The Party's Over - Episode 11, Wednesday 31st January 1973

The story…

Dr Carmichael tells John Parker that his wife Ethel will need special care because she has a serious heart condition. However John is having an affair with a young woman called Julie and sees Ethel’s condition as an opportunity to get rid of her and inherit her wealth. He doesn’t want to risk resorting to conventional murder so hatches upon the unusual plan of trying to scare her to death...

Frightening times in the cellar foe Ethel Parker (Suzanne Neve)

Review

Without question the most unusual episode of Shadows of Fear and one with a peculiar background. The previous episode Come Into my Parlour had aired as far back as March 1971. It’s unclear exactly when this one was produced but actress Suzanne Neve mentioned it in a newspaper interview on 7th February 1972 so it was certainly made at least a year before broadcast and the radical change in style suggests it was at least a few months - probably longer - after its predecessors. 

This episode was written for a half-hour slot (around twenty-five minutes of screen-time) but with its Edwardian period setting – very well recreated on-screen - and extensive (and skilful) use of incidental music it’s a striking contrast from the more austere look of its counterparts. The story editor was now George Markstein rather than John Kershaw. – the former was a very experienced story editor who had worked on shows such as The Prisoner and (another Thames show) Callan so he may have been brought-in to revamp the show although John Kershaw was by this time working on Public Eye so may have been unavailable. Although background to this episode and the future direction of the show is lacking the reduced running-time, new story editor and look of this episode do suggest that this was a de facto pilot for a relaunch, perhaps with a looser focus on the original darker style. This episode – whatever its merits – is one that really would fit better in a new or different anthology (in many ways akin to an episode of Tales of the Unexpected) or just as a standalone production.

That is not to deny that this certainly does have some good use of suspense and it does play on some everyday fears and issues. Various Shadows of Fear explored plots by a spouse (usually the husband) to kill their partner and issues of infidelity and doubts about one’s spouse are not uncommon. However these links are not really strong enough to make it a comfortable fit with the rest of the series. One of the aims of the series was to connect with everyday fears drawn out of everyday situations and it’s questionable how well a story set in the past can do this. Period settings had certainly been used in thrillers (often related to historical criminals such as Jack the Ripper) and - most of all - the horror genre. However the common horror focus on pagan villages, vampires, witches and ghost stories from distant times was far removed from the down-to-earth, non-supernatural focus of Shadows of Fear; equally a focus on historical serial killers wouldn’t particularly fit in a show where the villains were essentially ordinary people for whom killing was generally a one-off event, not a habitual practice. The focus on a villainous husband in high society was also at odds with the series focus on individuals from more accessible backgrounds. None of this is to deny that such thrillers, suspense and horror productions can work very well, just that they really belong in a different realm from a more realistic show as Shadows of Fear.

John Parker (Edward Fox) seems to comfort his wife but appearances are deceptive

Leaving that aside though it is a very engaging story although the premise of trying to scare someone to death is rather far-fetched and helps to make this what might seem a “quirky” or “offbeat” tale rather than a darkly-serious one. It also manages to provide not just one but two twists at the end. These are common in the thriller genre and are well-done here but again they were rare in Shadows of Fear which relied more closely on suspense rather than surprise.

As it transpired there were no more Shadows of Fear episodes in any format. When the episode did air it was in a graveyard 11.00-11.30 pm slot. While such a slot might be normal for repeats or imported shows it was rarely used for a new episode of a British-made drama or comedy and was a clear sign that the show was at the end of the road. It suggests that the future of the show had already been decided before broadcast - indeed probably long before it with the episode screened to "get it off the books" with no expectation of it going any further. While this last instalment was not the best it was still good viewing and it was a shame the series did not continue although it would have been even better had it retained the exceptional style of the first ten episodes.

TV Times listing for The Party's Over

Notes and final thoughts

It's possible that the producers Thames or the other ITV channels felt unhappy with the episode and the new style and therefore decided not to pursue it any further, Another possibility is that Thames had been unsuccessful in negotiations to get a favourable slot and without that there was no possibility of continuing. Suspense / thriller anthologies were common around the time and maybe the wider ITV network felt Thames had had their opportunity and it was time to look elsewhere.

The February 1972 article contains a remark that this episode was part of "American TV's Shadows of Fear series". On the surface an obvious error as it was made by a British company and there is no evidence it was ever shown in the USA. However it is just possible the new style had been part of an attempt to create a show with greater appeal to the USA and international markets more generally. Maybe if it had gained international sales it might have been recommissioned. Indeed two new anthology series came later that year - Orson Welles' Great Mysteries (Anglia) and Thriller (ATV). Two distinguishing features of these shows were their use of some American actors and their association with a star creative figure (Orson Welles and Brian Clemens for Thriller). Both these gave their shows much more international sales potential and therefore more chance of being commissioned. Thriller was in production at the time and the Orson Welles show may also have been in the pipeline so it may have been felt there was no room for a revamped Shadows of Fear or possibly the Orson Welles' show (aided by its shorter time-slot and frequent period settings similar to The Party's Over) was commissioned as it seemed a more viable option. 

Come Into My Parlour - Episode 10, Tuesday 9th March 1971

The story....

Deanna Ward is a door-to-door cosmetic saleswoman who is returning to work after a nervous breakdown. Often she encounters rejection by those she calls upon so she is surprised when a middle-aged man called John Dolby shows interest, even though he lives alone. She goes into his flat and he says he wants to buy items for his mother, though later and somewhat oddly changes his mind and saying he is buying for his fiancée. 

However the conversation ranges much more widely than cosmetics. Dolby explains that he works in a betting shop but that he used to work for a firm of solicitors before losing his job after being convicted or riding a tube train without a ticket which he says he lost but wasn’t believed. He is clearly still very affected by that incident as well as showing a peculiar interest in wider issues of crime and justice including notorious murderers. His behaviour does make her feel uncomfortable at times, not least when he asks her to pose for a photograph with him saying he wants to test a new camera. However at the same time she appreciates that someone is showing interest in her and she is able to talk about her own difficulties at work and her lack of family and friends. She is also able to display her remarkable talent in being able to identify hymns just by their number and she leaves his flat not just with a sale that could help her keep her job but feeling much more happy with herself.

