I wonder a bit why the writers wanted to remake some of
the older episodes. Were they running out of script ideas? Did they think they
could tell the stories better? Were they fiddling around just trying to see
what they could come up with?
Remakes
of anything, of course, are usually not popular. I’m always surprised when I
hear about one that’s really taken off, such as the recent Battlestar
Galactica or Hawaii 5-0. (I still want to see the latter, out of
curiosity.) When it comes to remakes of Perry episodes, my opinion
varies depending on the episode itself.
As
ranted about before, I found The Vanishing Victim, the remake of The
Fugitive Nurse, quite terrible in many ways. There were a couple of things
I liked, but overall the episode really belonged in season 1. The atmosphere
even felt like season 1. It doesn’t seem to fit anywhere else, and certainly
not in season 9. Had it been season 1 I would have liked it a lot better. When it appeared in season 9 it just perplexed me. I already spoke of it at length in another post, so I won't reiterate it here.
On
the opposite end of the spectrum, I loved season 7’s The Woeful Widower,
the remake of The Fiery Fingers. I felt that it improved on the story
and really threw in a dark twist. Not that The Fiery Fingers didn’t have
a dark twist as well, but the remake arguably had a larger or at least a more
rare one. Perry defended someone who was actually guilty? Well, it was a
robbery case, and Perry was a friend of the court, but still. That woman ended
up being a multiple murderer (even though she hadn't been arrested for that at the point when Perry defended her).
Others
I’m left not quite sure what to make of one way or the other. The Impetuous
Imp falls in that category. Overall it’s a very intriguing and intense
episode. But I’m not fully sure what the writer’s intention was with some of
the plot angles he threw in. And I far prefer the more serious defendant of the
original Negligent Nymph to the somewhat ditzy gal we get in Imp.
But
that episode will get its chance at a full-length examination another time.
This time I’m thinking more of The Candy Queen, the remake of The
Silent Partner.
The
first time I saw the former at any recent date, I had just come from seeing the
original. I found that The Candy Queen did not handle some of the key
plot elements as intensely as The Silent Partner. For instance, the girl
who gets poisoned in the remake is never even heard of until she calls Perry on
the phone, gasping for breath. But in the original, she is seen in a couple of
scenes before that, and I think that works much better.
There’s
just a certain intensity and intrigue present in the way The Silent Partner
is told overall that makes it a classic. Half of the episode takes place over
one night. The poor defendant has a nervous breakdown and is too ill to even be
brought to trial. Hence, it’s the first time the mystery is solved out of
court. And Tragg, rather grumpy at being disturbed late at night when he’s just
taking his groceries home (including a loaf of Wonder Bread), has some
wonderful screentime.
That’s
not to say that there aren’t things I don’t care as much for. Season 1
certainly presented Hamilton as an outright antagonist more than once, and that
is the case here. It’s the first time one of those wild accusations goes
flying, I believe. Sometimes Hamilton has a basis in fact for what he’s upset
about, but the accusation he makes here (that Perry told his client to fire
another, random shot from the murder gun) just seems out of left field.
On
the other hand, Perry has messed around with guns himself sometimes, including
in the very first episode. Strangely, it seems like the things he does that are
the most off-the-wall are things Hamilton doesn’t find out about. I suppose
it’s possible that he does find out, off-screen, and those things are why he gets so upset
and flings around the oddball accusations. That would certainly make it make
more sense.
The
Candy Queen
did not ignore the character development with Hamilton over the past nine
seasons, the way some of the other season 9 episodes did. In fact, I think just
about everyone has awesome moments in it. And due to that, there are some
rather surprising and delightful tidbits along the way.
This
is the episode where Paul first seems to show that he particularly likes Steve
Drumm’s company. When they call the police, worried about the girl having been
poisoned, Steve answers. Paul perks up and asks, “Is that you, Steve?”
Paul
must be in quite a good mood. While talking with Clay later on, he even acts a
bit as though he’s defending Hamilton’s prosecution of Claire Armstrong, the
titular Candy Queen, co-owner of a successful candy company.
Clay’s
view of the whole thing made me raise an eyebrow a bit. He doesn’t think Claire
should be prosecuted, even if she did kill the victim. After all, the victim
was definitely a crook and not a good fellow to have around. Paul doesn’t
vocally disagree but asks, “And if you were the district attorney?” Clay says
he would pay Claire a bounty and that that’s how such cases should be handled.
Clay
is definitely a unique and colorful character. I think I should do a character
spotlight on him. He is a very prominent fixture during the final season.
