In his glory days, Columbo was occasionally thought to be working undercover due to his tramp-like, unkempt appearance. On May 2, 1994, he went undercover fo’ real in the straightforwardly titled Undercover.
In an attempt to solve a double homicide (that later expanded into a quadruple homicide) and recover $4m of lost bank robbery loot, the Lieutenant donned a variety of silly hats and outfits as he worked the city’s underbelly for hot leads.
The second of the series’ two dreaded Ed McBain 87th Precinct novel adaptations, can Undercover manage what No Time to Die failed to do two years earlier and insert Columbo into the world of serious police procedurals without ALIENATING, DISGUSTING and/or ENRAGING viewers? I have my doubts, but I’m wading in regardless. Wish me luck…
Dramatis personae
Lieutenant Columbo: Peter Falk
Irving Krutch: Ed Begley Jr.
Sergeant Arthur Brown: Harrison Page
Geraldine Ferguson: Shera Danese
Suzie Endicott: Kristin Bauer
Dorothea McNally: Tyne Daly
Mo Weinberg: Burt Young
Zeke Rivers: Robert Donner
Bramley Kahn: Edward Hibbert
Det. McKittrick: Albie Selznick
Det. Mercer: Joe Chrest
Police Captain: Hank Garrett
Dog: As himself
Directed by: Vince McEveety
Written by: Gerry Day (from a story by Ed McBain)
Score by: Dick De Benedictis
Episode synopsis
While investigating the synchronous murder of two thugs in a Smack Alley doss house, Columbo discovers a puzzle-shaped piece of a photograph in one of the dead man’s hands. The guy had clambered up the outside of a two-storey building to break and enter, so Columbo makes the safe assumption that the puzzle piece is what he was willing to kill for – and what he was killed to safeguard.
While discussing the significance of the find the following morning with Sergeant Brown, the duo are interrupted by the pleasantly manic Irving Krutch, an insurance investigator desperate to recover $4m dollar that a gang of crooks hid after robbing a bank six years earlier (the crooks were slain by cops right after secreting the cash away). Krutch has another piece of the puzzle, as well as a list of seven names – two of whom were the hoods who slew each other the night before – and believes that when all the pieces are found, the location of the hidden booty will be revealed.
Intrigued, Columbo and Brown agree to help Krutch in his bid to uncover the stolen money and search the apartment of the dead man who was found gripping the photo piece. Hidden in a light fitting, they find the third bit of the puzzle. With the plot thickening as rapidly as a corn starch-laden stew, the police Captain permits Columbo go undercover to pump career criminal Mo Weinberg (another name on the list) for further info.
Attired in a brown hat and ramping up the huskiness of his voice, Columbo makes a rendezvous with Weinberg and spins a cock-and-bull story about being a lowlife from Salt Lake City named Artie Stokes (why not Jessop?) who paid a couple of grand for a puzzle piece and two names of folk who might have additional pieces – one of those names being Weinberg’s. The two agree to trade pieces and split the cash 50-50 in the event of finding it, and Weinberg reveals that an art gallery owner named Geraldine Ferguson also allegedly has a piece of dat puzzle.
The gallery is Columbo’s first port of call the next morning, where Geraldine immediately sees through his charade and identifies him as a cop. She denies having a puzzle piece, but her bluff is called by her colleague, the camp and simpering Bramley Kahn, who invites Columbo to talk shop in the back office. Kahn seems willing to sell their piece, but Geraldine is not. Columbo urges them to think it over and contact him at his bum-wipe lodgings if they decide to play ball. He also reveals his whereabouts to Krutch, whom he rings from said lodgings to update him on the case. Krutch is cock-a-hoop at Columbo’s progress and begs to be kept in the loop on developments.
After an hour’s shut-eye, Columbo is roused by a knocking at his door. Upon answering, he is immediately smashed in the face by a masked felon, who follows this up with a kick to the detective’s head. That’s nap-time, baby! Some hours later, Sergeant Brown looks in on his colleague to find the apartment trashed and an addled Columbo barely clinging on to consciousness. It’s a trip to the hospital for the Lieutenant, while Brown makes a beeline for Weinberg’s place, convinced that he’s the man behind the Columbo braining.
After receiving a check-up, Columbo is confined to bed at the hospital. No phone calls in or out are permitted, and the nurse steals his trousers so he can’t escape on foot! Brown, meanwhile, discovers more than he bargained for when he reaches Weinberg’s. His apartment has also been trashed, and the man himself is lying dead with a gunshot wound to the upper chest. As a result, Krutch now becomes a key suspect as he knew where both Columbo and Weinberg were holed up. Brown busts Columbo out of the hospital (providing him with some MC Hammer-style pants to get away in) and the pair dash over to disturb Krutch’s sleep.
The rangy insurance man is grilled about his whereabouts the previous day. He claims to have been at home before going on a dinner date and stroll with his current squeeze, Suzie. He’s been with her since before 4pm (when Columbo called him) – and she’s still here now! A sleepy Suzie confirms Krutch’s alibi when she’s tipped out of bed, but Columbo still demands a detailed timetable outlining precisely where Krutch was, and when, since Suzie’s arrival.
