This Friday on "Kolchak: TNS" ep 01 "The Ripper"

The Ripper


Our first two proper looks at Carl Kolchak (including a credits sequence that's a miniature masterpiece) establish him as 'a regular joe' and a working stiff. He rides the L, has no head for fashion, and if his hat spends all day on the floor 'cuz he missed the coathook it's no big deal.

Writing for the Independent News Service, Carl is watching a big story pass him by. Someone is murdering women in Chicago's sex trade. That's the kind of mean, gritty beat Carl is good at...and he's stuck filling in for "Miss Emily", the advice columnist while the killer assignment lands on the desk of prissy Ron "Uptight" Updyke - a reporter singularly unqualified for the job. Carl has been sidelined as chastised by editor Tony Vincenzo after Kolchak's latest act of overzealousness in covering a story: Kolchak made a 'citizen's arrest' of people who got in his way. In Carl's view, that's just getting the job done. Tony knows Kolchak's the best reporter he's got going but oh! The headaches! Kolchak has a gut instinct for rubbing every authority in sight the wrong way, and it always ends up in Vincenzo's lap. That's Tony Vincenzo, bellicose with his underlings but timid with authority. The lead characters and the dynamic that will drive them have now been expertly sketched out for us in a matter of minutes with zero exposition and no fuss.

These regulars are half the fun of K:TNS, balancing the careful build of fright setpieces with delightfully funny bickering. Simon Oakland reprises the role of Tony Vincenzo from the two Kolchak movies that preceded the series, ever frustrated by his star reporter's eccentricities. One of these days Vincenzo's gonna be driven to a breakdown. Updyke (Jack Grinnage) is the butt of Kolchak's humor, never able to get the upper hand. McGavin and Oakland had already established a chemistry with natural rhythm and timing into which Grinnage easily becomes a perfect third party. They make a great comedy trio.

Also funny are scenes of Kolchak being stymied at a massage parlor and encountering a Miss Emily fan who asks if he spends a lot of time checking on weirdos. Cpt. Warren is not especially amusing in himself but his steadfast faith in rationality provides a launching pad for McGavin to send Kolchak on an outraged tirade - he's so much fun to watch when he's skyrocketing!

Humor is a staple of TNS, balancing extended sequences of terror. We see the victims being assaulted, Kolchak investigates, the facts mount. Our serial killer dresses like an escapee from Gothic horror production with natty Victorian dress, cape, top hat and devil's-head cane. He leaps from rooftops several stories high with no injury, walks away from being hit by a car, tosses around grown men - trained cops - like rag dolls and never utters a single sound.

For most of the episode we will only see the murderer's clothing, and in glimpses at that. We are kept in the dark quite literally as time has darkened the film stock of what was already a production set largely at night. This renders some of the action difficult to make out (Kolchak declares that the killer demolished a squad car, but we don't see it), but it also increases the creep factor. You can really feel those empty spaces where it's best not to lurk, or the isolation of a city street at night.

Fellow journalist Jane Plumm sets Kolchak in the right direction when she points out that these killings are replicating Jack the Ripper's reign of terror in London of the late 19th century. Even the crude notes left for police are the same, and a letter withheld by police contain a nasty taunt about devouring one of the victim's kidneys (Jane relates over a huge lunch). Did you know, she asks, that the same killing spree has been re-enacted multiple times over the last century? Contagious psychosis, that's her theory. This story is going to make her career if she can land it for the tabloid paying her salary. She's hungry for it.

