Columbo: an origin story (2018)(columbophile.com)
columbophile.com
Columbo: an origin story (2018)
https://columbophile.com/2018/02/17/columbo-an-origin-story/
98 コメント
>Nowadays there is a big focus on series where every episode ends with an addictive cliffhanger. I hate that.
Me too. And most of the cliffhangers are stupid, you know they were added in just to pad out the episodes.
> Lately everything has to be dark and quirkiness is used to explain how someone is directly rude.
Yeah, I've stopped reading crime fiction (and watching crime drama) for exactly this reason: Every detective *has* to be rude/obnoxious, hate their life, be an alcoholic with marriage problems.
And I'm like, why can't we have a mentally stable detective who solves crime because of duty, and not to excorcise their "inner demons" (or other such psychological BS reason usually given).
For this reason, I love Columbo, Poirot and Midsomer murders: The detectives are honourable people, very polite and respectful, but polite doesnt mean they let people walk over them.
It seems to me most crime writers cannot grasp the fact that one can be polite and ruthless (or relentless) at the same time.
Me too. And most of the cliffhangers are stupid, you know they were added in just to pad out the episodes.
> Lately everything has to be dark and quirkiness is used to explain how someone is directly rude.
Yeah, I've stopped reading crime fiction (and watching crime drama) for exactly this reason: Every detective *has* to be rude/obnoxious, hate their life, be an alcoholic with marriage problems.
And I'm like, why can't we have a mentally stable detective who solves crime because of duty, and not to excorcise their "inner demons" (or other such psychological BS reason usually given).
For this reason, I love Columbo, Poirot and Midsomer murders: The detectives are honourable people, very polite and respectful, but polite doesnt mean they let people walk over them.
It seems to me most crime writers cannot grasp the fact that one can be polite and ruthless (or relentless) at the same time.
I recommend watching Knives Out- Daniel Craig plays the kind of detective you want to see. (It helps that he is not the sole point of view character.)
Recommendation seconded. Its hilarious and excellent!
I recommend the Maigret novels by Georges Simenon. He is portrayed as a genuinely decent human being, and the stories are interesting.
The BBC drama The Missing and spin off Baptise have a calm and friendly lead detective. Not sure where you are but it you can get them in your country maybe give them a try.
Along those lines, Tintin is the best role model I've ever had
Me too. You’re making me realize I’ve left my Milou to sleep alone upstairs. Tintin would never do that, unless Milou was drunk.
Inspector Lewis and Inspector Morse are great detective series as well.
A murder detective show where you already know who did it and how should never work but somehow it does, perfectly.
Yes. I think the real ingredience is that the culprit is rich and has a beautiful house and Colombo is the underdog bringing them down.
I think my favorite aspect of the show is how there are still societal remnants of the fancy, Victorian era customs and Columbo uses breaking social norms to put people off-balance.
I loved his old car. I think it was a Volvo?
The show reinforced what I believed at the time--money dosen't buy happiness, and don't judge people by how they look.
Now--as an aging person--a bit of money would make life easier?
The show reinforced what I believed at the time--money dosen't buy happiness, and don't judge people by how they look.
Now--as an aging person--a bit of money would make life easier?
[deleted]
Beautiful for the era. Most of the houses on that show are a riot.
It's totally the rich people going down.
Not just rich but often “smart people”. They might be professors or scientists etc.
According to Hitchcock it just means Columbo is a Suspense show, rather than a Mystery: https://youtu.be/-Xs111uH9ss
I think the show would be improved if it did not use that device. I feel like it was almost like a detective show for dummies. You didn't have to (get to) match wits with the detective (or is it the writer?, ha ha) but did get to enjoy some justice porn, watch the guilty squirm.
I love the character of Columbo and he would lose nothing if they followed the more traditional detective format where all the bits revealed throughout are tied together in the end.
I love the character of Columbo and he would lose nothing if they followed the more traditional detective format where all the bits revealed throughout are tied together in the end.
Because, after all, who cares who killed Roger Ackroyd?
I used to try and miss the start of episodes so I wouldn't know exactly who did it. It's usually very easy to guess throughout in any case, but it's still an enjoyably journey even if you're almost 100% clued in.
Yes, the viewer has way more information than Columbo, so should be able to solve it even more easily. And yet it’s still extremely hard.
Oh, so they’re ‘rebooting’ it. I wish they would hire a writer with the imagination to do something completely new without all that baggage. …I agree - there’s darkness in Columbo, but it’s much subtler and is tempered by the kindness and charm of Columbo himself. I see why they do it, but the ‘just one more’ episode netflix-thing easily gets tiresome and ends up prolonging some plots/story arcs unnaturally and unsatisfactorily. The little of ‘Discovery’ I watched I felt no engagement with at all - the writing I thought was generic and boring and the characters seemed two-dimensional - but maybe I’m just behind the times: ‘Enterprise’ grew on me a few years down the line (though not the opening theme!)
[deleted]
I agree. I have recently been watching a lot of Star Trek and Mission Impossible. Two shows where you can watch one episode and be done with it until the next time.