She returns to deliver the goods a few days later but events have moved in a strange direction. Dolby has got dressed-up and tells his home-help that he has got engaged. He displays a telegram of congratulations and there is a notice in the paper about his engagement to “DW” – by remarkable coincidence Deanna’s initials. Some of the things he says and does contradict what happened a few days earlier but the biggest change is in his focus of interest. He asks her to join him in a toast for “justice” and very soon he is resuming his preoccupation with the issue but in a very disturbing way….

John Dolby's first view of Deanna Ward, the fish-eye lens conjuring up images of a better-known series that followed

Review

A quite exceptional episode. Much of this is down to the captivating nature of the two central characters who – not unusually for the show – are on-screen almost throughout. Both are in different ways scarred by difficult pasts, insecurities and loneliness, Deanna is the more clearly sympathetic figure. Her parents were killed in the Mau Mau uprising in Kenya and she says she has no other family or – it seems – friends, her last phone bill was entirely rental with no calls made at all, To add to all this she has a troubled work history with a failed job in a packing department and her current sales work at severe risk unless she produces orders for her supervisor with whom she doesn’t get on. Maybe these difficulties mean she has to take chances in her job and that includes seeking out dubious clients like John Dolby.

Dolby is a mysterious figure. He portrays himself as a victim – a man who lost a high-status job due to an innocent mistake; indeed the kind of mistake that might befall any person. One can understand how such an experience could be troubling, even traumatic for someone. It is clear he is resentful, chiefly towards the justice system that convicted him rather than his erstwhile employers. It is women - ranging from the ticket inspector who stopped him through to the chairman of the magistrates - that seem to particularly antagonise him. Now he says he is working in a betting shop and has a day off work. However is he telling the truth? It is clear he is prepared to invent stories on other matters such as his supposed engagement with him trying to give others the impression that Deanna is his fiancée. Maybe he just wants company and embroiders stories to make himself more interesting. Maybe he is a fantasist, a lonely man who wants others to think he is about to be married. Maybe he is a crank who gets peculiar amusement from stringing others along or provoking them.

Or maybe he is actually a dangerous man – possibly with a violent past – who has snared a victim – maybe not his first. His fascination with notorious killers may be just of academic interest and there are plenty of law-abiding people who enjoy learning about the most appalling crimes and their perpetrators. However it’s also possible that he sees these individuals as his role-models. The title sequence of a prowling spider and the title “Come into My Parlour” do imply that he is some kind of predator and Deanna has fallen into his web. In a private moment soon after she arrives he holds his hand to his face in apprehension – possibly uneasy about a future act he is about to commit but also possibly of someone trying to fight temptation or even anxious about meeting someone new.

Whatever his motives there is no doubt that the first meeting has plenty of moments where both show warmth and friendliness. Deanna finds her anxiety slipping and Dolby is able to make her smile and laugh at times. Maybe there is a chemistry of sorts and her spirits are definitely lifted. However she is a fragile, vulnerable person who is less able than most to deal with his mind-games and strange behaviour. When troubled people come together the results can be very unpredictable.

Deanna struggles to cope with her host's behaviour

Typically for Shadows of Fear everyday issues and anxieties are explored. Door-to-door sales work can be a frustrating business for both sellers and the householders they call upon. It involves a meeting of strangers and that can be awkward for both parties and in some cases risky as well, particularly when the interaction moves inside away from public view. Either may be looking to exploit or even abuse the other but how can they tell beforehand? When either is in need or vulnerable they may especially take chances in an interaction or transaction they will regret. Deanna seemed to have got over the greatest risk by having a seemingly successful first meeting but maybe that apparent success was just to draw her in and get her to drop her guard.

Peter Barkworth and Beth Harris give exceptional performances as Dolby and Deanna, both in the first meeting with its lighter moments and in the more disturbing second encounter. I have always had some reservations about the ultimate conclusion but it is certainly a plausible one and the final shots are unquestionably powerful ones. At the very end “colour” spills over the screen and it is unfortunate here that the episode was made in black-and-white (due to a technicians’ dispute) as that does inhibit the impact of that final shot but clearly it was unavoidable and it does round off a remarkable story. 

Unfortunately it was the last of the series “proper”. Whether more full-length episodes were planned and then suspended due to the dispute is not known but in any event only one more episode of the show followed – “The Party’s Over” - and that was only half the length, in a very different style and transmitted almost two years later. That could almost be part of a different show and it is on this remarkable note that the series in its original format ended.

Notes

TV Times listing for the Armchair Theatre version

This was a remake or reworking of an episode Roger Marshall had written for Armchair Theatre called "Will You Come a Little Closer", broadcast on 22nd April 1967 but presumably wiped before this version was produced. Freddie Jones and Caroline Mortimer took the lead roles in the earlier play. It's not known how closely the Shadows of Fear version followed its predecessor but a TV Times response to a viewer indicated the same conclusion and some interesting ideas on why John Dolby acted as he did.

Sour Grapes - Episode 9, Tuesday 2nd March 1971

The story...

Gwen and Michael arrive happily at a Spanish villa for a holiday. All seems well until Gwen discovers some blood in the bathroom sink but they just dismiss it as left behind after a minor accident and lack of diligence by the cleaner. However more worryingly they later find a broken window. Then a burly German man (he is given no name on screen) knocks at the door. He speaks no English and they speak no German but at first it just seems strange when he walks in and starts drinking straight from their bottle of wine. However matters then take a very serious turn when he points a gun at them. Despite their communication difficulties it becomes clear that this man is dangerous and they need to keep him on-side for however long it takes or risk their lives.

The German (Ray Smith) awaits his moment

Review

Generally this my least favourite episode of the core series (the final episode The Party’s Over really being an untypical case) but on a very recent viewing I found it to be rather better than I remember although it’s still one of the excellent show’s lesser efforts. It’s an episode I’ve generally been reluctant to watch, largely due to an unpleasant scene in which the German finds a live chicken which he wants to eat (it must be stressed the bird seen on-screen is a prop) and then proceeds to wring its neck. The camera focuses on his upper half with the bird out of shot but its simulated shrieks can be heard and the looks of revulsion by Gwen and Michael are highlighted. The pair are then required to pluck the dead bird, prepare it and cook it for him. The scene is designed to show his brutality but there is ample evidence of it elsewhere and the risk is that for some viewers it distracts from the storyline in general which is otherwise pretty good.