A new day dawns. Columbo’s next act is to dress up as a mafia boss (!) and locate the sister of a mobster’s dead wife who allegedly gave Krutch his puzzle piece and the list of names, as well as telling him that the completed image will reveal the location of the bank robbery cash. The old coot doesn’t know anything about hidden treasure and denies ever having the list. She did give Krutch the piece, but he never paid her for it. She also divulges that Geraldine Ferguson was desperate to get her oily clutches on the bit of puzzle, so Columbo pays the wench a house call.
There, Columbo comes clean about being a cop and urges Geraldine to be cautious lest she be the next person slain. Brown has already searched the gallery and found the other half of the list of names in Kahn’s safety deposit box, but Geraldine claims never to have seen it herself. However, the police now have the full names of all seven people on the list and set out to make contact – but not before Columbo enlists the help of parking enforcement officer Zeke Rivers to share all he knows about the on-street parking outside Weinberg’s apartment. Why? We’ll find out later on…
Cut to another dingy apartment block downtown. This is home to part-time hooker (and full-time drinker) Dorothea McNally, the sixth of seven names on the list. Turns out that she was given a puzzle piece by her nephew just prior to his being killed on the bank job. With the help of some flattery and some $20 bills, Columbo gets hold of her piece (the puzzle piece, you filthy-minded beast!). But, get this, Dorothea has a second piece that she has no recollection of receiving, which was sent to her by one Derrick Combs – the seventh name on that perishing list – who has since passed away.
The cops now have six pieces of the puzzle. There appear to be two more, one of which is in Geraldine Ferguson’s gallery safe. However, when Columbo and Brown screech round there on Monday morning there’s a scene of chaos. Kahn is lying unconscious outside the gallery having fainted after finding Geraldine dead inside! Kahn denies involvement, but under aggressive cross-examination does admit to being the assailant who knocked Columbo out cold on the night of Mo Weinberg’s killing. Fearful of arrest, Kahn gives the cops what they really want: Geraldine’s puzzle piece, which was not in the safe – it was hidden within the frame of a painting.
This new piece is helpful in that it shows a road running alongside a body of water, but its precise location remains unknown. They’ll need the eighth piece to find the X that marks the spot. As his colleagues spitball ideas, Columbo is interrogating Krutch. The detective confronts his suspect with the news that the old Italian woman knows nothing about any hidden loot, and she never gave Krutch any list of names. Krutch calls her a lying old bag. Unconvinced, the Lieutenant demands to know of Krutch’s whereabouts on Sunday night, when Geraldine was killed. He claims, once again, to have been in the sack with sexy Suzie.
As it happens, Suzie is already at police HQ in another interview room, so Columbo and Krutch amble over. She confirms she was with him all Sunday night, going to the movies then making sweet, sweet love from around midnight until 2.30am! Geraldine was killed sometime between 11.30pm-3am. If Suzie’s telling the truth about her lover’s unlikely staying power, then Krutch is an innocent man.
The Q&A is interrupted by the Lieutenant’s mystery mate Zeke Rivers, who appears to be carrying a parking meter wrapped in brown paper. Krutch is ejected so Columbo can interrogate Suzie without him. Columbo wants to ask her about Saturday night, the night of Weinberg’s killing, when she claimed she was with Krutch non-stop from 1pm. She reconfirms this detail.
It is now that Rivers unwraps the parking meter. It has been removed from its usual spot right in front of Weinberg’s apartment. The meter was emptied of all of its coins at 1pm on Saturday afternoon. The police have checked every coin that was inserted into the meter between 1-6pm (when parking becomes free) and have found Krutch’s fingerprints on one coin. He was definitely at Weinberg’s apartment around the time of the killing. Does Suzie want to change her story? If she doesn’t, she’ll be an accessory to murder.
Stung by this, Suzie spills the beans. Krutch was out of his apartment between 4-6.30pm on Saturday. On Sunday, he was out from midnight to 3am – precisely when Suzie had previously said they were getting jiggy. With no more wriggle room, Krutch admits his guilt – and also flips out the final puzzle piece from his underwear that marks the precise location of the bank robbings. Turns out that Krutch simply wanted the money for himself and was happy to slay all-comers to get his trotters on it.
Using the now-complete map, police divers are able to locate a watertight crate of currency. HUZZAH! The stolen $4m has been recovered at last! As Brown and pals whoop with glee at the success of their mission, Columbo excuses himself to take Dog for a walk as credits finally roll…
My memories of Undercover
This’ll be short and sweet, as my only recollections of Undercover (having not watched it this side of 2015) are of Columbo wearing silly costumes, behaving in a manner absolutely inconsistent with his established character and his being clubbed unconscious in one of the series’ rare (and terrible) action sequences.
I remember the puzzle mystery, but details surrounding the murders themselves and the roles of the huge supporting cast largely escape me. Despite a lack of familiarity with this episode, in my mind it remains one of the show’s biggest missteps and just a beige lump of mediocrity unbecoming of the Columbo name. I entered in to viewing this without the least expectation of being proven wrong.
