Last night my local station aired The Hasty
Honeymooner as part of its current Saturday lineup. If I’ve ever seen it
before, it was years ago. It’s a season 9 episode, and one of the strangest I’ve
seen in any season. And perhaps the oddest thing of all is how some elements of
it curiously echo some of what’s wrong with the episode that aired right after
it: The 12th Wildcat. And it managed to run this parallel
despite being an out-of-town episode.
The plot is both unique and odd, concerning a
very suspicious man who arrives in town and immediately begins courting a young
woman on a ranch. Apparently they met through a computer dating service, only
he lied on his application about many things and now has the business’s staff highly
unsettled. They believe that he’s out to milk the woman for all she’s worth.
That’s certainly the impression the audience is
given. I wasn’t sure whether they were setting him up to be the defendant or
the victim, but since everyone seemed to think he was up to no good I figured
he might be the defendant. Which he is, after his new wife dies from drinking
poisoned lemonade he hands her.
Another unique element is that Terrance Clay certainly
has an extensive part in this one, perhaps his most important and involved in
any episode. The fellow happens to be a war buddy of his. Clay later recommends
Perry to him when he wants a good lawyer to write a will for his wife. And,
although Perry has strong misgivings about continuing to represent the guy when
he realizes he’s been lied to on many accounts right from the start, he agrees
to see him when Clay pleads for Perry’s help. And Perry finally consents to
remain the lawyer when the desperate defendant begs not to be let down.
I think out of all of his clients and all of the
lies, this guy is the one Perry has the least faith in. I don’t recall ever
seeing him so hesitant to represent anyone else. But he has good reason; he and
the audience are still being led to believe that something is bizarre and the
man might have been committing illegal acts. There’s the mystery of a former
wife who died under mysterious circumstances. And during court, it comes out
that there was another wife before that. Perry just about drops him after that
lie, and warns him that if there’s any more. . . . He’s interrupted and assured
that he knows about all of them now.
There ends up being an intriguing and sad twist,
in that the defendant was actually supposed to be the murder victim. And
instead of him fleecing the woman, she was the one fleecing him.
He was actually just lonely and looking for a loving wife, especially after two
bombed marriages (which he didn’t talk about because of being afraid that the
third woman would freak out and leave him).
I did think she acted very odd in their scenes
together. She was very standoffish and aloof. And I noted that when he wanted
her to call him Luke, feeling that Lucas was indeed standoffish, she continued
to call him Lucas. I thought maybe she was afraid of him, thinking he was out
for her money. But she wasn’t afraid at all until his stepson lied to her and
made out like Lucas had killed his former wife. Poor Lucas.
And the poor wife of the murderer. It ended up
being the guy who ran the dating service with his wife. He was in love with the
girl who got in with Lucas and he even gave her his and his wife’s ranch,
without his wife’s knowledge, to make her look rich. At the end of the episode,
Lucas gives the ranch back to the woman and muses that maybe he’ll go out there
and try to offer her some comfort.
Our main guest-star is played by Noah Beery, Jr.,
popularly featured as a regular on several television series, and a previous Perry
guest-star from season 8’s The Golden Venom. He played the bad guy in
that one. Here, as the very quirky, secretive defendant, he once again pulls off
a stellar performance. He is one of the best things about The Hasty
Honeymooner.
This episode takes place in the next county over,
save for scenes in Perry’s office. So, with a new county comes a different
prosecutor. And in walk the similarities to The 12th Wildcat.
Throughout the scenes in court, Perry continually
complains about the way the district attorney is handling the case. Many of his
complaints, if not all, are upheld by the judge. The half-dozen or so points of
frustration mostly revolve around the sole idea that the man is prejudicial
against Perry’s client and keeps phrasing questions in a way that brings that
out. The D.A. apologizes to the court each time this happens and he is
reprimanded. Sound familiar, anyone?
The most eerily familiar line is when Perry’s
patience is finally stretched to the nth degree and he says that his current
complaint is that not only has the prosecutor’s last comment been filled with
prejudicial misconduct, but his whole case likewise. Didn’t we hear the same
thing, pretty much word for word, when Perry complained about Hamilton in the
very next episode? What’s going on here? Aside from the actual identity of the
prosecutor, the exchanges are interchangeable!