This is a rather tense hostage drama. There is some similarity early-on with Roger Marshall’s opening script for the show Did You Lock Up? Both depict a happy married couple on holiday who soon see their happiness shattered when they encounter evidence of an intruder (in this case in their holiday home).  While the Astles in the earlier episode had to contend with a burglary and were understandably very shaken, being in the house with an intruder – one who seems only too prepared to kill – moves fear to a horrifying level. Typically this was the show exploring fears felt by us all: we look upon home (including a temporary one) as a place of safety and refuge and one of our most basic fears is to have an intruder within it – most terrifying of all a violent intruder.

The language barrier adds another dimension. With the couple and the German not sharing a common language they have no means of finding out what he intends to do: his demeanour and actions make clear that he is dangerous but they don’t know his specific and ultimate intentions. They do have an advantage of sorts in that they are able to talk about their predicament – and any possible ways out of it – without him understanding them but as it turns out that doesn’t help them much. They know they are trapped and a safe way out seems unlikely. He is a heavy drinker and they hope that ultimately, he will lose focus or fall asleep but he shows remarkable staying power – maybe because his own liberty and even his life is at stake. It is an irony that the fact they are a couple reduces their chance of an escape. Possibly one of them could try to get away but that would mean leaving the other so loyalty keeps them hostage. Both are aware that a miscalculated attempt to disarm the man or escape could be fatal – not just for the one making the attempt but also for their partner.

Anxious times for Gwen (Isabel Dean)

The fact that all this takes place in or immediately outside the villa intensifies the scene. Unusually for the show a courtyard outside the villa is recreated inside the studio – big enough to drive a car into – but the lack of genuine outdoor scenes or ones set in a different building amplifies a sense of claustrophobia and indeed was a feature of the series as a whole.

The final stages inject some further intriguing themes and round off a provocative and well-performed if not wholly satisfying episode. The following week would see another Roger Marshall script but a return to more humble British setting and one of the very best episodes of all – Come Into my Parlour.

Notes

The seemingly-peculiar title is taken from a line in the script (something Roger Marshall often did) when Michael tastes the grapes on a tree outside the villa - an ironic remark given the horrors later faced by he and Gwen.

Ray Smith was the only actor to appear in more than one episode of the show - he earlier appeared in the pilot Did You Lock Up?

White Walls and Olive-Green Carpets - Episode 8, Tuesday 23rd February 1971

The story...

Lena – a theatrical make-up artist – and Robert were once lovers although Robert was married at the time to Marian. One day Lena is at work when she receives a call from Robert telling her that Marian has been killed in a car crash and - although the two women had never met - she is shaken by the news.

Later Robert takes her to the country house he shared with Lena, asking her to help him to decide which items to take to his new flat but later admitting his real purpose was to discuss their former relationship. It proves to be a distinctly awkward encounter. Lena is frustrated by how her life has turned out and outlines her resentment at how she has been treated, particularly by men including her ex-husband and Robert; Robert is also frustrated at what he sees as her self-pitying attitudes and unwillingness to perceive her own faults. Lena feels that she is being needled by Robert throughout the encounter but is also unnerved by some small but strange events such as fresh milk and flowers being found in a house that has apparently been unoccupied. She feels unwell and also has a disturbing dream – or was it reality? She is to find that the line between dream and reality, truth and lies is becoming increasingly blurred…

Robert (Ian Bannen) keeps an eye on Lena while she is sleeping

Review

This is one of my top three Shadows of Fear episodes and I’ve always found it a joy to watch. However it’s also the lowest-rated episode by viewers on the Internet Movie Database although not by a large margin and it’s true to say episode ratings for the show on there are generally rather modest. For all my admiration for this outing I’m not surprised it’s not been a hit with the wider audience and in many ways, it is the Shadows of Fear style taken to the greatest extent. There is a tiny cast with only three speaking parts and ninety percent of the screen-time is Robert and Lena talking in the same room.  There are no great dramatic incidents and I can understand why others would find it hard-going, especially those expecting a more conventional “thriller”. Even the apparently bizarre episode title (a reference to Lena’s preferred décor) gives no clue that this is a suspense story. However there is a spirit of foreboding throughout and for me the interchanges between the two characters are riveting. A dead relationship is dissected in both the sense of an examination but also a dismemberment. The strange goings-on that spook Lena are very subtly done in the tradition of the show and I like this understated approach. Robert and Lena are essentially everyday people with everyday aspirations, concerns – and resentments. However given the nature of the show those resentments veer off in a rather twisted direction. Robert in particular seems to delight in the discomfort and disorientation he is creating but both characters are quite capable of hurting the other – and others around them.

Ian Bannen (especially) and Natasha Parry give excellent displays as the central characters. There is a neat cameo at the beginning by Geoffrey Wright as an actor in skull make-up which contributes a powerful image at the start of the first scene - indeed an image (below) that have misled some viewers into thinking they were about so see a horror / occult story rather than one about a disintegrated relationship. 

For me the writing by the talented Hugh Leonard makes this a magnetic story although others may well disagree. James Gatward directed his only Shadows of Fear instalment here but does a good job in setting up some mysterious happenings ultimately leading up to a creepy conclusion. Particular commendation should go the splendid additional title and incidental music by Harry South. Harry is now best remembered for his excellent title music for The Sweeney but his roots were in jazz and not unlike Roger Webb he contributes a darkly jazzy musical backdrop to the visuals. Incidental music was used sparingly in the show and often consisted of library tracks by different composers but it helps here to have a specially-written score by the same composer and gives the episode its own special character as well as holding appeal for even those viewers who might not have liked the episode as a whole. There are even some special sepia-tinted episode title screens (top of the page) which all add up to a very distinctive outing that could have readily functioned as a distinct play as well as part of the Shadows of Fear anthology.

Torrid times for Lena (Natasha Parry)

The Lesser of Two - Episode 7, Tuesday 16th February 1971

The story... 

A man called Harry climbs through the window into a flat. However Harry is no typical intruder because the flat is his home – or was his home. Harry has just been released from prison after serving a nine-year sentence for killing a child – a crime of which he proclaims his innocence. Harry wants to return to family life but his wife Margaret definitely does not want him back. She and their adult son Terry have tried to rebuild their lives after Harry’s conviction and now she fears his return will bring them crashing back down.