I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one getting really annoyed with the style with which most shows are made these days. I understand that there are good things about having a continuous storyline, and the last season of DS9 shows that it does work. But all shows don't have to be that way.
I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one getting really annoyed with the style with which most shows are made these days. I understand that there are good things about having a continuous storyline, and the last season of DS9 shows that it does work. But all shows don't have to be that way.
The key is that your long-form stuff needs to take a back seat to a plot that starts and ends in with each episode. In my personal opinion, Stargate SG-1 is a master class in this.
Shows these days are written for streaming, they are clearly meant to be binged a season at a time. You'll have 4 plots an episode and not a one of them starts and ends in the same one, with several episodes having resolution of anything at all. It's maddening.
Like, there are memorable episodes of some shows, like SG-1's Ergo, that you can sit down and re-watch and enjoy yourself, but this made-for-streaming format just doesn't have that quality. What episode did that cool thing happen in? They all blur together.
Shows these days are written for streaming, they are clearly meant to be binged a season at a time. You'll have 4 plots an episode and not a one of them starts and ends in the same one, with several episodes having resolution of anything at all. It's maddening.
Like, there are memorable episodes of some shows, like SG-1's Ergo, that you can sit down and re-watch and enjoy yourself, but this made-for-streaming format just doesn't have that quality. What episode did that cool thing happen in? They all blur together.
The short-ish lived Veronica Mars was quite good a having both a season long story arc, but having self-contained mysteries as well. Some episodes leaning more one way or another, but there was usually some mix of both.
Yes, that's one of the things that impressed me most about the show before it went off the rails. You had your season-long mystery, some multi-episode questions, and then your single episode mysteries.
It also has one of the best father-daughter relationships I've seen on screen.
I have noticed that quite a lot of how Veronica Mars "worked" got shifted over into iZombie.
It also has one of the best father-daughter relationships I've seen on screen.
I have noticed that quite a lot of how Veronica Mars "worked" got shifted over into iZombie.
The X-Files did a goodish job alternating between standalone episodes and overarching plot. Roughly 2/3rds of episodes were standalone monster of the week episodes, while every third episode or so was about the conspiracy to help aliens colonize Earth. Also occasionally stuff in the standalone episodes had effects in later episodes (for example Scully's dog is from a person who died in a standalone episode)
SG–1 was good but B5 was better.
I started rewatching it a couple months ago, but had to abandon it almost immediately. The alien race to historical nation stereotyping is so forced and gross :(
I’m not even sure that you are talking about the same show. Which alien race did you think was stereotypical of which real human nation?
The Centauri have a Senate and an Emperor, which I suppose humans have done. The writer and producer stated that he deliberately modeled them on the Roman Empire, but their story reminds me more of the transition from the Wiemar Republic to the Third Reich. The Minbari have castes, which humans have done, but the three castes are completely equal and share all responsibilities and decision–making authority, which humans have never done. The Narn have some kind of legislative body made of “many equal voices”, though we never learn many details. That government gets dissolved and replaced with a government appointed by the Centauri (spoiler!).
Among the League of Non–Aligned Worlds, there is also a Gerontocracy (which humans have never done), a Corportocracy (which I would argue humans have never done, though I know some would disagree), and one alien race draws lots and gets into fist fights, which is hilarious (“You do the same, for flag.”). The Vorlons have no discernible government, but no human society has ever been that inscrutable. But you won’t have seen any of those, since you gave up early.
But I can’t see how any of that is gross. Most fantasy and science fiction examines humanity and the human condition by creating alternate races which are just distorted reflections of our selves. Dwarves and Elves and Hobbits and even Orcs are just aspects of humanity that have been separated out for story–telling purposes, and it’s no different in B5. How can it possibly be gross?
The Centauri have a Senate and an Emperor, which I suppose humans have done. The writer and producer stated that he deliberately modeled them on the Roman Empire, but their story reminds me more of the transition from the Wiemar Republic to the Third Reich. The Minbari have castes, which humans have done, but the three castes are completely equal and share all responsibilities and decision–making authority, which humans have never done. The Narn have some kind of legislative body made of “many equal voices”, though we never learn many details. That government gets dissolved and replaced with a government appointed by the Centauri (spoiler!).
Among the League of Non–Aligned Worlds, there is also a Gerontocracy (which humans have never done), a Corportocracy (which I would argue humans have never done, though I know some would disagree), and one alien race draws lots and gets into fist fights, which is hilarious (“You do the same, for flag.”). The Vorlons have no discernible government, but no human society has ever been that inscrutable. But you won’t have seen any of those, since you gave up early.
But I can’t see how any of that is gross. Most fantasy and science fiction examines humanity and the human condition by creating alternate races which are just distorted reflections of our selves. Dwarves and Elves and Hobbits and even Orcs are just aspects of humanity that have been separated out for story–telling purposes, and it’s no different in B5. How can it possibly be gross?
Are you kidding?
Centari == Franco Roman.