Kolchak comes to a much more radical conclusion of his own. One of Jane's copycats was hanged for his crimes, and the next to appear had rope burns on his neck. That added to the superhuman power this killer is possessed of can mean only one thing. This is the real Jack the Ripper, still alive and still killing. I hate to say this, but I must... if you were to judge by the series alone without the prior movies, Kolchak comes off as kind of a flake sometimes. The Night Stalker (1972) had a running length of about 75 minutes, plenty of time in which Kolchak - a down-to-earth skeptic toward the supernatural - could weigh evidence and become convinced that vampires are real. The Night Strangler originally ran for 75 minutes and has since had material restored bringing it to 90. Following up on those two telefilms, K:TNS allows only some 50 minutes per episode, which necessarily means we get little or nothing of his process in reaching unbelievable conclusions. We know he's right every time, but only because he's the hero. By extension that means we know that people like Jane Plumm are wrong. We get exasperated with people like Vincenzo, or figures like Cpt. Warren of the police who stonewall with their common sense. All the same, these are the rational ones in Kolchak's universe. I try not to let that bother me when watching, but sometimes it does. because of the airtime limitations, Kolchak is kind of an incredulous nutter too quick to embrace the ridiculous. Besides his bull-in-a-china-shop approach, it's no wonder the authorities won't give him the time of day.

This particular theory has some holes in it. How exactly is the Ripper still alive and unaging? Is he not human? If not, then what? Why does he keep repeating the exact same pattern of his infamous spree, down to the same notes, instead of just...killing? How can he wear the same shoes for over 70 years without a hint of wear on them? To be filed under YNSTA (You're Not Supposed to Ask). You gloss over it because it's a campfire tale. The details just get in the way. For many, Jack the Ripper isn't just another serial killer, he's the quintessential boogeyman. You can use him any way you like in a story and it will work.

Where the banter with Vincenzo and Uptight have a playful score complete with a near-'wah-wahhhh' theme for horns, strings dominate the dark. Otherwise, scenes of Carl hunting or preparing to confront a monster tend to be silent. If he speaks. it's in pithy prose voiceovers, recorded notes from which he will write his accounts. He tends to compose his thoughts with an ear for the melodramatic punch. Not exactly the stoic hero, then. The Ripper's final act is a confident tour of the Ripper's derelict home and lair, Kolchak making us cringe as he leaves his sign everywhere through sheer lack of grace. That too is a nice touch, making us fear that he is waaay too incautious and really ought the get the *beep* out. But no, he takes us in with him, right into a closet where he and we hide as Jack keeps reaching his hand through a curtain and right past Carl's nose. How does our stalwart hero hold up? He panics and screams. You have to love a hero who loses his *beep* like that.

The finale is well orchestrated, quiet dread building to a breaking point before erupting into frenzy. It would have been nothing, though, without the firm base that the rest of the episode has provided. We see women going about their lives, The Ripper literally intruding into the frame, and then we see the aftermath. it's not graphic, but the sense of transgression and violence is carried in the reactions of those who are on the scene. Ron Updyke is an object of ridicule but his revulsion and horror are easy to sympathize with.

Carl Kolchak - a hero for the people. I'll rate it 7 pairs of highly sensible yet "funny" shoes.

Asides:
The dialog keeps insisting that Jane Plumm is "fat" - that's the specific adjective repeatedly given. Unfortunate enough, this body shaming, and in her one big scene she overloads at a diner. Why, then, was the part cast with an actress who by any standard could never be considered anything but her ideal body index? There's not an ounce of fat on her.

One of the series' signature music cues makes its debut at around 48:40 (per the DVD). It's one of my favorites from childhood. You'll be hearing it often throughout the show. I also love that title theme by Gil Mellé. Mellé is credited with writing the music for (at least) this episode, however five composers contributed throughout the series. They include Jerry Fielding and Robert Cobert from Dark Shadows. Who wrote what exactly, I don't know.

I like Johnny Depp, I do. All the same, I have read with no small amount of relief that Disney has finally deep-sixed Depp's plans to play Kolchak in a modern film version of The Night Stalker. I've nothing against Depp, who is adept at crafting memorable, colorful characters, but in any given performance he is as likely to rely on mannerisms and caricature as he is to push himself for something more genuine. McGavin's Kolchak was not driven by mannerisms and tics but by sheer force of personality. In that, McGavin and Depp's approaches would be polar opposites: one spontaneous and the other studied to death. Depp proclaims that he is a huge fan of the series, the character, and McGavin, and that his movie would be respectful. I'm sure he means it, but he said the same of Dark Shadows and we all saw the awful parody which he and Tim Burton delivered instead. I like Depp, but keep him away from The Night Stalker.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