Margaret urges him to go as soon as possible before Terry and the neighbours see him. However that plan is to no avail as her friend Betty does see him and soon word is round the community. Margaret’s unhappiness at Harry’s return is mild compared to Terry who is seething when he hears the news – he particularly resents his father and blames him for his lack of progress in life. The neighbourhood shares Terry’s hostility and soon there is a campaign to get Harry out and - while they try peaceful means - a brick through the window shows that violence is on the agenda as well. Harry needs to get out quickly before they go much further…

Terry and his mother at odds after his father's unexpected and unwelcome return home

Review

Shadows of Fear was not a typical “thriller” or suspense series and nowhere is this more evident than in this story. The series tried to generate suspense out of everyday situations in more realistic scenarios than usually found in the genre. The subject matter here of a man returning from prison and trying to restart his family life and return to the community – especially after being convicted of a very serious crime – could easily be the subject of a “Play for Today”, “Armchair Theatre” or some other socially realistic “kitchen-sink” drama and the episode certainly does consider those issues. Maybe this is why it has left some viewers who prefer more “traditional” thrillers underwhelmed. However there certainly is considerable menace, fear and suspense here and throughout a feeling that something terrible is going to happen – the only questions seem to be “how” and “when”. For me it is an episode that works supremely well as a thriller built around a social issue.

Harry is a convicted killer but the nature of the crime for which he was convicted is only briefly mentioned. He insists his innocence but is he telling the truth? There are plenty of genuinely guilty people who falsely protest their innocence and the bigger their crime the harder it is for them to ever admit doing it. However the justice system is not perfect and genuinely innocent individuals are sometimes wrongly convicted, finding their justified claims of innocence ignored. In this case we never know whether he committed the crime or not. Harry seems a genuine, heartfelt man who just wants a fresh start but that doesn’t mean he was innocent of the crime. He has served his sentence and is legally entitled to start again but - as he finds - that is easier said than done. The court of public opinion can be a very harsh, unforgiving one. Harry may have served nine years in prison but that is likely to be a life sentence is terms of public condemnation.

Harry checks the broken window but worse is to follow

One can understand the predicament of Harry’s dispirited wife Margaret and why she wants him out of her life. The family of a convicted criminal – especially someone convicted of a terrible, notorious crime – often find themselves considered guilty by association. While Harry was in prison there was a chance of her getting some sort of acceptance and normality but now it seems shattered. It’s never clear whether she believes her husband’s claims of innocence. If she thinks him guilty one can understand her determination not to have him back. However even if she thinks him innocent - or at least a genuinely changed man - she feels she can never have a normal life while he is with them. The same is true of their son Terry but his attitude is deeply hostile rather than crestfallen like his mother. He feels his mother will lack the resilience to make Harry leave but maybe the wider community will play its hand and get rid of him.

We see the court of public opinion most definitely move into action as the episode progresses. Margaret’s friend Betty cuts her off and she is one of many – as long as Harry is around Margaret is also condemned. Some of those rejecting her and joining the protests may themselves be in fear that they too will be condemned if they don’t conform. All this helps to bring about a change in Margaret’s attitude and she quietly rallies behind her beleaguered husband, feeling that he is being persecuted. However all this may be too late as danger moves even closer.

The final stages are powerful, poignant and ultimately moving. At the end a mournful flute piece plays and then segues into the end titles which unusually mix credits with apparently random pictures of members of the public – perhaps the sort of apparently ordinary people who might have joined the campaign against Harry. As the music fades away these images are accompanied by mumbling voices, the sounds of a siren and what seems like a prison door repeatedly slamming. These are novel and very memorable titles superbly rounding off a brutal conclusion.

For me this is an exceptional episode which lasts long in the memory. It is excellently written, directed and performed with very fine performances by Godfrey Quigley as Harry and Margery Mason as Margaret while Geoffrey Hughes brings a brooding intensity to the role of Terry. It may not be the easiest watch for some viewers and may be something that needs to be revisited to really appreciate it but it certainly does provoke the mind and show how well suspense can be generated out of such a story. 

Notes

This was the only one of the full-length Shadows of Fear episodes to be first broadcast in a late slot after News at Ten - a documentary about the River Thames occupied its standard 9.00-10,00 pm slot. It's not certain why this occurred - it's possible the documentary was always planned for that slot - but it seems likeliest that this was considered a more sensitive episode due to the references to Harry having been in prison for killing a child, even though the story doesn't focus on that event. This may also explain why John Kershaw was billed under the pseudonym "Hugh D'Allenger" (actually his other first names) although there might be some other explanation.

TV Times listing showing the later broadcast time

Actress Margery Mason died in 2014 at the remarkable age of one hundred, the longest-lived performer in the series. Elizabeth Sellars who featured in Repent at Leisure almost matched that feat, dying at the age of ninety-eight in 2019.

Margaret speaks to a policeman at the door who is heard but not seen - he is not credited.

Return of Favours - Episode 6 (Tuesday 9th February 1971)

The story...

Young couple Roger and Judith have been enjoying passionate meetings in a smart flat. Not in itself unusual except that the flat belongs to Judith’s friend Maureen who lets them use it for that purpose. One day the couple are shocked to discover a middle-aged man in the flat – and he is shocked to see them also. The man – Gordon Marsh – is actually Maureen’s husband but she hadn’t told him about this unusual use of the flat, perhaps because their marriage is on bad terms.

Although he is annoyed at his discovery Gordon not only lets them stay but offers them tea and cake. However they find his behaviour unnerving rather than conciliatory. Oddly he has a bandaged hand which he explains rather unconvincingly as the result of scalding himself on the kettle. A room in the flat is locked which Gordon claims is due to it being redecorated. Although Roger is a painter and decorator and asks to see the room Gordon refuses to do so and seems very evasive.

Afterwards Judith tells Roger she is worried about Maureen’s welfare as she hasn’t been seen for a while. Judith fears the room is locked because Gordon has killed his wife and the body is in there but how can they find out? Is Gordon just a man who has been toying with a couple he thinks have taken liberties or is he actually dangerous? Roger’s painting and decorating book will take on an unexpected significance…

Gordon (George Cole) with his mysterious bandaged hand

Review

Another excellent episode, this time written by Jeremy Paul with Kim Mills again directing (he directed six of the last seven episodes as well as the opener). The honours very much go here to George Cole as Gordon. Although he is now best-known as a comic actor this was a period in his career in which he tended to do “straight” roles and he excels here as the disconcerting, even sinister Gordon. Gordon’s annoyance at the use of his flat is understandable, especially given that he hadn’t been told, but it is clear he has deeper reasons than this for his reactions. Jealousy seems to be playing a part. His marriage to Maureen is failing and he can see Roger and Judith enjoying a relationship that is now very distant from him. It seems he feels an attraction towards Judith and a consequent antipathy towards Roger (who he discovers is also married which intensifies the dislike). However for all these feelings he seems to be toying with them rather than telling them to leave as many others would do. What is his purpose? An excellently drawn and performed character.

