » I just find a lot of these hour long procedural/formula type shows from the 1970's very boring. It's the same basic show every week. There's a formula, there's no surprises. There's no overall story arc for a season. There's no continuity from episode to episode. One week it's October the next week it's a May. There's no growth of the characters as they basically do the same exact thing.

Yep, that was the way to go in that era of television, and I agree with you abut the format's shortcomings. But then what else could they do?

I remember I would start following (watching) a show after some or several episodes had already aired (usually shows started without great advertising), then I'd miss a few episodes in the middle, and the show might be interrupted all of a sudden because of a change in the programming of the TV station. Then I'd see a few reruns, give up on it, catch up with it years later at another station and eventually catch up on episodes I missed. Of course, just out of the blue, in the middle of a season, they'd air the pilot (again) and I'd see it for the first time. Some other day we might be surprised by a season or the series finale, which would just be followed by a regular episode the following week. That was the life of a TV watcher in the 1970s in Brazil.

On the other hand, national productions called "novelas"always had a beginning, a middle and an end, each episode would only be shown once and everything was organized. So I grew up thinking that a single story was a novela, and standalone episode, a series.

I think a serialized show would be impractical in the past. And even though viewers like me prefer serialized shows now, procedurals with standalone episodes such CSI: Wherever and NCIS: Generictown are still the most watched dramas.

As for the support messages about my cat problem, I'd like to thank you all for your support. I was angry because members of my family wanted to euthanize the cat and that seemed, for a moment, what was going to happen. Fortunately, people changed their minds and Dexter the cat will undergo hip surgery on Friday.

reply

by JohnQ1127 » I just think it's goofy and cheesy. Most of the time, there are solid reasons why these shows were cancelled after 1 season.

Indeed and that's precisely the point. After all, we're the Sages of the Single Season, not Sages of the Five Seasons... We chose to pick cancelled, preferably, one-season shows, and those usually have some serious issues, which become even more noticeable if the show is old. Sometimes we're lucky to stumble on a gem which whose reason for cancellation we simply can't figure out.

reply

I have a cat in the brink of death. Just 16 months old. Run over by a car.


That's terrible, I'm so sorry to hear it.

reply

Sorry to hear about the cat, I hope it pulls through


reply

You make some good points JohnQ.
I'm enjoying Kolchak so far, mostly due to the dialogue in some scenes and little sight gags. I feel it does manage some creepy moments like Kolchak creeping up alongside the dormant Zombie.
Having said that I did feel Vampire felt fairly similar to Ripper. It didn't bother me so much this time but I did have to think about my score as to wether it is accurate to give it the same grade.

by JohnQ1127 - There's no overall story arc for a season. There's no continuity from episode to episode. One week it's October the next week it's a May. There's no growth of the characters as they basically do the same exact thing. There's no examination of the character's life or background


I guess I didn't think about this. It's something we have come to expect in modern series and I concede it is a hindrance to a series long life if it doesn't evolve over time. Perhaps by the time we reach the second half of the episodes I might begin to wane on the series. I suppose this is the advantage of choosing shows without multiple series or long runs, it is less likely to outstay it's welcome.

I hope there is going to be the odd episode ahead that is more enjoyable for you.

reply

madp: just hope next time we pick a show that is good. Just that, good. I mean, not "good, considering how old it is" or "good for its time" or "good compared to other shows of that time." And not a show that is only interesting if seen through the rose-colored glasses of nostalgia, or because folks remember it from childhood.



You're certainly welcome to your own reaction to the series, and I can even relate as there are plenty of tv shows, once childhood favourites, that now don't even come close to measuring up to what I once thought of them. Once upon a time Irwin Allen was da' man, but just about anything he produced for tv is pretty atrocious when seen through adult eyes, and I must admit it simply amazes me that I ever could've missed how badly written they were. "Kolchak: The Night Stalker", however, is not one of those shows. Yes, it's definitely formulaic, but then we're only talking about a 20 episode run, so it's not like they were telling the same story for years and years like, for example, it's grandchild, "The X-Files". Sure, the makeup is, at times, embarrassing, and I realized even as a kid that "The Sentry" was a laughably designed monster. However, much of the dialogue is something I laugh with, not at, because it's so genuinely witty and well-crafted. Paul Playdon did a great job scripting "The Werewolf", and, judging by their contributions to "K:TNS", it doesn't surprise me that David Chase and Robert Zemeckis went on to have pretty spectacular careers in film and television. Likewise, the quality of the acting still impresses me, and it really seems kind of outrageous that neither the perfectly cast McGavin, nor Simon Oakland, were emmy nominated for their superb performances.



I wouldn't condemn anyone for calling out this show's technical shortcomings, but good writing and acting does not degrade like something left in the refrigerator too long. "K:TNS" has something more enduring going for it than just nostalgic appeal.

reply

a_l_i_e_n I can see how what I said could be misunderstood. I have been enjoying Kolchak and my comment of ‘yes, please’ had more to do with the past shows we have watched since I have joined the group. I am enjoying watching Kolchak.

reply

Cheers, lorkris! Glad you're enjoying them.

reply

by a_l_i_e_n » I wouldn't condemn anyone for calling out this show's technical shortcomings, but good writing and acting does not go degrade like something left in the refrigerator too long. "K:TNS" has something more enduring going for it than just nostalgic appeal.

I agree with you as far as certain elements are concerned, the acting particularly. Clearly there's "something more" there. But it's not he kind of show I would ordinarily take time to watch if I'm looking for something entertaining, as on the whole, it has not aged well in my opinion. But then that's the nature of the shows we watch here. The last one we covered, UFO, also had some major shortcomings we had to deal with.

reply

Madp

And not a show that is only interesting if seen through the rose-colored glasses of nostalgia

Yes, please!
Glad to hear you cat is getting the surgery that will help him.

reply

Average episode spoiled really by the Vampire seen its glory/gory at the end. The actress was surely playing it for laughs, at least I laughed. To be fair she may have been asked to play it that way, but it ruined any genuine suspense for me.
Now the police know about vampires and that Kolchak is sometimes right will they listen to him more? Probably not. The next police press briefing it will probably still be " Kolchak get outta here you lunatic"
One does wonder why Vincenzo doesn't sack him, or why Kolchak doesn't resign and become a freelance. He could work on his crime stories and sell them to whoever will take them and be free to follow the stories he really wants.
As for the FX , I never criticize old shows will small budgets, the FX is OK.
Some folks are having trouble with the picture quality, the five DVD set I'm using is pretty good quality.
This show's short lived status has definitely helped keeping it as " cult " material, more than one season would make it unacceptably tedious.
4/10

reply