User Reviews

Isabel Smith (played by Barbara Barrie) falsely accuses Howard Clements (played by Bradford Dillman) of attempted sexual assault (however less provocatively it was worded back then) and Howard plots revenge after he is convicted and released from prison three years later. Fatefully he gets his chance but how will it play out? No further spoilers here although other posters have given away some salient details.

Suffice to say that Barrie is a marvel. To see her young and lovely again, and, for a Texan, sounding and acting just like the lovelorn New England spinster she is playing, is a joy. Even at the beginning when Isabel gives in to her darkest impulses and accuses Howard (as described above), Barrie manages to give her character the credibility of, at worst, self-delusion, purifying her of anything baser or more vile, a delicate task given the inherent evils of bearing false witness and wrongful accusations, but, as Howard plots his own revenge, the scales of justice start recalibrating to find a new balance.

***SPOILERS*** If ever anyone ended up getting the short end of the stick in life it was Howard Clements, Bradford Dillman. Minding his own business by taking a walk at night Howrad after slipping and almost breaking his leg is then arrested by the local cops from an attempted rape that the poor guy,in what already happened to him, was totally innocent of! His accuser mosey and insecure, with the opposite sex, Isabel Smith, Barbara Barrie, spotted the handsome guy and decided to screw up his life forever for barley noticing her or not asking Isabel out for a date!

Convicted for a crime he didn't commit Howard ends up losing his job and spending a year in the clink and everything, the lousy food the hardened and abusive fellow convicts and loss of freedom, that goes along with it. Now out with a criminal record Howard plans to even the score up with Isabel as well as the town of Lewisberg who had destroyed his life. Meanwhile Isabel has gotten guilt feeling about what she did to Howard and tries to make things up with him by going to his record store that he paid a down payment for with money he robbed from a local bank, yes she and the town made Howard a criminal,to get friendly with him. But Howard has other plans for Isabel then just talking about the latest top 40 hits or the classics. He want's to stick it to her and stick it good for all the trouble she caused him.

***SPOILERS*** Like everything else in this Alfred Hitchcock episode Howard's grand plan to screw Isabel backfires on him. Instead of putting her away or deep sixing her for good he ends up stuck with Isabel, as his wife, for life! And even worst of all if he he ever plans to again knock her off in the future and make it look like an accident he's facing the rest of his life behind bars. Yes Howard already tried it once, knock off Isabel, and failed miserably but luckily got away with it. Or did he? Now being stuck with Isabel for life which may even be worse then spending the rest of his life behind bars doing hard time in a state prison!

This episode had the oddest resolution, didn't it? Police Lieutenant Huntley (Edmon Ryan) connects the dots on the robbery of $15,150 from a bank messenger to a pair of transactions made by Howard Clements (Bradford Dillman), and has enough reason to believe that Clements planned the murder of his wife (Barbara Barrie) in a boating accident. So what does he do? He essentially commits Clements to a lifetime marriage to Isabel Smith, claiming that any further attempt at doing away with his wife would open the floodgates to his prior investigations! What??!!

Obviously, I had problems with this story. I mean, how could Howard be so dumb as to so neatly divide the money he stole into a bank deposit (at the same bank it was stolen from!) for thirteen thousand dollars, while sending the remainder to the police? There could be no other explanation for that coincidence other than he was the thief in the first place. And why wouldn't the First National City Bank itself question the large deposit just three days after the robbery of the courier? Poor writing there.

Notice I haven't even commented yet on Howard's developing a relationship with the woman whose testimony put him in jail for three years. If his intent was murder, there would have been any number of ways to go about it other than getting on her good side and entering into marriage. I also take issue with the 'ugly duckling' aspect of the story as it pertained to Isabel Smith's appearance. The same tack was taken in prior Hitchcock episodes, 'Beast in View' and 'Behind the Locked Door'. The female protagonist in each story, just as here, wasn't really ugly; the worst you could say is that all the women were plain looking, but not with an unattractive side.

So all in all, too many inconsistencies here to hold up as a credible story. It didn't even leave room for Hitchcock to comment on how the guilty party was eventually made to pay for their crimes. Which I find hard to believe, as it suggests that Howard and Isabel lived happily ever after. What are the odds?

Spoilers below -

Warning for content containing mentions of sexual assault and rape. I had a hard time with this one due to the men claiming the woman who was assaulted "wanted this to happen" and that the man who was accused "wouldn't risk (the assault) on a woman like that", because she's too ugly to attack. But maybe someone hotter and it would be worth it! GROSS.

He goes on to try to kill her but honestly the worst part is how much everyone goes on and on about how ugly she is. Like cmon it's just lazy writing in my opinion.

Actually love this actress tho and her glasses remind me of ones my mom had has part of a costume and they were so fun to wear and play pretend.