Robin Ellis and Jennie Linden play the part of the nubile and confident (or maybe over-confident) young couple very well. In a pattern not unfamiliar within the genre it is Judith who particularly picks up on something being very wrong while Roger plays the role of sceptic and tries to allay her fears. There is a small but important part for ubiquitous series guest star Caroline Blakiston as Gordon’s disaffected wife Maureen. There are some surprises which lead up to a provocative and memorable ending. Overall another very satisfying instalment of the show which again demonstrated that less is often more and that a very small cast, few sets and no music can still make for a fascinating production.

Anxious times for Judith (Jennie Linden)

Notes

The following year Jennie Linden and Robin Ellis appeared as a former couple in "Night of the Stag", an episode of the London Weekend Television series The Frighteners, a show which explored some similar themes to Shadows of Fear but was shot on 16mm film and all on location in comparison to the latter's studio-bound, videotaped and more theatrical style.

Repent at Leisure - Episode 5 (Tuesday 2nd February 1971)

The story...

Isabel – a wealthy, glamorous, middle-aged widow – is on a cruise to the Caribbean and strikes up a romantic relationship with Harry, a ship steward. They marry soon after returning home but their relationship soon runs into difficulties because of their very different backgrounds and outlooks on life. Isabel notes his warm relationship with an apparently single woman called Jenny and is particularly worried when she finds a picture of them kissing at an event. However what Harry hasn’t told her is that Jenny is actually his sister and she is married to a Jamaican man, a fact not revealed because they fear isabel will be prejudiced.

Isabel has deeper worries about Harry. She wonders about whether he has simply married her for her money, concerns that her businessman brother Peter helps to fuel. She is angry when Harry takes sleeping pills from her medicine cabinet and tells her he has flushed them away because she doesn’t need them. However she then searches Harry’s suitcase and finds pills there. He doesn’t need them and she becomes scared that he is planning to kill her, either by poison or some other means…

Isabel and Harry in happier times on the Caribbean cruise

Review

Another very fine story. Once again it shows how the series could take a story about tensions in a relationship and infuse it with suspense and fear, although the suspense here is more in terms of trepidation about what will happen rather than generated by tropes such as sinister characters, darkness and gloom, threats, creaking doors, odd noises and spooky music (all which occurred to some degree in the other stories). The characters and places on show are all essentially “normal” but normal people have their weaknesses, flaws, insecurities - and temptations – which can lead them to fear or exploit each other. Even an apparently normal, safe – even luxurious - place can be a place of fear in the wrong circumstances. Indeed it is Isabel's wealth and affluent lifestyle which causes her to distrust her husband. Harry and Isabel are a newly married couple who are free of money worries, have a lovely home and are free of responsibilities – and yet they still end up not just frustrated and unhappy but heading for danger. Fear can emerge from any environment when circumstances conspire towards it.

The core story by Roger Marshall could have been good material for a play in a very different genre or series. The class tensions and suspicions that develop between the couple are very well delineated but it also raises broader issues. The couple met on holiday but making such a relationship work when back to everyday life can be a different matter. Couplings where the partners are from very different backgrounds are at particular risk of conflict and distrust. The wealthier or more advantaged person can suspect the motives of their partner while the latter can resent such suspicions and wonder exactly why they have been sought out. As the story shows it’s not just the couple who help to make a relationship succeed or fail but also their families and friends. Isabel and Harry have very different social circles. Peter helps to unsettle Isabel about her new husband while Harry’s embarrassment about his sister leads him into deceiving his wife.

Isabel feels that Harry hasn’t really left the ship and sea-life behind. She tires of him talking about it and there is a telling little scene when she shows unease when noticing the tattoo on his arm – tattoos in those days were much less common and with much more of a deviant image than now. She and Peter wonder if Harry is just content to take things easy and live off her wealth. They would like him to get a job but, as Harry states, the only things he is qualified to do are things they would consider to be too lowly. Jenny perceptively realises that they are right that Harry needs a job but chiefly because it would mean he and Isabel wouldn’t be spending so much time together, needling each other. Many couples (or indeed friends) will have experienced how familiarity can breed contempt and sometimes it’s better to ration time together to keep the relationship fresh.

However Isabel perceives something much worse than a clash of cultures or boredom setting in from Harry. She starts to fear for her life. As she becomes increasingly scared simple acts take on a sinister meaning. Is this paranoia or is Harry really out to kill her? It isn’t unknown for husbands or wives to kill their spouse for money – or even sometimes just out of boredom or malice. All this leads up to a harrowing and moving climax and some striking end titles.

Isabel's suspicions of Harry grow while he becomes increasing frustrated by her treatment of him

The cast is typically small with only four characters with Isabel and Harry the central figures on screen. George Sewell and Elizabeth Sellars give excellent performances in these roles and are very well supported by Alethea Charlton and Peter Cellier as Jenny and Peter. The episode isn’t as (literally) dark and suspenseful as many of its counterparts but the mood of foreboding is still present throughout. Kim Mills had directed many episodes by Roger Marshall as well as being the central director on this series and he does a typically good job, particularly in the deeply unsettling final few minutes. Music is sparingly heard but a Ravel piece is used and plays over the poignant end titles. It’s testimony to the strength of Shadows of Fear that such a strong story is topped by many others in the series.   

Notes

The piece of classical music briefly heard in the episode and which then plays over the end titles is "Lever Du Jour" from the start of the third part of Maurice Ravel's ballet Daphnis et Chloe.

George Sewell played another man (again called Harry!) in a relationship with an older, wealthy woman in an episode of Public Eye called Come into the Garden, Rose and which aired only a few months after this one (although it was produced before Repent at Leisure was broadcast). Although both were Thames shows, writers and directors on the two episodes were different and the Public Eye story generally has a lighter tone. George was a prolific actor and the story similarities are probably coincidence although it's possible him playing such a part in Shadows of Fear encouraged his casting in the later episode.