Mimbari == Vague eastern mysticism
Narn == Dark skined prominant skeletal featured war like people
You gotta be really obtuse to not see that plainly for what it is.
The show has it's upsides but let's not pretend what's plain on it's face isn't right there.
Centari == Franco Roman.
Mimbari == Vague eastern mysticism
Narn == Dark skined prominant skeletal featured war like people
You gotta be really obtuse to not see that plainly for what it is.
The show has it's upsides but let's not pretend what's plain on it's face isn't right there.
No, very much no.
The Centauri map onto an empire in decline, so you could point at the late Roman empire, the late Byzantine empire, the late British empire, &c., where they haven't caught up with the reality of their situation and still have delusions of grandeur of the times when they were still ascendant.
The Minbari don't neatly align onto any human cultures. Sure, you can pick out elements of various Far Eastern and Near Eastern cultures, but there's no actual 'mysticism' there. If you wanted to compare them to anything, they're basically less hot-headed Klingons.
The Narn are not 'Dark skined prominant skeletal featured war like people'. To paint them as such misses the point of their whole arc throughout the show, and in particular that of G'Kar. They're a deeply traumatised people trying to recover after a long colonial occupation. About the only reason why you're projecting that onto them is that many human beings from colonised parts of the world have dark skin, but the Narn are not actually portrayed as warlike: that's something the Centauri liked to portray themselves as to excuse their treatment of and subsequent high-handedness with the Narm. From my perspective as someone from Ireland, I see ourselves in the Narn, after centuries of similar treatment from our neighbours to the east.
I would recommend you go back and rewatch the show past the first season.
The Centauri map onto an empire in decline, so you could point at the late Roman empire, the late Byzantine empire, the late British empire, &c., where they haven't caught up with the reality of their situation and still have delusions of grandeur of the times when they were still ascendant.
The Minbari don't neatly align onto any human cultures. Sure, you can pick out elements of various Far Eastern and Near Eastern cultures, but there's no actual 'mysticism' there. If you wanted to compare them to anything, they're basically less hot-headed Klingons.
The Narn are not 'Dark skined prominant skeletal featured war like people'. To paint them as such misses the point of their whole arc throughout the show, and in particular that of G'Kar. They're a deeply traumatised people trying to recover after a long colonial occupation. About the only reason why you're projecting that onto them is that many human beings from colonised parts of the world have dark skin, but the Narn are not actually portrayed as warlike: that's something the Centauri liked to portray themselves as to excuse their treatment of and subsequent high-handedness with the Narm. From my perspective as someone from Ireland, I see ourselves in the Narn, after centuries of similar treatment from our neighbours to the east.
I would recommend you go back and rewatch the show past the first season.
The speck is in your own eye, I think.
The Narn are certainly sounding the war drums at the beginning of the show, but that isn’t enough to make them “war–like”. The Centauri and the Minbari are both better at war than the Narn. Two of the Narn characters are the most eloquent and intelligent of any characters on the show. The humans and Minbari fought a war just ten years before the show starts, and you didn’t put either of them down as “war–like”. The Minbari nearly committed true genocide and wiped out the human race completely, but you called them mystics instead.
The Minbari certainly seem like mystics, at least until you meet a few members of the Warrior caste; the diplomats we see at first are only from the Religious caste. And when considered in detail their philosophy is not really very similar to any “Eastern” philosophies you might be thinking of.
But the decadence of the Centauri Republic is intended to remind you of the Roman Empire. There are differences, but that aspect of the Centauri was intended to feel especially familiar. Humans can grow to understand the other races, but they could easily _be_ the Centauri.
The question of religions and philosophy is an interesting one.
Depending on how much of the show you watched, you may have found out that they believe in reincarnation (in fact that think that was a big plot–point of the second or third episode). This is certainly a point of similarity with one “Eastern” religion that I can think of. However, the Minbari have _scientific proof_. The Warrior caste Minbari believe in reincarnation even though they are not religious, because it’s been proven. There are people in the universe who call it a “pretty fantasy” so the question is left open for the viewer, at least until later. However, in other respects their philosophy is not much like that of any human religion which incorporates a belief in reincarnation. Hinduism has reincarnation and castes, but it also has a pantheon of gods. The Minbari have reincarnation and castes too, but no gods at all. Their most revered religious figure is “a Minbari not born of Minbari”; in other words an ordinary Minbari of unusual heritage but not a supernatural being in any way.
Meanwhile, the Centauri believe that they can often see the circumstances of their own death. “Comes in a dream, yes?”. Again, this is something even non–religious Centauri believe. Londo tells Sinclair about his dream, that he has always known that he would be strangled to death by a Centauri (“We are squeezing the life out of each other.”). And he says that as soon as he saw G’Kar for the first time, he recognized him as the Narn in the vision. We the viewers are actually shown the vision, and in season 4 the show follows through and we see how Londo’s death plays out. The Centauri also have Seers who can see the future of other people, and those visions always happen exactly as we are shown them. Meanwhile, the Centauri religion is in many ways the direct antithesis of Christianity, a major human religion that has a strong element of prophecy, and one that became common in the Roman Empire no less. Their religion is much more similar that of the earlier Roman Republic with a whole pantheon of deities, including at least one ascended emperor.