Well in my opinion we are off to a great start. First episode seemed to have a great mix of drama, tension and humor.
Casting seemed to have a lucky star over it in getting Darren McGavin as their star and Simon Oakland as his boss. These two actors bouncing their lines off each other is golden. Then you throw Ken Lynch into the mix! Obviously someone in casting had a type. Which is get me good solid actors.
The writers were capable of giving us character development and storyline development in just one episode. We know who we are dealing with and what we are dealing with. It does not mean that the characters can’t change and grow but they did a great job of giving us a baseline.
I can’t help but compare this to shows of this era. Not saying one is better or worse.
1. Shows now cannot just have a linear storyline. We would have to have a least three stories going at the same time. Thus for me making it harder to connect. This episode gave me what I needed to know. Much like the characters, good and no nonsense.
2. I can’t imagine a show today not having at least one of these actors being a 29 year old guy who looks like he spends the majority of his day at the gym. More than likely the boss would be the ‘old’ guy and the police captain and Kolchak would be young ‘gladiators’ playing off each other.
3. Boy would this show have been filled with gore today. Close-up of all the wounds. Oh her head was almost all the way severed, let’s show that.

I’m not trying to say that any of this implies that the shows of today are not as good. I am just showing a comparison and it does show how they were able to get the tension and the story across with good old fashioned writing and acting.

I was surprised that they killed Miss Plumm. It seems to me that shows of this era usually saved the people that anytime was invested in getting to know. By doing so it also let us know what the stakes are for Kolchak in the future episodes.

On a funny note.
Do you think it was a continuity problem or a joke that they had the woman who wrote the letter with “can he kill me with his eyes or can he only make me sterile” be a woman WAY past the age of worrying about her fertility? To me it just made her that much cuter.
Edit:
Oops to long of a break I forgot the score
9 out of 10

reply share

add reply

formatting help

Much has already been said about Kolchak as a character and as a show (and TV movies), so I don't have to worry about introducing any context that establishes who and what the character is. Instead, I'll treat the character as someone we know fairly well.

But before I start talking about the episode itself, I have to mention that I'm still unsure how to deal with the fact there are two TV movies that precede the show. On the one hand, watching the movies would steal the show's freshness (and as I've watched them before the show, I am convinced they would). On the other hand, a few things are much better explained in the movies, and I feel really tempted to mention a few of them at times. We'll get there anyway.

One thing the show has that the movies don't is the opening credits sequence. It reminds me of an anecdote about a young civil servant starting at his first job in local government and, eager to do a good job, starts pounding away at the keyboard keys like a "1930s newshound with a great scoop to tell," thus making the other more veteran civil servants look bad. That image of the furious 1930s typist has stuck with me, and it translates the typical attitude of someone involved in a more idealistic age of journalism. At which time, even Superman decided to join a news team in order to make the truth known.

The other detail of the opening is that Kolchak misses the coat rack when he tosses his hat, showing he has little care about his surroundings, his clothes, and fashion in general: the only thing that matters is the story.

About the episode itself, we can see that the heart of the show is the interaction between Kolchak and Vincenzo, as established already in the two movies. These are easily two very likable characters, and one of the main reasons viewers would come back to the show week after week.

by Simian_Jack » K:TNS allows only some 50 minutes per episode, which necessarily means we get little or nothing of his process in reaching unbelievable conclusions. We know he's right every time, but only because he's the hero.

that's a crucial point. And I think that's going to repeat every week. For us it's a sort of deja vu comparable to Straker's uncanny intuition to explain the whole situation even without any facts to support it.

Another point that the show misses and the movies provide us with are the consequences after the killer is neutralized. In the show there was a brief narrated explanation and the episode ended. In the movies we have much more in terms of consequences and the reaction of the authorities trying to cover things up.

by lorkris » I can’t imagine a show today not having at least one of these actors being a 29 year old guy who looks like he spends the majority of his day at the gym. More than likely the boss would be the ‘old’ guy and the police captain and Kolchak would be young ‘gladiators’ playing off each other.