Peter Cellier and Alethea Charlton both appeared in unquestionably sinister roles in one of the first Thriller episodes - Someone at the Top of the Stairs.

The Death Watcher - Episode 4 (Tuesday 26th January 1971)

The story...

Scientist Pickering is conducting experiments to test his belief that it is possible for there to be communication between the dead and the living. Another researcher - Emmy Erikson - rejects such paranormal ideas but she has accepted an invitation from him to discuss them; her husband thinks this isn't a good idea but she goes ahead anyway.

They meet on a train and Pickering takes her to a remote large house where he conducts his experiments. After some initial discussions she feels their perspectives are too far removed and decides to leave but she is told it isn't possible, Pickering at first claiming that transport is unavailable but later insisting she must stay "in the interests of science". She finds that her bedroom is locked at night, the windows are barred and she  is prevented from leaving by his aide Dawson. She is prevented from contacting her family, Pickering sending them a fabricated message that she is at a conference abroad. Emmy becomes increasingly distressed but to no avail - visitors to the house are told it is a nursing home and that she is mentally ill with delusions that she is being held prisoner 

Pickering tells her that for there to be communication by the dead the deceased person must have died a violent death and must have a trained, scientific mind. At first Emmy thinks this means he is contemplating suicide to test his theory but then she realises he has a different person in mind...

Pickering has a special purpose for this giant image of his face

Review

One of the best-known and most acclaimed episodes of Shadows of Fear, this is certainly a superb offering. it is also one of the closest to mainstream thriller and horror tales, even down to it being the only one in the series with a typical genre title whereas the show generally had more oblique, enigmatic episode names. A "mad" (or at least deluded or amoral scientist) treating unwitting or unwilling human beings as disposable research subjects has long been a staple of the genre. It is also the only episode with a supernatural theme although it appears Pickering's ideas are nonsense - or are they?

Given that this is Shadows of Fear though rather than a more conventional thriller / horror production this take a more subdued, pared-down and generally less dramatic approach. There is no macabre violence, frequent attacks or high body-count. The emphasis is very much on psychological suspense and fear. At first there is mystery about Pickering - he seems a crank who will ultimately prove harmless. Later though it becomes evident that he is in fact dangerous. What though makes him such a magnetic figure on-screen is his genuine charm and geniality. He is unfailingly polite but his ideas are no less threatening behind that appearance. His aide Dawson is a more subdued figure - and one who can use force if required - but he also is exceptionally polite and considerate towards Emmy and seems genuinely concerned for her welfare. It is clear that he believes that she is ill and that they are helping her by preventing her leaving while Pickering engages in his "treatment".

Emmy is in effect a prisoner, a hostage, although Pickering and Dawson try to insist that she is not. Pickering is able to convince others that she is mentally disturbed and it does show how it is a possible to successfully label a perfectly sane person in that way if those doing the labelling seem sufficiently expert and "respectable", especially when it occurs in an apparent medical institution. It is striking to see the way that her pleas for help are ignored without demur by visitors and passers-by. It becomes clear that she is not the only "patient" who has stayed at the home as Pickering has previously tested out his ideas.

Pickering and Emmy are the dominant characters on-screen. Both are superbly written by Jacques Gillies and exceptionally performed by John Neville and Judy Parfitt but the splendid support by Victor Maddern as the thoughtful and considerate Dawson should not be overlooked. Comments from Emmy's husband to her at the start of the episode are skilfully "flashed-back" into later scenes. This is also the only episode to feature any location footage including Pickering and Emmy arriving at the house and - more extensively - Dawson taking a bus journey out into the Suffolk countryside later on. Peter Duguid had directed the preceding episode - At Occupier's Risk - and again does a fine job again here. The use of some genuine outdoor scenes works well and contrasts with those in the home which is in effect Emmy's prison.

The climax is a great one but it is the chilling, final scene that is is one of the very best and lives long in the memory. Even the closing titles are distinctively-done with unnerving images of the three central characters rounding-off a tremendous episode.   

Emmy Erikson (Judy Parfitt)

At Occupier's Risk - Episode 3 - Tuesday 19th January 1971

The story...

A young woman called Judith checks into a remote hotel. The hotel is run by a very intense couple called Mr and Mrs Darbon; Judith is the only guest and it’s not clear that she is entirely welcome. Judith has a mechanical problem with her car and Mr Darbon offers to get it fixed but when he returns he says he was involved in an accident and it has been damaged. However it later transpires that the car sustained damage in a more disturbing way and that the Darbons have a dark secret that they wish to keep hidden.

Review

Another very fine episode, just a little below the rank of the series’ best efforts. The Shadows of Fear style of a very small cast and with almost all the scenes set inside the same property is very much to the fore here but the mood is even more gloomy and anxious than in most of its counterparts. Three characters predominate on screen – the Darbons and Judith - and all three are very intense, preoccupied characters. Tragedy seems on the cards and Judith seems to have stepped into very dangerous territory. All three seem troubled in some way and the only character who even raises a smile is the briefly-seen, unnamed hitchhiker. A jack-the-lad type character, he is seen arriving with Judith but it is clear they have had an awkward encounter with her unreceptive to his advances and glad to be rid of him. Later on he turns out to have a more important role than anticipated,  There are typically-fine performances by Anthony Bate, Annette Crosbie and Gemma Jones as the lead characters with Tom Chadbon providing a striking contrast as the cocky hitch-hiker.

Judith (Gemma Jones) surveys her new surroundings

Again the series picks up on anxieties many have encountered such as the uncertainty when picking-up a hitch-hiker (for both parties) but much more significantly on-screen the strangeness and unease that can be felt away from home (with perhaps less obvious the concerns hoteliers may have when opening-up their property to guests they’ve never seen before). The rather spartan and not very welcoming atmosphere of the hotel is also rather different to the glamorous accommodation and cheery staff more often seen in TV and film.

Anthony Bate as Mr Darbon

The script was by Richard Harris who – like many others on the series – was a very versatile writer who had worked in many genres with great skill. This story though does offer a noted departure from many of its counterparts in providing a striking twist near the end. While “the twist” is very common in thrillers (especially Brian Clemens’s Thriller a few years later) it was rarely used in Shadows of Fear which was much more focused on suspense than surprise. The direction by the equally versatile Peter Duguid contributes to the austere and forbidding mood although there is a brief peculiar scene which attempts to depict a character just outside the hotel by a rather primitive special effect but given the theatrical atmosphere of the series it’s less jarring than it would be in other productions. Many episodes of the show had no incidental music but this has a little in the form of plaintive harpsichord pieces and it is suitably sombre.