Episode analysis
For a show loved by millions for its popular, dependable format, any changes to the Columbo template ought to have be handled with the greatest of care and the greatest regard for the sanctity of the show and its central character.
Departures from the norm can be jarring but have also contributed some of the most celebrated episodes of serialised television. I’m thinking of M*A*S*H’s black-and-white documentary-style outing The Interview; ER’s foray into live television in The Ambush; the extended dream sequences of The Sopranos’ The Test Dream; the drama-comedy pathos of Family Ties episode My Name is Alex; and Buffy’s musical extravaganza Once More With Feeling.
In all these examples, production teams took calculated risks to deliver viewing experiences atypical for the show, but with sufficient heart and excellence of writing to ultimately see them considered amongst the series’ stand-out episodes. When it comes to Columbo, though, its few departures are unquestionably amongst the show’s least-loved efforts.
Last Salute to the Commodore looms largest in mind with its intriguing, genuine whodunnit aspect ruined by madcap direction and characterisations. The highly stylised black-and-white dream scenes of 1989’s Murder, A Self Portrait are an acquired taste for Columbo fans, while 1992’s No Time to Die featured no murder at all, with the Lieutenant investigating the kidnapping of his niece-in-law on her wedding night in an episode routinely considered to be, in technical terms, a steaming pile of pants.
In the case of No Time to Die, its failings are almost entirely due to the unsuitability of the subject matter, it being an adaptation of Ed McBain 87th Precinct police procedural novel So Long as You Both Shall Live that Falk had snapped up the rights to on a whim after a friend’s recommendation. At the same time, Falk also secured the rights to a second McBain novel, 1972’s Jigsaw, that become Undercover. As was the case with So Long as You Both Shall Live, the attempt to modify Jigsaw – a dark, bloody treasure hunt laced with bad language and racist undertones – to fit the Columbo mould was always likely to be a struggle. So it proved when Undercover finally waddled onto screens in 1994.
The most damning aspect of Undercover is how the story portrays Columbo himself.
Amazingly, in spite of its many shortcomings, Undercover fared much better in the ratings than many ‘new Columbo’ episodes – indeed trouncing the two most recent, It’s All in the Game and Butterfly in Shades of Grey. History, though, has not been kind to the episode and what may have seemed like an intriguing experiment for the first-time viewer in 1994 now comes across as a grotesque miscue that carelessly brings the Columbo name into disrepute.
The most damning aspect of Undercover is how the story portrays Columbo himself. The Lieutenant of Undercover has none of the charming idiosyncrasies we’ve come to associate with him over the past 25 years. He’s a more cynical, aggressive figure who is far more likely to tough-talk (or yell at) a suspect or wisecrack with a colleague than lose a pencil or share a homely anecdote about his wife. He’s just as shrewd a cop as he ever was, but the softer, more human aspects of the character that enable us to truly love him are almost entirely absent.
Some viewers won’t mind that too much, especially those that believe we’re just seeing a different side of his character that the storyline demands. Certainly, when Columbo is in disguise and interacting with a variety of differing characters there’s valid reason for him to put on a show. But in Undercover, even when he’s in the Columbo role he rarely feels like his old self, being much less circumspect and much more direct in all his dealings.
This was also true in No Time to Die, but there was justification for that. There, he was involved in a personal, family matter in a race against the clock to save his niece from peril. He didn’t have time to spare on his shop-worn bag of tricks. That’s not the case in Undercover, so for me, the lack of his established character traits feels much more grating.
The Lieutenant also engages in some outlandish behaviour that he would never have entered into during his heyday. In one scene of note, he kicks open the door of Mo Weinberg’s apartment, charges in and draws a gun on him in what’s quite possibly the most non-Columbo act Columbo is ever involved in. What happened to the man who despises guns and would talk his way out of tight spots? He finds himself on the receiving end of similar treatment a short time later, when a masked goon sends him to the floor with a big forearm, then knocks him senseless with a kick to the head!
The latter is particularly galling because it goes against everything series creators William Link and Richard Levinson wanted for the character. Their Columbo was never intended to be involved in physical tussles with foes. Mental battles, yes, but a gun-toting Lieutenant who gets his a*s whupped in a grimy apartment block? That’s a million miles away from their vision for the show. Levinson had died in 1987, so never saw Columbo’s comeback adventures to pass comment, while Link had stepped back from Executive Producer duties some years earlier. I’m unaware of his opinions on Undercover, but I would wager they weren’t terribly complimentary.
Then there are Columbo’s interactions with Dorothea McNally, the past-her-prime hooker from whom Columbo gains two puzzle pieces in exchange for a few $20 bills. Quite apart from his lack of embarrassment at her ribald ways, he lands an uninvited chuck on the chin and a smacker on her boozy lips at the end of their meeting! Granted, he’s fresh from canoodling with Lauren Staton in It’s All in the Game, but this is a weirdly out-of-character moment that was thrown in unscripted by Falk and which I’m very surprised made the final cut. Who is this man? And what has he done with Lieutenant Columbo?