Nowadays at least one of these characters wold be a woman. I bet the police captain would be an African American, like Lieutenant Van Buren from Law and Order. But I can see the Kolchak character more or less unchanged today, but perhaps with a much darker side. Come to think of it, "Saul Goodman" seems to be modeled after Kolchak in a way, except that Jimmy McGill has a much darker side, while Kolchak's dark side is literally manifested in his flirting with dark supernatural forces.

I was surprised that they killed Miss Plumm.

My guess is Miss Plumm, in the library, with a candlestick. 

Anyway, after watching the episode I came up with a few questions. Let's see how the show handles them:

* Will all of the killers' victims be women? The ladies seem to get the short end of the stick in Kolchak stories.

* Is Kolchak going to come across some unlikely supernatural incident every single week in Chicago? What are the odds of that happen?

* What does Kolchak actually do for a living? I mean, what kind of stories does he normally write? No reporter could survive writing about vampires and monsters on a daily basis. Especially when none of his stories get published.

* Speaking of which, Kolchak didn't get lucky this time and his story was buried. Will any of his stories see the light of day, or will they all be buried under the mysterious cloak of the night and indifference?

* Kolchak didn't seem to be a very flexible reporter, considering his lack of adaptation to the position of "sob sister". How would he react having to do *real* reporting work? (E.g. interviewing the secretary of water and sanitation, covering a teachers' protest for better salaries, interviewing an expert about changes in local traffic, analyzing City Hall's planned budget, covering a sports event, reporting on damage caused by a storm, etc... (Of course, I'm just joking, but it's funny how traditional reporters in fiction investigate crimes, while most of the stuff we read in newspapers are about something else, things that affects us daily.)

* Will Kolchak every be in the editor's position (perhaps filling in for Vicenzo on, I don't know, jury duty) thus having to demand cold hard facts from an intempestive rookie journalist?

* Speaking of jury duty, will we have a jury episode in which Kolchak will try and convince the other jurors the murderer is someone other than human?

* Will there be a bottle episode, say, with Kolchak and Vincenzo stuck in an elevator the whole time?

Well, more questions to come.

The episode gets 8 desk drawers with badly hidden sob letters to "Miss Emily".

reply share

add reply

formatting help

The first shocker on this show occurred before it even started. I cranked up NETFLIX and typed in KOL only to find it was no longer a part of their package. Well, good thing I still had those DVDs from back in 2005. I popped the first disc in and was on my way. By the way, if anyone else was relying on NETFLIX and doesn’t want to buy the DVDs, ME-TV is running them starting Sundays at 10 so you could follow them from there (if you get ME-TV, that is.) They’re likely to be edited but at least you’d get something.

On to the actual review: Early in, I realized I’d forgotten what a jerk Kolchak could be. Right off, Vincenzo tells us Carl posed as a police commissioner and “arrested” 6 people for getting in his way. Later, he drives over a sidewalk to park near a crime scene. He’ll do anything to get a story, but doesn’t seem to comprehend that antagonizing people will only work against him in the long run. No wonder he has such trouble with his editor and the police. Credit Darren McGavin with giving Kolchak such a lively personality that he seems more sympathetic than he actually should.

One highlight of the show is the “reporter narration” that Carl does off-screen. Examples:

“May 21st 3 AM. Across the state line at Werner’s Boom-Boom Room in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Michele Shifman, a dancer – whatever – had just done her last number. I mean, really her last number.”

“May 24th 11:30 PM, Three days later, Milwaukee again. Debbie Fielder, 22, 5 feet 9, weight 120. Hobbies: Breaking horses and collecting bone china. Debbie wanted to be successful. She should have settled for being alive.” Good stuff.

Also later, he talks about another reporter saying they have mutual trust, only to have her tell him. “I don’t trust you. You’d double-cross your fairy godmother for a story.” (Well, at least she didn’t say his mother.)