Shadows of Fear was a show that prioritised atmosphere, mood and character over pace and this is even more prominent here. Maybe it is a little too much to the fore and perhaps the episode needed just a touch more pace, incident or livelier dialogue to raise it to higher levels but these are small points and it stands as a fine outing with even better to follow.

Notes

There are some similarities between this episode and one in 1974 of Brian Clemens’ s Thriller – Come Out, Come Out Wherever You Are. In both a young blonde woman checks into a hotel run by a married couple who have an awkward relationship and secrets to keep. The young female guest also has an uncomfortable relationship with the couple and both episodes feature a striking twist near the end. It’s not known if the Thriller episode was influenced by this and the similarities could simply be coincidence but both are certainly worth a comparison by viewers.

Shadows of Fear - Series Overview and Analysis

Shadows of Fear, the early 1970s Thames TV suspense / thriller anthology series, is sadly a little-known and largely neglected production but for me one of the very best British contributions to the genre. Individual blogs will look more closely at each episode but here is an overview of the series as a whole with some comments on its production background although unfortunately little is known about this.

In sharp contrast to later anthologies such as Thriller and Tales of the Unexpected, Shadows of Fear was not centred around the work of one particular writer / creator such as Brian Clemens or Roald Dahl. Numerous writers worked on the show and their backgrounds were very diverse but without any particular association with working within the broad thriller / suspense genre. While there may have been advantages in using writers, production crew and actors steeped in this genre it can lead to predictability and the use of more general writers, crew and performers probably helped in bringing a freshness of approach. In particular there seems to have been an attempt to generate suspense out of "ordinary" people and situations with nods to social realism. Writer and producer John Kershaw said the aim was "stories in which fear comes from ordinary, even everyday situations". In the same article he noted that it would be "difficult without resorting to death at the ciimax - death is after all the thing that people fear most" (Daily Mirror, 12.1.1971, p14). He stressed though the aim was to produce "suspense plays, not just murder stories". Therefore there is a noted absence of stories about serial killers, psychopaths or supernatural entities and none were set in mansions, castles or pagan villages as tends to be the case with many other works in the genre. Further excellent comments on the style of the series comes on the rear of the DVD released by Network in 2011 (bottom of page): "fear can visit us in many forms - perhaps most disturbingly when it stalks us in familiar or cherished surroundings... eleven plays in which every character has one thing in common - each has someone or something to fear". 

The opening titles also helped reinforce this theme. These were animated, largely monochrome titles depicting rows of bleak-looking houses and other equally bleak-looking neighbourhood scenes, ultimately with the door to one of the houses opening-up as if to herald the story to follow. The implication was that fear could lurk inside any of these seemingly-ordinary dwellings. All this was accompanied by the eerie, chilling theme music by prolific and versatile Roger Webb who wrote much excellent music for TV and film.

Rows of houses from the opening titles - in each fear may reside

The suspense / thriller genre can be linked to others such as horror, murder-mystery, police, detective, espionage / secret agent, military, superhero and more broadly action / adventure. While these are different in many ways they have the core similarity in stories based around overcoming a threat or villain, usually challenged by a hero or heroine (or heroic organisation). Broadly these are hero versus villain narratives or even tales of good versus evil or - less starkly "our side" versus "their side". Academics have termed these "mythic" texts or narratives as battles between heroes and villains or good versus bad are timeless. These mythic tales almost always end with the villain or threat being defeated and "good" triumphing. This may be at great cost with much tragedy on the way and there are commonly new villains, threats and plots to defeat in the next episode or story. However the basic story of threats being defeated remains.

Another stark image from the opening titles

This has certainly been a general feature of thrillers - at the end of the episode or film the villain is defeated, usually by the hero, sometimes arrested after a struggle but occasionally killed in a final conflict in which they are commonly trying to kill the hero / heroine or someone else. In this sense thrillers can be seen as "moral" genres because they show that crime and villainy does not pay - there is reassurance in seeing killers taken out of society and paying for their crimes (sometimes with their lives). However one of the most striking features of Shadows of Fear was the frequency with which episodes end just after a crime has been committed with the villain still at large. Of course it's possible - probable even - that most of the villains would later have been caught but at the point the stories ended they were still free. There wasn't the closure that typified stories in the thriller and mythic genres more generally. This was a bold departure from formula and a refreshing and realistic turn: villains can be difficult to apprehend and may get away with their actions for some time. Another advantage of this approach is it encourages viewers to speculate on what might have happened next in these narratives - would the offenders have evaded justice? If not how would they be caught and what would happen before that time?

Another realistic aspect was the way the show blurred the usual distinctions between heroes and villains or villains and victims. In one episode a victim of crime later exacts terrible revenge on the perpetrators - an avenging hero dispensing "natural justice" or a cruel, clinical vigilante? Meanwhile the original villains have themselves become victims but do they deserve sympathy? In a couple of other cases the offenders kill out of a sense of terror - a belief that they otherwise will be killed. One of these is almost certainly a tragic misunderstanding, the other has more justified cause for concern but in neither of these instances was the killer under immediate threat; they would struggle to argue self-defence in court and they would almost certainly be convicted of manslaughter if not murder. A couple of other episodes see an innocent person framed for a killing they did not commit. However even in these instances they are not simple victims - one has already been shown to be a feckless individual while the other tries to bargain with the real killer and offer his services to cover up the crime. The Shadows of Fear world is not a simple one of black-and-white, clear-cut heroes, villains and victims and shows a more complex picture of flawed and scared individuals, some of whom will do desperate things when cornered or put under pressure.

Another interesting and often under-explored outcome is covered in another episode. In this one the offender leaves the scene some time before the end having achieved what he wanted - there is no great climax in which he makes a violent and ultimately unsuccessful attempt at escape or is stopped at the brink from committing a final, terrible crime. At the end of the episode he has evaded justice. However as the remaining minutes on-screen make clear there is no "closure" for those he has targeted. They may not have been killed or seriously injured but they will have to deal with the trauma of their experience for years to come - maybe for the rest of their lives. This is a highly realistic outcome that tends to be brushed-over in crime dramas. Even being the victim of a "minor" crime can haunt the victim for long to come but those caught-up in life-threatening situations or who witness killing can face terrible trauma. In another episode the villain appears to have been defeated but comments by his intended victim indicate that his influence is far from over whether that is in terms of the terrible memory of his deeds or even his villainy having "passed on".