Just about the only time Columbo feels like the Columbo we know is during his interview with Irving Krutch and Suzie Endicott at police HQ in the episode’s closing minutes. Here, he’s as unthreatening and mild-mannered as he’s ever been, happy to make the pair feel at ease prior to delivering the stinging evidence that will prove Krutch is a killer and force Suzie to confess the truth. This scene doesn’t occur until the episode’s 81st minute, though – a very long wait for desperate viewers seeking any sense of familiarity from the leading man.
This problem is exacerbated by having Columbo play the role of delinquent Artie Stokes in several scenes, and later a Mafia boss paying his respects to a mobster mistress with links to Krutch. He’s a phony, and boy does it feel like it. What’s interesting is that Falk made a name for himself early in his career playing gangster types in the likes of Murder Inc. and Pocketful of Miracles (earning two Best Supporting Oscar nods in the process), while he put in a sometimes terrifying turn as a former mob guy in Mikey and Nicky (1976). Undercover gave Falk the chance to relive those halcyon days, but he’s laughably unconvincing.
His Mafia boss is every Mafia boss comic cliché you’ve ever seen, from the black coat and fedora to the humourless, affected Italian accent. He’s similarly implausible as Artie Stokes, a sour face and world-weary demeanour unable to disguise the fact that he’s about as dangerous as a puppy (who’s luckily facing off against a man about as dangerous as a hamster). No wonder Geraldine Ferguson immediately sees through his charade and identifies him as a cop within moments of their meeting. That Mo Weinberg – a crook with a police file a foot thick – failed to do so is indicative of the episode’s patchy writing.
This inconsistency is perhaps best exemplified in the erratic characterisations served up in the script. The supporting cast in this episode is mammoth – certainly one of the biggest ensembles of the entire series. Some of those characters are interesting and authentic feeling, while others are hackneyed stereotypes that only serve to plunge the episode further toward the abyss.
Burt Young’s Mo Weinberg is one such character. Although Young (of Rocky fame) is a good actor who is more than grubby enough to convince as a lawless scumbag, Weinberg is a drop-kick who comes across as a gullible amateur with no street smarts. He falls into line with Columbo’s suggestions at the drop of a hat, swallowing his story hook, line and sinker, and later allows himself to be jumped in his own home, by a much older man, after being distracted by a note pushed under his door. What an absolute clown! Columbo’s message “YOU’RE A HORSE’S ASS” seems a pertinent description of this cretin.
Weinberg is a drop-kick who comes across as a gullible amateur with no street smarts.
Far worse, though, is that simpering little toad Bramley Khan, who is amongst the handful of worst Columbo characters ever created. Khan as played is a cerebral but lily-livered fop, a camp popinjay who faints at the sight of his dead business partner and screams like a ninny when aggressively questioned by police. And yet we’re supposed to accept that this is the man who knocked Columbo out cold with a furious kick to the head? Don’t make me laugh!
This guy couldn’t break out of a wet paper straightjacket. The idea that he could have the courage and fortitude – even if the adrenaline was pumping – to knock a man senseless and toss an apartment is so preposterous I just want to scream. I don’t know whether Khan is a straight lift from the Jigsaw novel, or someone heavily adapted or even created for Undercover, but there’s no excuse for a character this lame to be part of the Columbo universe.
Faring somewhat better in the script are Shera Danese’s Geraldine Ferguson and Kristin Bauer’s Suzie Endicott. Bauer has little to do other than smile and make doe eyes at Ed Begley Jr., but she does it well and really is a stunning mademoiselle – the type who could easily bewitch a man into spending all his waking hours with, preventing them from finding time to commit murder in the process. Her motives aren’t sketched out very well, mind you. Was she fully in on Krutch’s plans and set for a bumper pay-out once he recovered the cash, or was she simply a fool willing to cover for the man she loved without asking questions? It’s left up to the viewer to decide.
As for Danese, she ought really to have never appeared in Columbo (or any show) ever again after her petulant antics on the set of Columbo and the Murder of a Rock Star, yet she collects her fifth series credit (her third since Columbo’s 1989 comeback). Fortunately for the viewer, nothing more is expected of Danese than to be herself: a sassy, mildly obnoxious cynic with a withering stare and foul mouth.
The role of Geraldine is a much better fit for Danese than lawyer Trish Fairbanks in Rock Star, or Vanessa Barsini in Murder, A Self Portrait – episodes in which she was arguably the weakest link acting-wise. Here, she’s tolerable, neither ruining nor illuminating the episode in two lengthy scenes she shares with the Lieutenant. Aptly, she even becomes one of the series’ very few characters to openly cuss when she responds with “Bullsh*t!” to Columbo’s warnings about her life being in jeopardy, which seems a very Shera thing to say.
Notably, Geraldine becomes the second female in three episodes to ask what Columbo’s first name is. As was his reply to Lauren Staton in It’s All in the Game, Columbo simply states that it’s ‘Lieutenant’. Geraldine is later gunned down to become the episode’s fourth victim (a record body count for the series), although it wouldn’t be the end of Shera’s Columbo career. She would return in A Trace of Murder three years later for a sixth and final bow. The perks of being married to the boss, eh?
