The Stalls of Barchester

While cataloguing the library of Barchester cathedral, Dr Black comes across the personal diary of Archdeacon Haynes among the rather lacklustre and poorly maintained books. Black reads about how Haynes rose to the position of Archdeacon when his predecessor, the elderly Pulteney, took a fatal fall in his home. The diary tells of admin and clerical responsibilities but gradually the personal musings of Haynes about noises, feelings and other impressions that Haynes starts to have about his new home.

As well as many other strengths, BBC4 recently also provided an opportunity to dip back into some old versions of ghost stories made back in the seventies, adapting the writing of MR James. Of what I have seen of the series, The Stalls of Barchester is pretty good despite not being as creepy as I would have liked. The story itself offers creepy moments without ever totally revealing itself and in this regard I did find it quite engaging, however the delivery doesn't work to the favour of these moments. The story is told in retrospect via the reading of Dr Black and this technique does rather distance the viewer from the material because, instead of being with Haynes, we are actually with Black. This doesn't matter too much when the Haynes scenes are longer and run together but Black does fragment the telling and, despite bookending the story, Black is mostly remote from it.

The construction of the Haynes scenes is good though and the film does produce some genuinely creepy moments with minimal effects. Not brilliant perhaps, but still nicely creepy – just a shame the rest of the delivery doesn't support it. The acting is solid in the key role; Hardy convinces in his increasing bewilderment and inability to accept what he is experiencing. Bennett, Barlow and others all fill in around him. Swift and Leighton are fine but the script keeping them away from the main story means their performances do likewise.

At heart this is a nice little ghost story with some effective chills but the structure and manner of delivery does rather prevent the viewer getting lost in it and also breaks up the flow. Worth seeing but there are much better similar films shown on BBC4 recently.

The second M.R. James adaptation I have set up for this Halloween marathon emerges a marked improvement on the cerebral and rather uneventful WHISTLE AND I'LL COME TO YOU (1968). The horror is still subtly deployed throughout, but it creates the right kind of frisson and a distinct aura of unease (thanks largely to the remote wintry locale, also incorporating the obligatory vast mansion) for this intrinsically low-key and character-driven piece. The setting is a school run by the Church – and, apparently, James had himself toyed with the idea of taking the cloth (and would actually become a teacher, among whose pupils was a certain Christopher Lee!); it involves jealousy and machinations among the staff, particularly when the current Dean 'refuses' to relinquish his position to the ambitious Robert Hardy (later of Hammer's DEMONS OF THE MIND [1972]). After he resorts to murder to obtain his wish, however, he begins to be haunted by the old man – via whispering disembodied voices and manifestations as either a black cat or a caped figure bearing a ghoulish hand with creepy talons! The predictable (but still effective) ironic climax, then, sees Hardy expiring in the exact same fashion as the fate he had planned for his doddering predecessor.

A cleric goes a step too far to satisfy his career ambitions and finds himself the target of a ghostly revenge.

The story is framed by a scholarly investigation after the event, which some reviewers feel detracts from the immediacy of the story, and I think the problem is that the narrator has no connection with the plot. Otherwise the story is well told, with the protagonist forbiddingly aloof and the spookiness delivered subtly in shadowy sets with intimate little sound effects. Also a nice strand of humour runs through the early scenes, as the dogged old archdeacon clings to his position.

One flaw in the story is the loose end of the collaborator in the fatal deed - once the blackmail note was produced it had to become part of the plot, but was just left dangling.

One need not have any familiarity with the short story on which this is based to quickly grasp the thrust of where this adaptation will go. I think the framing, narration, and voiceovers work against the storytelling in some measure, or at least the extent to which these are employed, for they add a layer of artifice that dampens the inherent value of the tale. On the other hand, the gothic primary setting and musical selections - organ and choral - help to add a tinge of uneasy atmosphere to the proceedings, not least in those select instances when the audio is slyly manipulated. Then again, even within the abbreviated television airtime of forty-five minutes, the pacing feels weirdly slow and stilted: not taking ideal advantage of the length it has, needing to be more drawn out to allow for more detail and progression, yet also advancing the tale in a halting manner that's not fully convincing. This is in addition to the flat, extremely subdued tone that the presentation constantly maintains. In fairness, this was the first writing credit of filmmaker Lawrence Gordon Clark, and only his third outing as director including other television credits; 'The stalls of Barchester' further represents only the first of the BBC's "Ghost story for Christmas" series. There is no expectation that the result would be perfect. Even at that, however, it's a little sleepy.

By all means, the narrative in and of itself is firm and interesting. It might be more actively engaging if not for the heavy use of the flourishes noted above, which in part make for the cinematic equivalent of a man sitting in front of a fire and reading a story to us. Indeed, the narrative in and of itself is rather diminished as we see it for just that reason. I would also observe that the telling is rather vague about the minutiae of the course of events; it doesn't so much relate the tale as it does provide insinuations and possible hints. Granted, I don't doubt that this approach was intentional - laying out a mystery, above all else, as to the life and fate of Archdeacon Haynes; moreover, not being familiar with M. R. James' short story I can only assume that either these matters are a fault of adaptation, or perhaps James was also just as stalwart in putting the mystery first. In any event, I can only remark on the TV movie, and what I see is storytelling that's nonspecific and imperfect. Adding this to the majorly restrained, understated tone (so understated that it's barely stated at all) that Clark sustains throughout, it's safe to say that this doesn't make for the most robust and captivating of viewing experiences. And I say that as someone who often appreciates the quieter, subtler side of genre fare, or even prefers it.

It's broadly well made, certainly, including the modest stunts and effects; the production design is admirable. The manner in which some lines are delivered feel off to me, which I chalk up to Clark's direction as well, but mostly the acting is fine. I did, in fact, enjoy watching. I just think James' story perhaps deserved better treatment than what it got, with more substantive elucidation of - well, if not the truths behind the mystery, then at least the pieces of the mystery, so that the mystery could be more absorbing and impactful. The picture as it presents rather keeps itself so low-key and ambiguous that maybe the framing was necessary after all just to provide in some capacity a plot that was more concrete and tangible. Suffice to say that 'The stalls of Barchester' will not appeal to all; this is best reserved for those who like the softer and more muted side of horror, and mystery, and even then favor will surely vary significantly from one viewer to the next. I see what Clark was doing here; I'm just not convinced that it entirely works. By the strength of the underlying tale, however questionably realized on film, this earns enough esteem in my book to help it stay afloat, but one should be well aware of the nature of the material before they consider watching.

This short 'ghost story' film still delights and intrigues me even after several viewings over the years. Wonderful creation of atmosphere,from the dark interior of the archdeacons house to the misty cathedral grounds.I agree that some may find it a little 'plodding'but this is not a slasher/effects movie and I think the build up of the macabre moments and outcome are to be savored and maybe the 'ghost stories' series strong point. I also enjoyed the subtle moments of humor in this story. All in all a very enjoyable winters afternoon or evening viewing.

Roy