It’s not as important to the plot of the show as the others we see, but in the fifth season we learn that every 200 years on the Brachiri homeworld the dead come back to life for a night to talk to the living and give them advice. And this works not just for the Brachiri; a human on the Brachiri homeworld or on any property owned by the Brachiri during that night will be visited by someone from their own past. One of the visitors, a human who died years before the show begins, relays a message from a character that died in season 3 to one that is still alive, but who wasn’t within the Brachiri zone!
I’m not really sure how to classify the Narn religious beliefs, but at least one of their religious texts contains accurate historical information that turns out to be useful to the main characters.
So in the Babylon 5 universe, many species have religious beliefs that are actually literally true. Those religions share some broad strokes with religions that exist here on Earth today, but not much more than that; the details are always quite different. There’s more depth there than you thought.
The Narn are certainly sounding the war drums at the beginning of the show, but that isn’t enough to make them “war–like”. The Centauri and the Minbari are both better at war than the Narn. Two of the Narn characters are the most eloquent and intelligent of any characters on the show. The humans and Minbari fought a war just ten years before the show starts, and you didn’t put either of them down as “war–like”. The Minbari nearly committed true genocide and wiped out the human race completely, but you called them mystics instead.
The Minbari certainly seem like mystics, at least until you meet a few members of the Warrior caste; the diplomats we see at first are only from the Religious caste. And when considered in detail their philosophy is not really very similar to any “Eastern” philosophies you might be thinking of.
But the decadence of the Centauri Republic is intended to remind you of the Roman Empire. There are differences, but that aspect of the Centauri was intended to feel especially familiar. Humans can grow to understand the other races, but they could easily _be_ the Centauri.
The question of religions and philosophy is an interesting one.
Depending on how much of the show you watched, you may have found out that they believe in reincarnation (in fact that think that was a big plot–point of the second or third episode). This is certainly a point of similarity with one “Eastern” religion that I can think of. However, the Minbari have _scientific proof_. The Warrior caste Minbari believe in reincarnation even though they are not religious, because it’s been proven. There are people in the universe who call it a “pretty fantasy” so the question is left open for the viewer, at least until later. However, in other respects their philosophy is not much like that of any human religion which incorporates a belief in reincarnation. Hinduism has reincarnation and castes, but it also has a pantheon of gods. The Minbari have reincarnation and castes too, but no gods at all. Their most revered religious figure is “a Minbari not born of Minbari”; in other words an ordinary Minbari of unusual heritage but not a supernatural being in any way.
Meanwhile, the Centauri believe that they can often see the circumstances of their own death. “Comes in a dream, yes?”. Again, this is something even non–religious Centauri believe. Londo tells Sinclair about his dream, that he has always known that he would be strangled to death by a Centauri (“We are squeezing the life out of each other.”). And he says that as soon as he saw G’Kar for the first time, he recognized him as the Narn in the vision. We the viewers are actually shown the vision, and in season 4 the show follows through and we see how Londo’s death plays out. The Centauri also have Seers who can see the future of other people, and those visions always happen exactly as we are shown them. Meanwhile, the Centauri religion is in many ways the direct antithesis of Christianity, a major human religion that has a strong element of prophecy, and one that became common in the Roman Empire no less. Their religion is much more similar that of the earlier Roman Republic with a whole pantheon of deities, including at least one ascended emperor.
It’s not as important to the plot of the show as the others we see, but in the fifth season we learn that every 200 years on the Brachiri homeworld the dead come back to life for a night to talk to the living and give them advice. And this works not just for the Brachiri; a human on the Brachiri homeworld or on any property owned by the Brachiri during that night will be visited by someone from their own past. One of the visitors, a human who died years before the show begins, relays a message from a character that died in season 3 to one that is still alive, but who wasn’t within the Brachiri zone!
I’m not really sure how to classify the Narn religious beliefs, but at least one of their religious texts contains accurate historical information that turns out to be useful to the main characters.
So in the Babylon 5 universe, many species have religious beliefs that are actually literally true. Those religions share some broad strokes with religions that exist here on Earth today, but not much more than that; the details are always quite different. There’s more depth there than you thought.
Even with the deus ex machina aliens?
The plot wasn't resolved thru magic—the first ones realized they were doing more harm than good and decided to finally take their leave. This characterization has some merit but is stretched to fit.
Also, the thread was discussing how a show could best weave short and long term story lines together, not their absolute quality.
Also, the thread was discussing how a show could best weave short and long term story lines together, not their absolute quality.
Which aliens did you think of as a Deus Ex Machina?
I haven’t watch Columbo since I was a kid, but I always thought Monk was the closest of the modern crime serials.
> every episode ends with an addictive cliffhanger
By chance I noticed if you watch from the midpoint of one episode to the next, there is no cliffhanger. ;-)
By chance I noticed if you watch from the midpoint of one episode to the next, there is no cliffhanger. ;-)
> There are many things that separate it from most.