The best of the bunch when it comes to female co-stars is QUEEN Tyne Daly, who steals the show despite having only 8 minutes of screen time. Cast as down-on-her-luck floozy Dorothea, Daly has that rare gift of endearing herself to viewers and co-stars alike and she’s such fun to watch. Her scenes with Falk were all shot in a single day and it’s a testament to the rapport between them that they are amongst the most watchable and enjoyable of the whole episode. Viva Tyne, she’s a national treasure!
Another actor to come out of Undercover smelling of roses is Harrison Page, AKA Sergeant Arthur Brown, who swiftly establishes himself as one of Columbo’s most capable and agreeable sidekicks. Time and again I’ve had reason to lament that Columbo has had very few significant black characters, and Brown is just the tonic. His relationship with the Lieutenant seems genuine. The two cops seem to ‘get’ each other and are sufficiently at ease with one another for Brown to poke some gentle fun at Columbo’s appearance and smirk away during some of the older man’s more eccentric moments.
He also has a heart, showing genuine concern for Columbo’s wellbeing after finding him unconscious in a trashed apartment, and later in breaking him out of the hospital after discovering the corpse of Mo Weinberg. Yes folks, Sergeant Brown is a keeper, one of the few ‘new Columbo’ characters to treasure and a guy I’d have very happily seen return to the series in a future instalment. I’d go so far as to say he’s second only to Bob Dishy’s lovable Sergeant Wilson in my list of favourite Columbo colleagues – high praise indeed.
Columbo’s two other sidekicks, McKittrick and Mercer, are really only there to make up the numbers, but pop culture nerds may be delighted to realise (as I was on this watch-through) that Mercer is played by Joe Chrest – better known to millions of Stranger Things fans as Ted Wheeler, the slow-witted, bespectacled father of Mike and Nancy. I love Stranger Things, so this connection between two of my favourite shows tickled me pink.
Making his third Columbo appearance over a 20-year period (following small roles in Any Old Port and Murder Can be Hazardous to Your Health) is Robert Donner as Zeke Rivers, a traffic enforcement officer with an encyclopaedic knowledge of LA’s parking zones. A laconic, anally retentive figure who has an interesting part-cordial, part-antagonistic relationship with Columbo, Donner is a welcome presence whose scenes are fun without being overplayed.
So large is the cast of Undercover that it’s only now I’m able to turn my attention to Ed Begley Jr.’s murderous insurance agent, Irving Krutch. Given the deliberately shadowy nature of the episode’s plot, Krutch’s behind-the-scenes machinations mean he has the least screen time of any primary Columbo killer – just 17.5 minutes in total, a third of which comes in the closing scenes after Columbo has already figured things out.
Krutch is certainly an unorthodox villain for the series, being down to earth, innocuous-looking and frankly a little goofy. I don’t really buy him as a man capable of murder, but we see so little of him I’m willing to suspend my disbelief and assume his jovial manner with the detectives is as much an act as Columbo usually puts on for his suspects. Begley Jr. is a lovely chap and a decent actor, so I can’t fault his performance here – even if Krutch has an irritating habit of referring to himself in the third person. Alas, Krutch’s limited screen time, combined with the banal nature of the story, renders him one of the series’ most forgettable villains, which seems rough justice on Begley Jr., but them’s the breaks.
If it was just about the performances, Undercover wouldn’t be a bad piece of TV. Sadly, though, there’s so much wrong with the entire story that the noteworthy contributions of the wider cast can’t come close to salvaging it. Like No Time to Die before it, Undercover has no business being a Columbo episode at all. But even as a standalone police procedural, it’s a flimsy and highly contrived tale that all too often feels like it doesn’t have a grip on its own identity.
Perhaps feeling the sting from the negative feedback received about No Time to Die’s joyless nature, Undercover attempts to offset the darkness of the subject matter with some attempts at comedy, which fall absolutely flat. The worst of the lot is the furore surrounding Columbo’s trousers, which are confiscated by a nurse to prevent him leaving the hospital, leading to Sergeant Brown sneaking him a pair of multi-coloured parachute pants in which to make good his escape, which is predictably accompanied by a comedy musical number.
It’s a gag that has no greater depth than someone thinking ‘let’s get Peter to wear some stupid trousers in this episode’, and then working backwards to concoct a scenario (including wonking Columbo over the head, sending him to hospital and having his regular trousers pinched) to enable the idea to come to fruition. It’s rock-bottom humour that does nothing to enhance the episode and is tonally at odds with everything else going on – a criticism I would also aim at the episode’s bizarrely jolly score.
Following on from this, we are given a scene of Columbo changing into his Mafia boss costume in the back of an unmarked police car, pasty legs akimbo as he searches for yet more trousers while his fellow officers chuckle outside. The scene could only have been made worse had the elderly female passer-by done a comedy faint upon seeing Columbo’s meat and two veg being exposed – an idea that I feel 100% sure was considered. Matters aren’t helped by Columbo’s sidekicks yelling to him across a public street that they’ve got his Mafia costume with them. Did they forget this is supposed to be an undercover sting operation? It’s awful, awful stuff (watch below if you dare).