Now, of course some things during court scenes
recur. There are certain comments both Perry and Hamilton make over 271
episodes that are repeated in various ways. And I’m not forgetting that during
William Talman’s suspension the assistant D.A.s were all given dialogue meant
for Hamilton. But, the very same problem with the prosecutor, twice in a
row? I don’t recall that problem ever happening before, at least not to
the same, strong degree as it’s shown in both The Hasty Honeymooner and The
12th Wildcat. What is the explanation? Is there one? Is it just
coincidence?
Honestly, I doubt it. Especially after looking at
the writers for both and finding a common denominator. Ernest Frankel wrote
some of The Hasty Honeymooner. And he wrote The 12th Wildcat
all by himself.
I’ve long suspected that Ernest Frankel was
responsible for most of the trouble with Hamilton’s characterization in season
9. True, he and Orville shared writing credit for other episodes I’ve strongly
disliked that season, but I took special notice that when Orville wrote by
himself he was usually kinder to Hamilton. There was that oddity during court in
The Golfer’s Gambit, which was an Orville solo project, but even that
wasn’t on the same level with episodes such as The 12th Wildcat
and The Vanishing Victim. And since Ernest wrote the former on his own,
and was partially responsible for The Vanishing Victim, it seems much
more likely that Ernest was the main one throwing characterization to the wind.
So, concerning The Hasty Honeymooner and The
12th Wildcat, a whole new series of questions arise. Why on
earth were the court scenes written so strikingly similar for both? Why weren’t
the writers more creative, especially with the episodes airing one after the
other? Maybe they didn’t know they would air in that order, but that’s still no
excuse. Isn’t it a bad enough blow to deal the prosecution once, to say nothing
of twice? When I watched The 12th Wildcat, I complained about
the prejudicial misconduct angle and that it had never happened to that extent anywhere
else in the series. And with Hamilton, it didn’t. But with this other D.A., it
happened again.
Was The Hasty Honeymooner ever intended to
be an out-of-town script? Was Hamilton originally supposed to be the scapegoat
in both episodes? Or going the other way around, was The 12th Wildcat
ever meant to be an in-town episode? What if it had originally been written as
another out-of-towner, with some oneshot prosecutor as the instigator of that
misconduct too? It is possible that Hamilton was not intended to be the one
committing those acts. (And unfortunately, it’s also possible that he was
supposed to commit twice the number he did. If the latter was the case, I guess
I have to be grateful that they decided to make The Hasty Honeymooner an
out-of-town episode instead. It was bad enough in The 12th Wildcat
without seeing Hamilton act so strange another time.)
It certainly gives me some new things to think
about. It’s annoying to see that prejudicial misconduct angle crop up again,
but it’s kind of nice to muse that there is the possibility that it wasn’t
intended as a slur against Hamilton. (On the other hand, it’s aggravating to
think that maybe it was, twofold.) It would be nice to know what really
was in the writers’ minds.
In any case, as long as the angle is being used,
I’d rather see it with a random oneshot prosecutor instead of Hamilton. Hamilton
is already dealt enough blows in the series without being hit with a plethora
of (justified) prejudicial misconduct complaints. And despite the episode’s
overall strangeness, The Hasty Honeymooner is most definitely better
than The 12th Wildcat. In the latter, I just can’t get over
Ernest Frankel’s sloppiness in not even explaining the crime. And it’s
that fact, not only the gross mischaracterization of Hamilton, that makes me rank The
12th Wildcat at the bottom of my list.
The
only positive notations about The 12th Wildcat are the
appearances by real-life sports icons, for those who are into sports. And the
epilogue, admittedly, is cute, even though it does nothing to explain the
goings-on. And I honestly don’t think those things are enough to save an
episode that really is terribly cobbled together.
(Oh, and by the way, I finished my latest writing prompt challenge. For anyone interested in reading the Perry vignettes that came out of it, the entire set is here: http://www.livejournal.com/tools/memories.bml?user=insaneladybug&keyword=lux%20aeterna&filter=all )
(Oh, and by the way, I finished my latest writing prompt challenge. For anyone interested in reading the Perry vignettes that came out of it, the entire set is here: http://www.livejournal.com/tools/memories.bml?user=insaneladybug&keyword=lux%20aeterna&filter=all )
No comments:
Post a Comment