Matlock is another great detective(?) show for self-contained episodes.
Matlock is another great detective(?) show for self-contained episodes.
I used to like The Bill (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bill), back when it had 30-minute episodes, each of which was in effect a self-contained little play using the same set of main characters. The episodes were written by different people, who were credited quite prominently at the start, so the quality of the writing varied, but in a way that made it more interesting. Unfortunately, more recently, that's not what the market wanted, apparently.
I haven't seen it mentioned yet, but 'Try and Catch Me' is my favorite episode (it has everything: the car, Dog, and IMHO, the best "villain"), and addresses the kindness:
> Abigail Mitchell: I'm beginning to be very fond of you, Lieutenant. I think you're a very kind man.
> Lt. Columbo: Don't count on that, Miss Mitchell. Don't count on it.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075866/quotes/
> Abigail Mitchell: I'm beginning to be very fond of you, Lieutenant. I think you're a very kind man.
> Lt. Columbo: Don't count on that, Miss Mitchell. Don't count on it.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075866/quotes/
Lately everything has to be dark and quirkiness is used to explain how someone is directly rude.
Talking about darkness, I remember Burn Notice, a funny show where an ex-spy used his training to fix his neighbours' problems, much like A-Team.
It was a nice light entertainment, but for some reason, the last season (or last two seasons, can't remember) turned so dark that it was really scary. I started watching it to have some chuckles and finished with a sour taste.
Talking about darkness, I remember Burn Notice, a funny show where an ex-spy used his training to fix his neighbours' problems, much like A-Team.
It was a nice light entertainment, but for some reason, the last season (or last two seasons, can't remember) turned so dark that it was really scary. I started watching it to have some chuckles and finished with a sour taste.
Oh my god, Discovery...
Discovery is just written by toddlers or something.
Like, I was willing to blame it on continuity baggage for the first 2 seasons, plus the first season of every Star Trek is lackluster so whatever. But in season 3 it looked like they'd finally hired a competent writer for a few episodes, Osyraa was suddenly a more nuanced character, the Federation was offered a path to its goals that meant they'd have to compromise their ideals, Burnam was becoming Han Solo [0], Tilly was being slotted into the leadership role her character is actually good at, etc. Then at the last second the toddlers took over again, Deus-ex Burnam'd[1] the ethical decisions, shoved Tilly back into a science role, put Suru on a bus, and put Han Solo in charge of a starship for some reason. What the hell!?
[0] Which is what her character should be, clearly. She doesn't follow rules, she doesn't work well with others, can't lead worth a damn, and she readily compromises her ethics to achieve her goals. She's a terrible Star Fleet captain but she'd be a great chaotic-good rogue.
[1] What the fuck is with Marry-Sue God-Queen Burnam anyway? She has like 95% of the screen time or something and her Picard speeches inspire nothing but contempt for the writers. Like, answer me this: There are regular characters on the bridge other than Tilly, Burnam, and Suru. What are their names? There's Detmer, who we kinda know about because she had that PTSD episode on screen, and I guess that one woman is a cliff diver or something, but I don't know her name. And dude in the back who got horribly murdered by Mud that one time? These aren't red shirts, why aren't we getting any character development for them?
Alright, sorry, I went on a bit of a rant there.
P.S. I'm hesitant to blame the actors for bad performances. I feel like there's a lot of bad direction and obviously terrible material to work with.
P.P.S. I actually think the hack writers are are a pretty good fit for the mirror-universe stuff. It's still garbage writing, but it just sorta fits that place.
Discovery is just written by toddlers or something.
Like, I was willing to blame it on continuity baggage for the first 2 seasons, plus the first season of every Star Trek is lackluster so whatever. But in season 3 it looked like they'd finally hired a competent writer for a few episodes, Osyraa was suddenly a more nuanced character, the Federation was offered a path to its goals that meant they'd have to compromise their ideals, Burnam was becoming Han Solo [0], Tilly was being slotted into the leadership role her character is actually good at, etc. Then at the last second the toddlers took over again, Deus-ex Burnam'd[1] the ethical decisions, shoved Tilly back into a science role, put Suru on a bus, and put Han Solo in charge of a starship for some reason. What the hell!?
[0] Which is what her character should be, clearly. She doesn't follow rules, she doesn't work well with others, can't lead worth a damn, and she readily compromises her ethics to achieve her goals. She's a terrible Star Fleet captain but she'd be a great chaotic-good rogue.
[1] What the fuck is with Marry-Sue God-Queen Burnam anyway? She has like 95% of the screen time or something and her Picard speeches inspire nothing but contempt for the writers. Like, answer me this: There are regular characters on the bridge other than Tilly, Burnam, and Suru. What are their names? There's Detmer, who we kinda know about because she had that PTSD episode on screen, and I guess that one woman is a cliff diver or something, but I don't know her name. And dude in the back who got horribly murdered by Mud that one time? These aren't red shirts, why aren't we getting any character development for them?
Alright, sorry, I went on a bit of a rant there.