Having Carl chase after Jack the Ripper was a good idea; he is a classic mysterious villain that has been part of both fictional and non-fictional lore for years. But it wasn’t handled as well as it could have been. He seems to have superhuman strength and can jump off a four-story building without a scratch. But why? Where did he get his powers and immortality from? He has a cane with a Devil’s head on it. A deal with Satan perhaps – requiring 5 human sacrifices every so many years? All we can do is speculate.

Further, the information seems to just fall in Kolchak’s lap. We don’t see him doing that much research – a couple of books from the library, the good fortune that a reporter he knows got the letter which matched the Ripper’s original letter. How did he find out so fast about all the other Ripper crime sprees – from that one book? (No Internet back then.) I was surprised when he pulled a piece of fabric from the car bumper after they hit Jack that he didn’t have it analyzed and discover that it was some old-style English fabric or something. Instead that piece of evidence was simply forgotten.

Meanwhile, Vincenzo is mad about Carl’s chicanery with the police, so he makes him take over the “Dear Emily” column and Kolchak has to dodge his duties doing that as well as sneak off and cover the story despite it being taken away from him and given to Updyke. (But he happens to get the vital clue he needs by reading one random letter and ignoring just about all the rest.) I don’t find much humor in that kind of thing, or in him needling Updyke constantly. Yes, Updyke’s a very bad crime reporter, but he did get to the scene of the massage parlor murder before Carl did.

And it was almost painful to watch Carl get arrested because of the vague way he worded his request to stay at the massage parlor to catch the killer, making it sound like a lewd proposal. What a mess.

On the plus side, the Ripper does make a creepy villain even when we don’t see his face. And Carl brings him down nicely with the electrified pool of water and a creepy little fading into ashes effect. Of course, he accidentally burns down the Ripper’s hideaway with all the evidence – leaving only that one shoe that was discontinued in England 70 years ago.

Good casting too – I liked Beatrice Colen as Jane Plumm, Ken Lynch is always a good authority figure, and Ruth McDevitt was a hoot as Miss Eggenweiler. She will reappear in future shows and eventually play the very “Dear Emily” she supposedly wrote to.

So overall, I’ll give the episode 7 Kodak 110 cameras that were notorious for looking grainy when you tried to enlarge the picture. A perfect camera for a series about a man who can never get a good photo of the creature he is chasing.

Random thoughts: When Kolchak relays his nonsensical story about doing research for Updyke, he tells Vincenzo that Updyke borrows books from the library but forgets to return them. I wonder if he was projecting his own story – that in reality, he was the one who kept forgetting to return books.

Despite my not liking Carl shirking his duties as “Miss Emily”, I have to admit Vincenzo’s instructions to answer every single letter by return mail was ludicrous. Most, if not all, of such columns always have a disclaimer that personal replies are not possible due to the volume of mail received. Asking Kolchak to do that would be a waste of time, paper, envelopes, and postage.

Fun facts: Kolchak premiered on September 13th (Friday the 13th) in 1974. Or rather, THE NIGHT STALKER premiered on that date; that was the title in the theme of the first few shows. After about 4 shows or so, the title was changed to KOLCHAK: THE NIGHT STALKER which now appears on all copies, DVDs, syndication etc. “The Ripper” was not the scheduled premiere episode. The TV GUIDE announced “The Zombie” would be the first episode. When “The Zombie” aired the following week, it read “Postponed from an earlier date.” Apparently, ABC decided at the last minute this would be a better premiere episode. (I don’t think it made any difference as far as sequence; there was no backstory to the show, so you could run them in almost any order.)

KOLCHAK originally ran at 10 PM on Fridays. Later it was moved to 8 PM. I remember that I was going to college night courses at the time, so I always came in right in the middle of the show. Fortunately, I had a tape recorder and co-operative parents and/or siblings willing to turn on the TV and the recorder at 8 PM in the bedroom so I could listen to the tape later on and hear what I had missed. You can imagine how useful that was during certain scenes. (Growl! Crash! Bang! Eeek! Thump. “Did you see that? It was unbelievable.”) But that was life pre-VCR. The last few episodes were rerun at 8PM on Saturday. Since that was the family hour, they edited certain scenes. The scene where Kolchak flipped over the couch and ended up next to the dead body of Jane Plumm was excised for family hour viewing.

