A serial killer who preys on women haunts Chicago and an intrepid mild-mannered reporter with an irreverent attitude named Carl Kolchak gets determined to find the truth and make it known by the public.
Absolutely. A friend of mine is a K:TNS fan and was positively impressed with Plumm's appetite for life, not just food but for her job. "I relished the fact that Plumm was perky and ambitious, and didn't seem to give a *beep* She liked to eat, and she was damn well gonna enjoy it." Now that I think about it, it also brought out a side of Kolchak that I like, or maybe more than one. Granting that he was pumping her for information, all the same I got the feeling he respected her as a fellow professional and liked her as a friend. Enough so that he didn't try to get in her way in pursuing the story, but he did strenuously voice his objections for her safety. It's clear that his fear and concerns for her are genuine. He may not be a reliable friend, and judging by the prior movies (not wanting to spoil later episodes) he can be ungrateful...but he does honestly care about people when it comes down to it.
reply share
I wanted to wait until Sunday so I could watch the METV showing of Kolchak and it didn't look much better than the Dailymotion version. Was it just that it was a single season show so the print kind of got lost and forgotten before they transferred it to DVD?? Overall the film transfer looks lousy. It's dark & blurry all over the place and I could barely make out what was going on in the story. I guess part of it was due to a lack of budget so they filmed a lot of it in the dark places to minimize scenic requirements.
On to the story.
Basically Kolchak is a mash up of 1930's/1940's pulp horror movie with a 1970's intrepid anti-hero reporter type story but the reporter is right out of something you'd see in a late 1940's movie. It's a pretty unique premise because it doesn't easily fit into any category or description.
Kolchak works for the INS (Independent New Service) under an editor named Tony Vincenzo played by Simon Oakland. Oakland was a long time character actor from the 1950's-70's usually specializing in tough guys or supervisors or commanding officers. Kolchak starts working a story about a string of death surrounding female strippers which end up being committed by a Jack The Ripper type character. He gets into some trouble as he attempts to follow the assailant with his 110 instamatic camera so Vincenzo takes him off the story. Vincenzo has him working on the "Dear Emily" letters. In his place Vincenzo put Updike on the story. Updike is kind of fastidious meek and somewhat mediocre reporter so Kolchak is naturally upset.
Kolchak doesn't care about his demotion in classic 70's rebel trope fashion and investigates the case anyway. He is helped along the way by the way of a female reporter named Jane Plum. Together they surmise that the murders bear a strange resemblance to the Jack the Ripper murders. Some more murders take place and Kolchak starts to believe that the perpetrator is actually Jack the Ripper. They believe that Ripper is some kind of supernatural creature that comes back to life every 20-30 years.
The finally has Kolchak investigate Ripper's house in Ripper's absence. As he's searching around the house Ripper comes home and a confrontation ensues and Kolchak runs away. He finds Ms. Plum's body which was a bit of surprise. Ripper almost catches him but falls into a small river where Kolchak has set up some kind of bizarre electrocution station. They never find a body and Kolchak is never held responsible for burning down this rather large house.
It ends with a bit of an epilogue and a cut to a new shoe found in the house that was actually 70 years old.
Random Thoughts:
*The print quality was pretty lousy on ME TV so I was wondering if the DVD's look any better?
*I was a bit shocked they killed off Ms. Plum, I thought they would have brought her back.
*It was odd that they kept referring to Jane Plum as "Fat". I mean by 2016 American standards she looked about average. I guess it's just that 2/3 of the American population is over weight.
*There doesn't seem to be any consequence for Kolchak's actions so in this regard it has a very comic book kind of feel to it.
*I forgot how cheesy 1970's t.v. special effects were.
Pretty good first episode but I could see this formula getting very repetitive and boring. I give it a 7/10.
by JohnQ1127 » *The print quality was pretty lousy on ME TV so I was wondering if the DVD's look any better?
The video I downloaded was better than what you describe, but not much. I have difficulties making out the images in night scenes, and there are a lot of them.
Pretty good first episode but I could see this formula getting very repetitive and boring.
Just for the record, that's always my fear in procedurals. A formulaic case-of-the-week series with standalone episodes was expected back between the 1960s and the 1990s, because networks would air the shows irregularly and you could catch up with the story at any point. Now that we can download, stream or buy an entire season at once, serialized shows make more sense for those who like complex stories. But we can't forget procedurals like NCIS: Wherever or CSI: New City are still the most popular drama shows, though they are not the critics' favorites. Personally I prefer serialized shows and wouldn't like to go back to the 1970s style of shows. But in the 1970s, I was quite happy with the way the shows were.
As for Kolchak specifically, time will tell. I know we have to have an extra margin of tolerance when it comes to old shows. And we should pay great attention to the characters' interactions despite the formulaic aspects, because the characters in this show are very rich. But right now I'm wondering how I'll be feeling by episode 10 or 15 and how anxious I'll be for the next show.
reply share
Personally I like procedurals. If done well you can have a continuing story involving character development and still have a story with a beginning, middle and end. Monk is a good example of how one can mix both. I also like non-procedurals. I think the first few seasons of Dexter were great at mixing the two styles. What I find a lot of shows do now is they are so against doing a procedurasl that they are desperate to find enough storylines to fill the time. What I see happening with a lot of shows which I think could just have been good mysteries is they cross into the land of nighttime soap operas. I’m not talking about getting to know the characters and their lives but some of the shows on now you take out the murder and you could put it on daytime TV. reply share
The video I downloaded was better than what you describe, but not much. I have difficulties making out the images in night scenes, and there are a lot of them.
I'm guessing that a single season show like this that was never in syndication probably had the prints locked away in a vault somewhere. In that vault the prints probably deteriorated before somebody decided to put the show on dvd's 25 years later.
Just for the record, that's always my fear in procedurals. A formulaic case-of-the-week series with standalone episodes was expected back between the 1960s and the 1990s, because networks would air the shows irregularly and you could catch up with the story at any point. Now that we can download, stream or buy an entire season at once, serialized shows make more sense for those who like complex stories. But we can't forget procedurals like NCIS: Wherever or CSI: New City are still the most popular drama shows, though they are not the critics' favorites. Personally I prefer serialized shows and wouldn't like to go back to the 1970s style of shows. But in the 1970s, I was quite happy with the way the shows were.
Yeah, I think networks were rightly afraid of serielized dramas back in the 70's-80's because people could miss episodes and not have any recourse for catching up, i.e, dvd's, streaming, etc. So I think there was a conscious effort for procedural type shows with somewhat loose continuity and seasonal story lines.
From what I've read the T.V. movies of "Night Stalker" were extremely popular and received high ratings and critical reviews. It seems like the formulaic approach to the t.v. show turned people off to the story.
reply share