P.S. I'm hesitant to blame the actors for bad performances. I feel like there's a lot of bad direction and obviously terrible material to work with.
P.P.S. I actually think the hack writers are are a pretty good fit for the mirror-universe stuff. It's still garbage writing, but it just sorta fits that place.
Rant or not, I have to agree entirely. They literally tried to do a Die hard in Space episode...
If you think of it as `Star Trek: Burnham and the continuing voyages of Discovery`, then it sort of makes sense. Doesn't make it any good though
If you think of it as `Star Trek: Burnham and the continuing voyages of Discovery`, then it sort of makes sense. Doesn't make it any good though
[deleted]
Turbo lift scenes in season 3. Is the ship a f’ing TARDIS now where it’s bigger on the inside?
Possibly. That was after the INSTALL ALL THE MAGIC refit, wasn't it?
One of the earliest (and also one of the best) Columbo episodes ("Murder by the Book", 1971) was directed by Steven Spielberg. If you watch it, it is immediately clear (even during the initial shot) that this episode is simply in another league. Not only when compared to other Columbo episodes, but also when compared to other TV shows during that era (see for example this short documentary [0]). It is crazy to think that Spielberg was only 25 when he directed this.
If I remember correctly, the quality of that Columbo episode was what really started Spielberg's career. He got the offer to direct a TV movie afterwards, and he presented Duel [1] (also in 1971), which is simply a masterpiece and got a theatrical release after the TV success. It established Spielberg as a major film director. Just watch the title sequence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0707XtiFPs
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gb62FxCH-Ks
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duel_(1971_film)
If I remember correctly, the quality of that Columbo episode was what really started Spielberg's career. He got the offer to direct a TV movie afterwards, and he presented Duel [1] (also in 1971), which is simply a masterpiece and got a theatrical release after the TV success. It established Spielberg as a major film director. Just watch the title sequence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0707XtiFPs
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gb62FxCH-Ks
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duel_(1971_film)
Apparently this episode is in the public domain, and is available on the columbophile's website[0]
[0] https://columbophile.com/2018/03/25/full-episode-columbo-mur...
[0] https://columbophile.com/2018/03/25/full-episode-columbo-mur...
I wonder, are these episodes really part of the public domain, or are they just misusing that term to describe being allowed to embed them?
Respectfully disagree on Spielberg. Many episodes from the early series show exceptional visual flair. Watch the opening sequence of Publish or Perish or the post murder cover up from Death Lends a Hand.
Spielberg was young and had enormous talent obviously but I think a blind taste test wouldn't show the difference.
Spielberg was young and had enormous talent obviously but I think a blind taste test wouldn't show the difference.
You beat me to mentioning Death Lends a Hand.
“How do we trump split screen? Let’s do it on sunglasses” (which always seems to get cut in syndication)
“How do we trump split screen? Let’s do it on sunglasses” (which always seems to get cut in syndication)
> Watch [...] the post murder cover up from Death Lends a Hand.
Personally, I find the projection on the sunglasses a bit kitschy.
Personally, I find the projection on the sunglasses a bit kitschy.
My feeling is that if it was used in the context of cinema/feature film then yes it would be kitsch. But for the medium of TV of the era it strikes me as a bit of intelligent fun.
I was introduced to Columbo by a housemate a few years ago and was instantly hooked. The episode you mentioned is excellent, as are all the Jack Cassidy ones.
For me the standout episode is 'Any Old Port in a Storm' (1973) with Donald Pleasance.
For me the standout episode is 'Any Old Port in a Storm' (1973) with Donald Pleasance.
I think there are 4 things that make a Columbo episode enjoyable:
1) Peter Falk 2) Creative murder ideas 3) Great plot 4) Supporting performances
In "Any Old Port in a Storm" the acting by both Falk and Pleasence is outstanding. Regarding 2), I always adored "Now You See Him" (the magician episode, also with Cassidy) and "Swan Song" (the airplane murder with Johnny Cash).
1) Peter Falk 2) Creative murder ideas 3) Great plot 4) Supporting performances
In "Any Old Port in a Storm" the acting by both Falk and Pleasence is outstanding. Regarding 2), I always adored "Now You See Him" (the magician episode, also with Cassidy) and "Swan Song" (the airplane murder with Johnny Cash).
I think what makes Columbo good is how out he is of his element. The perpetrators are always from a higher social class and he always takes advantage of their hubris, lulling them into a false sense of security, agitating them until they give up clues. All that while being polite and sympathetic. There is no shoehorned social commentary in Columbo. It's pure entertainment, which is hard to find these days.
Kinda a lot of episodes were like that. The more interesting episodes I think it was more of a he was 'a sly little elf perched on his toadstool'. He was unassuming. He disguised himself to be invisible and would pick apart everything usually very methodically. He 'took a defect and used it as a tool'. Even the way he would blow people off was to be unassuming 'oh my boss he is a very exacting man', 'oh just a routine question'. When it was usually him looking for that information. He would many times make the perp 'self own' themselves by their own lies.