The comedy aspects may have failed but are hardly the smoking gun when considering why Undercover is such a woeful outing. The execution of the entire treasure hunt and the puzzle piece premise is weak and tacky – right down to the pristine condition all the individual pieces are despite being years old and inherently susceptible to loss or damage. It all comes across as being very child-like in its presentation, and I suspect is more convincing in written, rather than visual, form.
What I don’t get is why all these people with a puzzle piece, and knowing its potential value, don’t truly have them under lock and key. One guy has his stuffed in a kitchen roll, Geraldine’s is loosely slipped behind a painting frame support and Krutch evidently carries one piece down his underpants at all times, or at least that’s what his confession scene suggests. If so, ewwwwww. That’s gonna be one clammy, stinky little piece of photographic paper! And our mate Columbo happily picks it up in his ungloved hand…
Enragingly, after all the killing, costumes and hoo-hah, the completed puzzle is next-to useless because there’s no significant point of reference on it to indicate exactly where the loot was hidden. All we’re shown is a snippet of a presumably long stretch of road beside a presumably long breakwater. In reality, it would take eons to find the crate of cash in a trial-and-error police search that would cost the taxpayer as much as the stolen money amounts to in total, but at this stage of the episode most viewers will be well beyond caring.
I have my doubts about the veracity of the evidence Columbo has against Krutch, too. To my mind, it would be extremely difficult to get a usable fingerprint off the raised surfaces of a coin, but this is the Columboverse, so I’m happy to accept it. In any case, Krutch’s swift confession makes it a moot point when he could very easily have held out – even accusing Suzie of framing him after taking a coin from his wallet would be entirely plausible.
A further, major reason why Undercover sucks is in how poorly it portrays the city’s underbelly. Right from the very first scene, when the two thugs slaughter each other in a ramshackle apartment block, it’s as schlocky and cheap-looking as TV gets. The characters we meet in these places (notwithstanding Tyne Daly’s excellence) are broad caricatures with nominal authenticity.
One gets the feeling that no one involved in this production had any idea what life in the tough parts of town were really like – as opposed to the 70s’ series, when many of its cast (and some crew) would have lived the high life exemplified in the mansions, motor cars and high-class eateries. The gulf between ‘new Columbo’ and the original series has rarely felt as pronounced as it does with Undercover, which is, from first to last, a soulless experience.
A further reason why Undercover sucks is in how poorly it portrays the city’s underbelly.
The crowning turd on the episode is the final moment, when Columbo abandons his gleeful colleagues with a ‘toodle-oo’ (his equivalent of ‘Tisn’t’ perhaps?) and sets off to take Dog to the park against a boisterous orchestral rendition of This Old Man. It doesn’t quite represent everything that has gone wrong with the series, but is a stark reminder of how far standards have plummeted and is absolutely in keeping with the 90-odd minutes of swill that preceded it.
As the saying goes, you get what you pay for. Every fault in Undercover can be traced back to the ridiculous decision to buy the rights to this unsuitable tosh in the first place – and the man to blame for that is Peter Falk. As custodian of the character and the show’s golden legacy, he ought to have known better than to attempt to crowbar Columbo into a world where he really doesn’t belong.
How I rate ’em
Undercover is a righteous stinker that shouldn’t be part of Columbo saga, and yet here it is, biting its thumb at the bewildered viewer who has likely given up trying to guess which way the series is going next. It avoids bottom spot in my rankings by the skin of its teeth, the supporting cast’s stronger performances marginally elevating it above the daytime soap stylings of Murder in Malibu.
To read my reviews of any of the other revival Columbo episodes up to this point, simply click the links in the list below. You can see how I rank all the ‘classic era’ episodes here.
- Columbo Goes to College — top tier new Columbo episodes —
- Agenda for Murder
- Death Hits the Jackpot
- Columbo Cries Wolf
- It’s All in the Game
- Rest in Peace, Mrs Columbo
- Columbo Goes to the Guillotine — 2nd tier starts here —
- Sex & The Married Detective
- Caution: Murder Can Be Hazardous to Your Health
- Butterfly in Shades of Grey
- A Bird in the Hand…
- Murder, A Self Portrait
- Columbo and the Murder of a Rock Star — 3rd tier starts here —
- Murder, Smoke & Shadows
- Uneasy Lies the Crown
- No Time to Die — 4th tier starts here —
- Grand Deceptions
- Undercover
- Murder in Malibu
Over to you, gang! I’d love to hear your thoughts on Undercover and see whether you agree with my assessment of its many, devastating lows. If you are a fan, what is it you like about it? And can we all at least agree that Sergeant Brown comes out of the episode with his head held high?
With just five episodes remaining, I’d like to think it’ll be downhill all the way to the finish line from here, but then I remember that the next episode is Strange Bedfellows, featuring the crazily miscast Norm from Cheers as a murderer, and Columbo entering into a pact with the mob to close out his case. Bottom spot in the rankings may yet be up for grabs.
