Triggers in Leash

Simple as could be, this Western drama is skillfully directed by Don Medford, whose expertise in the genre peaked in 1970 when he made "The Hunting Party", an ultra-violent Western that was my favorite in the wake of the new cinema norms following the breakthrough of Peckinpah's classic "The Wild Bunch".

TV favorites Gene Barry and Darren McGavin square off as gunslingers intent on killing each other in a gunfight after a dispute over a poker game. Neither one will step down, but Ellen Corby as a cafe lady preparing them breakfast dominates the show, cleverly outwitting them and saving the day.

A character actress of the first order, Corby makes her character utterly believable, no hint of acting at all, but forceful all the same, and seeing the future "Bat Masterson" versus evilly smiling McGavin in this Mexican standoff is memorable.

Normally, I'm not cheering on a shootout, but when Hitch says, "That was disappointing, wasn't it?" I had to agree. Both gunmen bored and annoyed me at the same time, which seems unlikely, but jeezely Pete, by the third time (of MANY) one taunts the other to draw, I'm hoping for an end to the characters' (and my) misery.

The basic plot: a men enters Maggie's establishment, which looks like a little cabin but apparently feeds random stragglers. The man refuses to remove his gun belt. Why becomes clear when a second man enters. It seems there was a poker game the night before and it devolved into an argument. The first man let the second live, and now the second is looking for revenge. Their showdown over ham and eggs lasts 20 minutes. 20. Minutes. "You draw first." "You draw first." "Even if you draw first, I'll outdraw ya." "Even if you draw first, I'll outdraw ya." Lather, rinse, repeat. For 20 minutes.

In between, Maggie implores both men to think before they shoot. The twist ending I hoped for involved Maggie and a pistol hidden in her apron, but alas, it was not to be. Not one of the show's better offerings, in my opinion.

Here is an interesting development of the 30 minutes formula that this show approaches. I believe people involved in the show could do anything with the specific episode they were granted. These were exercises in working a short measure of time to develop an idea that, in order to work, would have to be clear, clean, grasping and effective. Or not be any of those but made in a way that made the audiences wonder. It had to work. Actually, as i start digging a little deeper into this, i think one can probably go through all the episodes of the show and get, in the end, an interesting glossary on cinematic narrative bending. Probably not so much in visual terms, which is understandable because: -not many directors of the show did really interesting things with their careers; -this Is television, things were shot and edited way faster than feature films.

Here we have an interesting idea. To build (and hold!) a tension based on nothing. A single set, to prevent distractions, and a dispute that will make us follow the two cowboys, and want to know who of them (if any) will break and draw first. The fact that they use a single space is already important, because it notes already an intention to be tense (and intense). Because this is a 25 minute episode (plus Hitch's interventions) they don't have to establish any shots outside the space to allow spectators to breathe. We can be 25 minutes inside the same room.

The interesting thing is to check the narrative devices and modes they choose to build on the tension, or ease on it when needed, and the cleverness of the unfolding. So, tension increases depending on the placement of the cowboys in the space and, more important, Maggie's position in relation to them. So it's a very spatial positioning of the characters which i enjoy, and which the camera helps. We fear for Maggie, when she is just behind Del, and we fear for her when she's in the middle. Comedy; this is a comedy, in the end, and we have a very curious balance between the eminent shooting and the goofiness of having, for example, two fellows who can't eat properly because they won't stop starring at each other. Comedy here happens not because they act to be funny, but because the situation implies that. It's a great type of comedy. And of course, the final twist, when we thought we'd seen something, we are told we've being as deceived as the cowboys.

Hitch's interventions, specially at the end, is again priceless, here enhanced by the really funny nonsense twist. The value of it is that it's not a mere annotation on what we saw, it's a continuation of the narrative, after the end of the episode.

My opinion: 4/5

http://www.7eyes.wordpress.com

A cook tries everything she can think of to end a dispute between two gunmen who have sworn to kill each other.

I appreciate this episode for the young Darren McGavin, who looks remarkably different than he did in the 1970s. I understand 20 years will do that to a guy, but it makes me wonder what he was doing for most of that time. Was he a big name before "Kolchak"? I am not aware of it, but then I wasn't really alive at the time.

After the first two episodes, this one is a bit of a disappointment. Not great, not terrible, just a very simple story. Maybe if I was a bigger fan of westerns I would like it more, but it just seemed like it could have used a little something more.

I enjoyed seeing such great actors. Gene Barry is one of my all-time favorites. Bat Masterson and Burke's Law were awesome shows. I'm a big fan of The War of the Worlds. Darrin McGavin and Ellen Corby are wonderful too.

The plot is a little thin here, but I still enjoyed it. Maybe not the best of the shows, but I still had fun watching it.

Lots of Alfred Hitchcock episodes are on YouTube. Peacock has all episodes from Season One, Episode One of Alfred Hitchcock Presents to the last episode of The Alfred Hitchcock Hour. I've decided to start and the beginning and watch them all. I hope you enjoy the shows as much as I do.