In terms of general production style the show was remarkable for its intensity. Casts were very small with only a handful of characters each episode and even then there was often a predominant focus on just two or three of them. With the exception of a few filmed scenes in The Death Watcher all the action was recorded on video-tape in the studio; there were a few shots set outside the places depicted but even these were generally tight shots of doorsteps and exteriors and recreated in the studio. While many shows in those days were studio-bound the show was unusual in the degree to which it was so profoundly studio-focused. Most episodes had no incidental music and this also can be seen as contributing further to realism and an austere atmosphere. The focus was very much on the writer, director and actors to create tension. This is certainly a big difference from Thriller which appeared a few years later and in which the incidental music of Laurie Johnson was a central element. This is certainly not to knock the use of such music in suspense and other shows (indeed when it is used in Shadows of Fear such as in Sugar and Spice it is used very well) but it is a bold move to avoid using it and it can contribute to a starker atmosphere. In another difference with Thriller there was no use of American guest stars but the British acting talent on show was certainly very impressive and given the small casts those actors got a lot of screen-time and dialogue to develop their characters.

These points essentially apply to the first ten episodes that aired from June 1970 and (the great majority) in early 1971. There was then a two year wait for the final episode in January 1973 - The Party's Over. This is a very untypical outing that has little in common with the rest of the series. This is not just because it was designed for a 30 minute slot and had a period setting but because it has a very different, generally lighter atmosphere and elaborate set design for an opulent Edwardian setting. Actually a good, entertaining episode on its own terms - and with some impressive use of suspense at times - it really would have fitted better into a different anthology or even as a one-off production in its own right. Information about its circumstances is lacking but it seems very likely that - like the first episode Did You Lock Up? - it was a pilot but this time for a potential relaunch of the show with a shorter running-time and maybe different production style. It was given a late-night slot which would have greatly limited its audience prospects and it's quite possible that the decision not to carry on had already been made before transmission although whether the producers felt the new format hadn't really worked or it was unsuccessful in getting the better slot required isn't known. As it transpired there were no more and the show ended with the unusual number of eleven episodes - ten in original style and the final untypical one.

Overall I consider six of these eleven episodes to be excellent and all the others are good outings which have their merits, including The Party's Over although it is a shame that more were not made in the original style of the opening ten. Fortunately the show is readily and cheaply available on DVD and has received screenings from Talking Pictures TV and is certainly well-worth checking out.

Front cover of the DVD released in 2011 by Network

Episode list (original broadcast dates in brackets). Broadcast times 9.00-10.00 pm except where noted:

1. Did You Lock Up? (17.6.1970, repeated on Thames only on 25.3.1971)

2. Sugar and Spice (12.1.1971)

3. At Occupier's Risk (19.1.1971)

4. The Death Watcher (26.1.1971)

5. Repent at Leisure (2.2.1971)

6. Return of Favours (9.2.1971, 8.50-9.50 pm)

7. The Lesser of Two (16.2.1971, 10.30-11.30 pm)

8. White Walls and Olive Green Carpets (23.2.1971)

9. Sour Grapes (2.3.1971)

10. Come Into My Parlour (9.3.1971, produced in black-and-white)

11. The Party's Over (31.1.1973, 11.00-11.30 pm)

Back cover of the DVD

Notes - possible production dates

Video Tape Recording (VTR) numbers can give an indication of production order for a series and are available for Shadows of Fear - normally episodes produced earlier in the year have the lowest VTR numbers. Using those numbers the order would seem to be as follows:

1. Did You Lock Up? 

2. Sugar and Spice

3. White Walls and Olive Green Carpets

4. The Death Watcher

5. Repent at Leisure

6. At Occupier's Risk

7. The Lesser of Two

8. Come Into My Parlour

9. Return of Favours

10. Sour Grapes

11. The Party's Over

All the fifty minute episodes seem to have been produced in 1970. The gap between episode 1 and episode 2 in both broadcast and VTR numbers with the first episode a probable pilot does suggest that Did You Lock Up? was produced well before the others. Given the impressive reception for episode 1 the others probably followed into production soon after, probably mid 1970. As episode 2 (Sugar and Spice) was written by producer John Kershaw and was in effect launching the series it is perhaps unsurprising if it went into production next. There is a gap in VTR numbers between The Lesser of Two and Come Into My Parlour which probably indicates a brief break in production.

There is a possible anomaly in the production order above as it seems almost certain that Come into My Parlour was the last of the fifty minute episodes produced - or at least the last in main production, This is because it is the only one in black-and-white which means it was made during the technicians strike which ran from November 1970 to February 1971. The two episodes that are listed as following would also have been in monochrome had they been produced later in 1970. It's possible Come into My Parlour was originally planned for earlier production but pushed back or maybe there was a little post-production work on the others which led to them having later VTR numbers. Come Into My Parlour most likely was produced in November 1970 just after the action started with production on Return of Favours and Sour Grapes probably in October..

What then happened is most uncertain. Ten episodes had been made at that point but series would usually run for at least thirteen. It's possible that the producers decided to pause the series at that time and either wait for colour production to resume (which might have happened quickly but in fact did not) or just to produce another series at another time. Other series continued in production throughout those months leading to numerous episodes in monochrome but given that Shadows of Fear didn't have any recurring cast there would have been fewer problems in halting production. If all this were the case production could potentially have resumed in March 1971 or very soon after but maybe an enforced break in production was used as an opportunity to rethink the series. 

it's not known exactly when the final episode - The Party's Over - was produced but lead actress Suzanne Neve mentioned her role in it in a Daily Mirror article on 7th February 1972 - almost a year before it appeared on-screen. It seems likeliest it was made in late 1971 but then held back for a long time, maybe while discussions over a potential new series were taking place and perhaps in the expectation that it would be shown in the same run as any other new episodes. As no others were made it was then transmitted as a late-night one-off in January 1973. 

Notes - music

The theme music by Roger Webb is now available to stream or purchase on services such as Amazon Music in long and short versions, both longer than the theme heard on the episodes. It is also available (including on 7 inch vinyl) from Trunk Music who released the tracks - more details here.