By the way, the preceding two paragraphs were NOT an early April Fool’s gag. All 100% true, I promise.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

by Simian_Jack » We are kept in the dark quite literally as time has darkened the film stock of what was already a production set largely at night. This renders some of the action difficult to make out

Indeed. That totally helps with the horror ambiance, but things get hard to make out. Let's say in the 1970s I would've watched this on a 20-inch low-res black-and-white TV, and now I watch it on a tablet. It has much better resolution, but the problem with Samsung tablets I think is the lack of contrast for night scenes. That bugs me a lot.

by brimfin » One highlight of the show is the “reporter narration” that Carl does off-screen.

I feel they got inspired by Dragnet.

Further, the information seems to just fall in Kolchak’s lap. We don’t see him doing that much research – a couple of books from the library, the good fortune that a reporter he knows got the letter which matched the Ripper’s original letter.

I was thinking that Kolchack seems to lack a scholarly mentor figure. In later series, they always introduced a character to fill that role, such as Bobby Singer in Supernatural or Giles in Buffy: the Vampire Slayer.

So overall, I’ll give the episode 7 Kodak 110 cameras that were notorious for looking grainy when you tried to enlarge the picture.

I'm glad someone brought up the camera topic. I never had that specific kind of camera, but I used to have an Instamatic, and those cameras had a very poor performance. To think that he would use that puny camera for a professional purpose to take pictures *at night* and *of moving subjects* makes it incredible he would get anything at all. Kolchak is a professional, so he should have a better camera.

A perfect camera for a series about a man who can never get a good photo of the creature he is chasing.

Yeah, I agree it works for characterization, but it just seems implausible that an experienced professional reporter would rely on a Kodak 110.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

Simian_Jack

Kolchak comes off as kind of a flake sometimes

Yes, I actually think he is a flake. I think he would be an unreliable friend, spouse and co-worker. He is a ‘do’ and then ‘think’ kind of guy. So he would also be that friend who is always in trouble and thus getting his friends in trouble. By this age he would have probably burned a lot of those people connections. I have seen this show before but I don’t really remember it so off of one episode I also think he is the kind of friend who would take a bullet for someone he cares about. Just a very interesting character that the writers have created and McGavin is putting an underlining humanity into the character that I think another actor would fail to do.
Madp

No reporter could survive writing about vampires and monsters on a daily basis.

The wonders (I mean bummer) of being an adult. When I go back and watch shows that I enjoyed in my youth I now sit there going “How are they making any money to live on!” Never crossed my mind when younger, it was just “Cool car, cool apartment, hot girlfriend/boyfriend, yes sign me up please. :)
In the Dresden Files, the book, they take care of this problem by having one of the characters work on a paper that actually does cover vampires and monsters. Thus that character can be a part of the action and also be employed. Smart way to get a reporter into the storyline.
Cloister56

The cops in this did seem to have their heads screwed on

I hope they stick with this. Nobody in this story had to act the buffoon. I guess part of that is really it is Kolchak that acts the most buffoonish he just happens to be right.
brimfin

How did he find out so fast about all the other Ripper crime sprees – from that one book

”I’m a REPORTER, I got a NOSE for the news, don’tcha know.”
Just kidding.

I realized I’d forgotten what a jerk Kolchak could be
Credit Darren McGavin

You are so right. Interesting that didn’t make a bigger imprint on me. I am usually the one arguing with people how much of a jerk a hero character is and that makes me not like them as much as everyone else does. In this I just thought Kolchak was a great TV character with many flaws but it is all because of Darren McGavin. New thing for me to pay attention to while watching this show.
Apparently, ABC decided at the last minute this would be a better premiere episode.
Thank you for this information. I did feel like I was watching a kind of introduction so I am curious to see how next week is handled.


Also, I think twice Kolchak whistled his own theme song during the episode. Maybe I need to pick a theme song for my life and start humming it during important moments.