Until next time, farewell – and remember to stay on your guard should anyone push a HORSE’S ASS note under your door…
If you rate this site, please donate to its upkeep – from just $3
Hit PLAY below for an up-beat send-off to this miserable experience
I didn’t hate the episode and thought some things were meant to be pathetic (e.g. Mo Weinberg). I like the idea of Columbo literally solving a puzzle. But what I never understood is why the puzzle existed in the first place. The people with the pieces would never be expected to come together. Most have no relationship to each other and they’re doing everything possible to hide their pieces, apparently as instructed, so they wouldn’t work together. Which makes me think the money is not meant to be found. But if so, why make the puzzle at all? If the crook who buried the money wants it to himself (or to leave it to his closest loved one), then he could have just done that.
I didn’t find this a bad as I was expecting, perhaps because I was forewarned by a comment at the end of the previous episode’s review that it was ‘pigswill’. Certainly miles more enjoyable than No Time To Die, which was so tedious I was hoping the kidnap victim would get bumped off to take the predictable plot in a different direction.
There are some pretty awful moments as documented, I thought the Godfather pastiches (with music) were probably the most cringeworthy of all, but the central plot and the anticipation of what the final picture would be did hold my attention. I thought the parking meter idea was clever and interesting.
Part of the fun of these silly episodes is reading these brilliantly excoriating reviews. It’s almost worth having to endure the trousers scenes just to look forward to the carefully crafted invective it will inspire here.
I thought Harrison Page was excellent and believable, most of the other characters less so. One point – I’ve noted a few times in these reviews the author lamenting the lack of ‘diversity’ among the cast; this may be true, but it’s nice to watch things for what they are, without constantly being harried into noticing the colour of everyone’s skin. It’s a bit like millennials discovering Friends and being horrified that there are no gay or black characters – does everything have to be subjected to a simplistic ‘box ticking’ exercise before one is allowed to enjoy it?
I think I would regard this as the worst Columbo episode, perhaps alongside the Commodore. There is a lot of awfully bad acting (f.e. Ed Begley Jr. as Irving Crutch) and some very embarrassing situations too: changing pants in the car, the scene with Dorothea McNally, to name a few. One thing I do enjoy is the camera shot as Brown enters the art gallery; that looks really good. But that is not enough. Very messy episode overall.
At least “No Time to Die” had an element of tension.
My wife and I watched it for the first time last night, and enjoyed it. We had some good laughs and liked the goofy cultural stereotypes.
The contrived plot is the worst aspect of the episode. But sometimes it’s best to just suspend all belief and accept a show for what it is. Then you might still have a pleasant evening’s diversion with a loved one.
So yeah, the negative review is justified, but perhaps a little harsh.
There is one good thing about this episode. One scene only. It is the Lt. rallying the shit out of the Peugeot, convincingly barely keeping on all fours, through a few extra sloppy turns, and then coming to a screaming halt when he parks it harder than McGarrett in a canefield crime scene. Lt. shuts it down and the engine continues to knock and rattle, it’s really at failure point as the charred metal innards of the motor continue to ignite the high concentration of unburnt gases getting into the cylinder even after the ignition is turned off, an alarming effect known as to spanner monkeys as Dieseling, and it’s not a good sign. Motor is toast. I think it’s really happening here too. And for the coup de grace the driver’s door is stuck and the Lt. is not able to gracefully emerge and start the scene. Either the car door is genuinely jammed up after some hard miles, which is how it looks, or this is the best bit of acting Falk does for the entire episode. The Peugeot doesn’t have much left in it, and it shows, and it is just kinda sad to see it like this, other than it being a perfect metaphor for this lame donkey episode, failure imminent and driver trapped.
It’s obvious that Peter Falk felt sorry for Tyne Daly, hence why she came back as a down-and-out hooker in this episode. The kissing scenes were ridiculously over-the top but Peter wanted it that way. I wonder if Shera felt the same?
I look forward to this engaging episode for a number of reasons that enable me to happily overlook its faults. Mainly it’s the scene between Columbo and Tyne Daley in her “modest” apartment Columbo seems focused and even Sheraton Danese is right on.
“Sucks” my esteemed Columbophile? Sorry to get personal, but I feel you were angry and perhaps a bit emotional when you wrote this one. The use by you of plebeian vulgarity, kind of startled me.
For me, it’s not that bad, Shera Denese is okay, and as a comic romp, it has to be taken for what it is. Certainly not an episode to get angry about. At least I agree with you that Tyne Daley always delivers. Even a campy Columbo is better than most of the other sh*t we get on American TV!!
I was neither angry nor emotional when writing this.
Okay. My error. Watching it again. But “turd” is rude over here, while “panties” is not. And I agree that Shanese is not only better, but just fine in this, perhaps because. as ou observe, her part may befit her persona. But that is exactly where I thought yo were getting a bit personal.
By the way, I love your blog, Columbophile, and have checked it for your review each time I watch Columbo over here, as well as the responses. Plus your captions have provided me some side splitting laughs. I do enjoy this episode though and it would rate higher in my list. Which is fine.