The
police are awesome, just as Tragg was in the original Silent Partner.
Steve shows he is both tough and compassionate. While worrying for the poisoned
girl he takes the keys from the fumbling apartment manager to get the right key
for the girl’s apartment. Moments later he tells her not to pick up the phone when
she finds it off the hook in the room. She is disgruntled (or further
disgruntled, rather, after the key incident), and Steve tries to make amends by
explaining why she needs to leave things alone. He looks adorably awkward and
embarrassed, not having wanted to come off too harsh.
Sergeant
Brice is around and gets stuff to do! Steve has him break up the crowd that has
gathered outside the girl’s old address upon seeing the police. Later, he takes
a call about the homicide at the gambling joint.
And
we get a guest policeman in the form of William Boyett as a hardboiled vice
officer. He leads a raid into the gambling establishment and it’s he and his
men who find the body there. Best line, when addressed as “friend” by one of
the staff members there: “I’m not your friend.”
Hamilton
has a great deal of screentime, unlike the one scene he gets in The Silent
Partner. They go to court in this version; Claire doesn’t have a nervous
breakdown. He handles things in a mature and calm manner. I believe the only
time he really objects to something is when Perry comes across as badgering a
witness. It does look that way, definitely, especially to someone who doesn’t
know what’s fully going on (as Hamilton doesn’t). Although even if he knew, he
would still have to object on technical grounds.
And
Perry definitely has good reason to be angry at said witness, who is a complete
slimeball and lies to protect himself while digging Claire deeper into a pit.
And that’s after he already told Perry and Paul the truth and said he would
tell it in court to help Claire. He had threatened the victim with Claire’s
gun, which was how it had gotten to the gambling joint. It had then been taken
from him and he had fled.
In
all fairness to the creep, if he deserves fairness, he does look sickened and
guilty as he lies on the witness stand. But that doesn’t change a thing about
his story. Paul comments in disgust that he knew the guy couldn’t be trusted.
Said
slimeball was also someone Claire seemed to have been interested in. She had
tried to help him repeatedly, so his betrayal was even more of a blow. And the
guy who co-owned the candy business with her had recognized what he was but
Claire had refused to believe him, even planning to not renew his contract.
Those around Claire had thought she was just awful for it. I imagine she felt
horrible too, when the whole truth of everything came out.
Perry
does do something rather jaw-dropping at the climax. To prove that the poisoned
girl is lying and that she couldn’t have eaten five pieces of candy without
realizing there was something wrong with them, he brings a box of chocolates to
court and has some of the pieces doctored with what he later claims is a bit of
the poison. The girl recognizes something is wrong on the first bite.
I
was stunned by that method both times I recently saw the episode, but I don’t
think I put enough stock in it. I suppose that’s because I figured Perry didn’t
put in enough to do any real damage, and that he would have stopped her if
somehow she hadn’t tasted the bitterness, but still. And then I’ve also
wondered if Perry really did put poison in those pieces of chocolate or if he
just said it to psych the girl out and he substituted something else bitter
instead. If it was the poison, that does seem like one of the most appalling
stunts he’s pulled in a while. Even moreso considering that the girl really was
poisoned with the stuff earlier (albeit she poisoned herself on purpose). Maybe
even having a small amount could have caused a negative reaction, considering
the poisoning.
The
poisoner being the same person as the poisonee is the same as in The Silent
Partner. That person is also the murderer. But the motive was different.
The original girl didn’t even know the defendant, I don’t think, save for one
brief meeting. Here, they were cousins, raised as sisters. But she was jealous
of Claire and felt that Claire had everything. And she wanted the formula for
the candy that Claire had inherited. It reminded me of the climax of The
Fiery Fingers.
The
epilogue has Claire going on a cruise, after finally renewing her co-owner’s
contract, and Paul being late to see her off. He makes it just in time with a
gift, which Della realizes in disbelief is a box of chocolates. Just what a
candy-maker doesn’t need. But Claire is sweet and gracious and tells a downcast
Paul that it’s just what she needed.
All in all, my
conclusion about The Candy Queen is that, while The Silent Partner
might be better plot-wise, character-wise I prefer The Candy Queen. And
despite their similarities, if it hadn’t said at the beginning that it was
based on The Silent Partner, there wouldn’t have been much to tie them
together. The Candy Queen doesn’t even have the same atmospheric feeling
as the original. It’s thoroughly embedded as a later venture. The two are
really quite different episodes, and perhaps overall, should be examined as
such. Standing on its own, The Candy Queen will likely fair better than
if it is compared to The Silent Partner.
No comments:
Post a Comment