The writers were also very good on making sure motive, means and opportunity were clearly picked apart in all ways. Apparently the whole crew was in on it and would make sure that the story stayed true. Making sure things were filmed so they did not contradict later or past actions.
The 90s series was a bit less tight and more of the 'stick it to the rich'. They were enjoyable enough. But something was missing.
The writers were also very good on making sure motive, means and opportunity were clearly picked apart in all ways. Apparently the whole crew was in on it and would make sure that the story stayed true. Making sure things were filmed so they did not contradict later or past actions.
The 90s series was a bit less tight and more of the 'stick it to the rich'. They were enjoyable enough. But something was missing.
I would add great pacing, with long, slow shots. I counted random modern film scene switches, it is average 2 seconds per switch.
Other is adding atmospheric elements that serve no purpose to the plot, just paint scenes of life. In modern films, most things shown will have to compulsively have some utility later.
Other is adding atmospheric elements that serve no purpose to the plot, just paint scenes of life. In modern films, most things shown will have to compulsively have some utility later.
I have been buying a lot of laserdiscs lately, and this is what I enjoy most about 70s-early 80s movies. Really long, interesting shots and way less music.
Jack Cassidy is amazing in all three? of the episodes he's in.
The show oozes genuine charisma, and the slow 1970's pacing is an absolute joy.
The show oozes genuine charisma, and the slow 1970's pacing is an absolute joy.
Wow, driving from downtown LA (Broadway), up 110 to I-5 towards Palmdale, using that unique connecting ramp where you turn left at the end of the tunnel.
I've driven these recently and remember the horrible smog-belching cars from my youth. Also, nice to see the freeways without tagging everywhere.
I've driven these recently and remember the horrible smog-belching cars from my youth. Also, nice to see the freeways without tagging everywhere.
"Murder by the Book" was also an early writing credit for writer/producer Steven Bochco.
The shot choices in that opening are spectacular. One of my favourite episodes.
I hate Columbo because in the Double Exposure episode they explain the cue marks that appeared during movies to indicate to the projectionist they need to switch reels, and after that I couldn't not notice those cue marks (Fight Club did the same reveal, much later).
But really, I love Columbo. RIP Peter Falk. 10 years already.
But really, I love Columbo. RIP Peter Falk. 10 years already.
I remember that and that was exactly my feeling. After watching this I just could not unsee them anymore.
It was the perfect TIL for me long time ago (when I didn't know what TIL would have stood for).
It was the perfect TIL for me long time ago (when I didn't know what TIL would have stood for).
When I read Dostoevsky's "Crime and Punishment" in school, I mentioned to my teacher that the investigator reminds me of Columbo. I only remember my teacher answering me, that Columbo is one of the few crime series to be of good quality.
Almost fifteen years later I read this:
> “The Columbo character was based squarely on Porfiry Petrovich, the astute but meandering lead investigator in Dostoevsky’s Crime & Punishment.”
Which makes me kind of happy :-)
Almost fifteen years later I read this:
> “The Columbo character was based squarely on Porfiry Petrovich, the astute but meandering lead investigator in Dostoevsky’s Crime & Punishment.”
Which makes me kind of happy :-)
Although the writing was superb, I don't think Columbo would have been such a good show without Peter Falk.
He had talent, and natural charisma. I don't think I have ever seen him in a bad performance, even before Columbo.
He had talent, and natural charisma. I don't think I have ever seen him in a bad performance, even before Columbo.
Agreed. In “Murder by Death” he also plays Columbo's parody, and it's hilarious.
If you are an estimator of Peter Falk in "light" roles, you surely know it, I have to confess that I still re-watch from time to time The Inlaws (with Alan Arkin besides Peter Falk) and still laugh out loud on the same lines, even if I almost know them by heart:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_In-Laws_(1979_film)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_In-Laws_(1979_film)
Came here to see if anyone mentioned "The In-Laws". Just a perfect, farcical gem. I still crack myself up yelling "serpentine, serpentine" when running with my kids, who have no idea what's funny. Probably about time I watched it with them.
>... when running with my kids
You mean when you talk about running with your kids ;-):
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079336/quotes/qt0136888
You mean when you talk about running with your kids ;-):
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079336/quotes/qt0136888
[deleted]
It’s also quite lucky that they decided to go with the “too young” Falk, who was then able to play the role for over thirty years!
I was always disappointed that Apple never got Peter Falk to appear on stage at WWDC and say "Oh, there's one more thing Mr. Jobs…".
Too true. I don't care for all revivified old shows but I've been seeing a lot of this show recently (MeTV in some cities) and of course, Columbo doesn't wear a stylish turtle neck, but I think some would find the callback hilarious.
>They based the character squarely on Porfiry Petrovich, the astute but meandering lead investigator in Dostoevsky’s Crime & Punishment – a book both had studied at college.
Perhaps, but I would find it difficult to believe that the creators of Columbo hadn't also seen the 1955 French film Diabolique (also known as Les Diaboliques). This film features a detective who seems very friendly and not very competent but who is cleverly setting up a rhetorical trap for the murder suspect, very much like how Columbo acts.
