User Reviews

The production value on this is pretty good, but its verisimilitude leaves something to be desired. It's the classic ambush. A group of men attempt to force a confession from a murderer by producing the ghostly specter of the victim. An actress is hired to play her. There are so many pitfalls in this scheme that it becomes absurd. Since it's the one year anniversary of the murder, one may think the young guest might be suspicious. But, of course, there would be no story. This is much prettier than most of the episodes. Since the great director actually put his mark on this serving, it looks much nicer. The acting is also very good. It still leaves one disappointed at the end.

It just doesn't seem very credible to me that a person who murdered someone would suddenly blurt out their guilt the way John Bedford (Kenneth Haigh) did here. The same thing happened in a prior Hitchcock episode as well, the title of which doesn't come to mind right now. I also concur with another reviewer who stated how Inspector Brent (John Williams) and the other parties involved in the seance made it a point not to look at the 'ghost' who made an appearance, especially when earlier it was discussed how they should pretend not to see it. But pretending would imply looking and not acknowledging. With all that, the expected twist here was rather mundane, even if it meant a quizzical look or two on the part of all the participants.

The great Hitchcock directed this episode. I have no problems with the direction, only with the script. As others here have detailed on IMDB, it's a simple setup. A retired Scotland Yard inspector, played by Hitchcock favorite John Williams, has arranged for a dinner party of four men at a house where an unsolved murder took place two years ago to the day, October 23, 1901. The suspect is the nephew of the lady who was killed. The game is to present him with a ghostly apparition of the aunt, played by an actress the inspector has hired to appear in the doorway of the next room. She is expected to arrive just after the men sit down to dine.

The inspector has gotten the other two men to agree to pretend they see nothing and hear nothing. He has also arranged for a dog to bark without being seen, just like the dog that belonged to the victim. The other guests arrive and they sit down and chat. When the dog barks, the suspect, John Bedford gets distracted from the talk and asks the host if it is his dog. The host, and others say, "What dog? I didn't hear anything."

A bit later, a black-clothed older woman appears in the doorway. She seems to walk a bit toward the dining room, then walks away, backwards and disappears. A bit later, she reappears and does the same thing. Bedford is quite distressed. He asks the others if they see what he sees, but when they turn, the woman is not in view.

***ENDING SPOILER ALERT*** After this happens a few times, Bedford loses control and starts yelling at the vision, telling her to get away or "I'll kill you again!" That's all they needed. The men stand up. A local police detective is called in from the next room to make the arrest-remember Williams' character is retired. They lead the man away and here comes the actress who informs the men that's she got delayed and she's just now arrived at the house. They stare in amazement.

Through out the episode, I was intrigued, wondering just what is this "ghost" going to do to get him to confess. The way it played out, and the weak ending left me quite disappointed.

First of all, Bedford never seemed to call out to get the men to look when he could see her. They kept turning when she was out of Bedford's view. But thinking of all the shows about seances where the key person sees a ghost or vision and it leads to a confession or something-the others in the seance can also see the apparition. I don't see why it was necessary for the men to pretend they heard and saw nothing. They could have exclaimed something like, "It's your aunt, Bedford, no doubt about it. What do you think she wants?" Frankly, if they see the vision too, it might help convince him he's not losing his mind, that she really has come back to get revenge on him. Thus the whole point of the others pretending nothing is unusual is lost on me. Normally, Hitchcock leaves the science fiction to Rod Serling. Here, we are to understand that the ghost of the murdered woman really did appear. If so, how come she didn't do like all the other ghosts in other shows and sort of float into the room and float back, or just disappear. This "ghost" moved just the way we expected the hired actress to move-she walked. Nothing other-worldly, she just took small steps toward the dining room, then stepped back and to the side out of view. I think in reality, if Bedford saw such a figure, he would have walked up and tried to find a real woman standing to the side, proving she's no ghost. Why would a ghost need to walk to the side to disappear?

I actually wonder if the reason Hitch directed this one himself is because his group of directors all thought the script a real turkey and asked not to do this one. I give it a 5.