Well,l I feel like we are back in school. We all are rested from are break and one of our group has come back with a completely different look and we wonder ‘is he still going to be the same now that he has changed so much’. Nice new look madp!

reply share

add reply

formatting help

The dialog keeps insisting that Jane Plumm is "fat" - that's the specific adjective repeatedly given. Unfortunate enough, this body shaming, and in her one big scene she overloads at a diner. Why, then, was the part cast with an actress who by any standard could never be considered anything but her ideal body index? There's not an ounce of fat on her. (Simian_Jack)

Thank you for bringing that up; I had meant to mention it as well. I never thought of Beatrice Colen as looking “fat” at all and was surprised that two different people would use that specific word as their first to describe her.

Simon Oakland reprises the role of Tony Vincenzo from the two Kolchak movies that preceded the series, ever frustrated by his star reporter's eccentricities. (Simian_Jack)

Oh yes, I loved him in this and BAA, BAA, BLACK SHEEP. Like the Skipper on GILLIGAN’S ISLAND, he can bellow and holler at you but you always see the decent person underneath. (And you can’t blame Vincenzo at all for yelling, seeing as what he has to put up with.) What an outstanding actor he was!

I can’t help but compare this to shows of this era. Not saying one is better or worse.

1. Shows now cannot just have a linear storyline. We would have to have a least three stories going at the same time. Thus for me making it harder to connect. This episode gave me what I needed to know. Much like the characters, good and no nonsense.

2. I can’t imagine a show today not having at least one of these actors being a 29 year old guy who looks like he spends the majority of his day at the gym. More than likely the boss would be the ‘old’ guy and the police captain and Kolchak would be young ‘gladiators’ playing off each other.

3. Boy would this show have been filled with gore today. Close-up of all the wounds. Oh her head was almost all the way severed, let’s show that. (lorkris)

All very valid observations. I’ve seen the reboots of HAWAII FIVE-O and MACGYVER. They have their values, but each are so different from the originals, and in many of the ways you mention.

Also, there’s the raw sexual angle of today. The original MACGYVER was quiet, even a little shy. In the reboot, the very first scene had MCG narrating that a young lady was “great on the keyboard” and then instantly we see them making out passionately while she is sitting on the computer keyboard.

I was surprised that they killed Miss Plumm. (lorkris)

Me too, (the very first time around, that is) and disappointed as well. She would have made a great recurring character. Since she worked for a tabloid, she’d have been a good source of background material regarding strange matters. BTW, I looked up her filmography out of curiosity and found that on an episode of ELLERY QUEEN, she play a Mary Lou Gumm.

Will there be a bottle episode, say, with Kolchak and Vincenzo stuck in an elevator the whole time? (madp)

There is a later episode where Kolchak goes after a sinister genie and spends half the episode trying to get out of her bottle. (Obviously, this time I AM kidding.)

Finally, a great batch of reviews so far. It looks like this will be a fun ride. Glad you decided to stick around, Simian_Jack, and welcome aboard Cloister56.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

Lorkris:

I was surprised that they killed Miss Plumm. It seems to me that shows of this era usually saved the people that anytime was invested in getting to know.

madp:

I can see the Kolchak character more or less unchanged today, but perhaps with a much darker side.

brimfin:

I’ve seen the reboots of HAWAII FIVE-O and MACGYVER. They have their values, but each are so different from the originals, and in many of the ways you mention. Also, there’s the raw sexual angle of today.

You've all got me wanting to take another look at the 2005 remake series Night Stalker (2005) with Stuart Townsend playing Kolchak. Not sure I even saw two complete episodes before giving up...it was a joyless show, grim and plodding. No humor, no life in Kolchak, and no chemistry with Vincenzo. Kolchak had one of those fabulous apartments that TV characters have that they could never afford from their given vocations.

Back when it was still possible to bring McGavin back for a continuation, I imagined him working for a tabloid - the only job he'd be able to land after ruining his reputation. Every single story would get published and even make the cover, only to have the world laugh it off as rubbish.

reply share

add reply

formatting help