Perhaps, but I would find it difficult to believe that the creators of Columbo hadn't also seen the 1955 French film Diabolique (also known as Les Diaboliques). This film features a detective who seems very friendly and not very competent but who is cleverly setting up a rhetorical trap for the murder suspect, very much like how Columbo acts.
There'sno source mentioned, but according to this (French TV station's) presentation (see slide 5)[0], Commissaire Fichet from Les Diaboliques was indeed an inspiration.
[0] https://tvbreizh.fr/sites/default/files/dossier_de_presse_50...
[0] https://tvbreizh.fr/sites/default/files/dossier_de_presse_50...
My wife and I discovered columbo in 2014ish. Ever since then we have become crazy fans. I have all the episodes from 1968 thru 2003 on DVD, ripped with subtitles and backed up on multiple SSDs and also backed up to Amazon glacier just in case... Columbo plays in our house every weekend since 2014, we are probably watching the series 7th or 8th time now and it never feels boring. My biggest regret is that, I found columbo after peter Falk died. I would have loved to meet him or just write to him when he were alive. Peter Falk was a legend, I almost feel like we are related and share some weird bond. Thanks Peter Falk and the whole Columbo crew for a masterpiece show.
This series is one of the very rare ones in which my favorite actor, Patrick McGoohan, makes a couple of guest appearances, and even directed one episode.
https://columbophile.com/2020/08/30/episode-review-columbo-a...
https://columbophile.com/2020/08/30/episode-review-columbo-a...
Yes. He's excellent. My favorite is Identity Crisis with Leslie Nielsen.
Correction: directed five episodes.
Be seeing you.
Pay attention to the camera & directing the next time you watch an episode, it's an absolute masterpiece.
One example to look out for is the back-and-forth between Columbo and the baddie. They would usually stand in opposite ends of the room and shot from two (sets of) cameras. One camera is closer to Columbo and the other is closer to the baddie, so when the detective is "winning" an argument, he'll look bigger on the screen and vice versa.
This usually starts with a shot where Columbo looks super small somewhere in the back of the room, then he'd ask his famous "just one last question", and then they switch the setup. Now Columbo is bigger in the front, and the baddie looks small while they are in trouble.
One example to look out for is the back-and-forth between Columbo and the baddie. They would usually stand in opposite ends of the room and shot from two (sets of) cameras. One camera is closer to Columbo and the other is closer to the baddie, so when the detective is "winning" an argument, he'll look bigger on the screen and vice versa.
This usually starts with a shot where Columbo looks super small somewhere in the back of the room, then he'd ask his famous "just one last question", and then they switch the setup. Now Columbo is bigger in the front, and the baddie looks small while they are in trouble.
For an extra blessing of Peter Falk should look for Wim Wender's Wings of Desire. It's an incredibly touching addition to an already profound film.
https://youtu.be/u7s-H4EqP4I
https://youtu.be/u7s-H4EqP4I
Great movie. I didn't know Falk was in it and this created a very surreal experience when he arrived on screen.
I never watched the show back in the day. I knew what it was but I was not into this sort of thing in my youth.
Decided to give it a try last month and I am already on season 2 and find it enjoyable.
A few things that stand out to me:
1. Male characters tend to be in their 50s or older.
2. Women are mostly gorgeous but somewhat the same type
3. Even though it was all filmed almost 50 years ago and some stories are ridiculous, over the top, it all seems more believable than whatever modern crime show my wife is watching. These old, pretentious, hilariously over the top rich assholes are more believable to me than "normal" modern TV characters that seem to have it all in their 20s while also looking like models.
4. Everyone is white lol
Decided to give it a try last month and I am already on season 2 and find it enjoyable.
A few things that stand out to me:
1. Male characters tend to be in their 50s or older.
2. Women are mostly gorgeous but somewhat the same type
3. Even though it was all filmed almost 50 years ago and some stories are ridiculous, over the top, it all seems more believable than whatever modern crime show my wife is watching. These old, pretentious, hilariously over the top rich assholes are more believable to me than "normal" modern TV characters that seem to have it all in their 20s while also looking like models.
4. Everyone is white lol
I discovered Columbo just a year or so back and I love it. Peter Falk is the big draw, but I also appreciate the relatively low intensity of the show. Scenes are allowed to unfold at a pace that would seem too slow or baggy for today's shows. It's a perfect evening watch to unwind after a long day.
That “buy me a coffee banner” is so annoying on mobile. Awful to just keep it there nonstop.
I learned conversational English by watching subtitled Columbo shows.
amazing, just downloaded recently and in the middle of episode 1 just now...
I agree, sadly there is nothing like Colombo produced these days, the CSI series are tangentially similar but using hitech instead of old school police work.
Interesting movie recommendation would be murder on the orient express , old or new version are equally good.
I'm sure, that it will get a reboot sometime in future. I just hope that it will not receive the same treatment as Star Trek with Discovery. I would appreciate i.e. Natasha Lyone to make it something different enough not to look like a cheap uncanny valley copy. But kindess and clear separation of episodes is a must.