I am a bit out of control. Signing off for awhile😒
Sasch, no worries bro! I love reading different points of view. We all have our likes and dislikes with the series but it’s great talking about it with others who also love Columbo. And as always, big thanks to CP for letting us have fun here at his wonderful blog!
I enjoyed this episode. In part because of the departure attempt. After so many years, I understand that (conservative) nostalgics prefer to only see the same usual plot structure while others enjoy more diversity… But as long as we find the “essence” of Columbo in it (which I think we do, in between the (overdone) undercover scenes), all this generates great debates,,,
While I agree with a lot of points in the analyses, I believe we can dislike a actor/actress and still appreciate their performance in the show to render a character (for me: it’s William Shatner’s Fielding Chase in Butterflys.)
I really enjoyed your episodes analyses but recently get a bit “annoyed” by the predictable repetitive reckoning of the new 90’s series against the almighty 70s series! An example is Shera Danese’s Geraldine Ferguson: one might dislike the actress but I find that her performance giving the change and exposing Colombo as a cop when he is playing undercover was wit and well played. As Columbo was still dressed as mob boss, we can assume he was still planning to act under covered and was exposed by her assertiveness and confidence. That was good acting and also enhancing’s the Columbo character. Bottom line, while I really enjoy the 70’s series (with its strong and poor episodes) I do not see such a significant trend, regarding plot issues and poor acting, and I suggest to leave it to preference…
Undercover is one of my favorite columbo episodes – interesting story line, intriguing taking making twists and turns, includes a handful of good solid actors..even includes Shera Danese Tye Daly both good actresses and perfect for columbo episodes – real columbo fans can and do appreciate Undercover – much better than I original thought until i re-reviewed Undercover 8 years later after my first viewing of same – one of my top 10 columbo episodes. Now to be fair, No Time to Die is so lousy/bad it doesnt even qualify as one of the the 69 columbo episodes – so theres really only 68 columbo episode – NOT 69
I loved Undercover as it was a welcome change to the tiresome predictability of most Columbo episodes and I say that as a Columbo fan. For once Columbo is not investigating the rich and famous in their palatial homes. Instead he’s mixing with low life in seedy apartments as well as meeting ordinary people.
A really funny moment is when a landlady hears a gunshot whilst on the phone to a friend and says that she’d better hang up as there’s been a shooting in a very matter of fact way. As if this is a normal occurrence !
In a lot of Columbo episodes, he knows who the murderer is very early on but police work is never that easy.
Sure, there are holes in this story but in most Columbo sameness
stories there’s plenty of holes
My top 3 Columbo episodes are ” Columbo Goes To College ”
” Undercover ” and ” Murder By The Book “
“Beige Lump of Mediocrity” will be the name of my fantasy football team next year!
You’re sure to romp to glory with a name like that!
I love Tyne, too.
Didn’t they have to bleep out Shera’s “bullshit!” line, back then ?
No, because at that time certain series on American television, most notably NYPD Blue, some profanity was allowed. Of course, it had it’s limits and the dreaded f-word was still forbidden.
Im watching the episode right now during the marathon and heard Shera blurt it out. I had to rewind to make sure i heard correctly. Seemed so out of place for Columbo, especially in 1994, even with NYPD Blue pushing boundaries around that time.
I am in agreement this episode is a complete departure of the traditional Columbo series. There was no central villian in the show for Columbo to go after. It was completely uneccesary for Columbo to get kicked violently in the head. Columbo looked like a chump for allowing the perp Kahn into the room in the first place. Also he would have not been able to continue the case. It would take weeks for him to recover from such a blow. I did like that Columbo was working together as a police team. His partner Brown was really good, but failed to protect Columbo from being attacked. The picture puzzle was good. I liked the music when each time a peice of the puzzle was discovered. Other than that this Columbo was meant to be a ratings grab. Falk did play the mafia boss at the church good, but Columbo changing clothes in a car was just sad and unprofessional. The finger print on the coin was ridiculous. There would have been no confession by Krutch. Tyne Daley as D McNally saved the show and was very believable. And Columbos pj pants…no comment neccesary.
Since previously loathing and swearing off this episode as a confusing dud, I decided to give it one last try.
With the help of CP’s recap, I was able to understand and follow the plot much better.
I watched “Undercover” again last night (just my third ever viewing, I believe) and it was much better than I had previously thought.
I’m not the smartest guy in the room, so I was really confused with that was happening during my first two views. But, like I said, CP’s recap made it easier for me to understand what was going on…..and it wasn’t that bad.
Still a few cringe-worthy moments, but as a stand-alone TV movie, I rather (gasp) enjoyed it.
I will not be watching it again, but I still not be dissing it anytime soon.
I forget if this was mentioned or not by any commentators or by CP, but the “retarded” joke has not aged well. I’m not the type of person who’s easily offended, but I never liked the “r-word,” and I thought Columbo….even in 1994….would be above that.
Since nobody else mentioned it …
Detective Arthur Brown is a fairly prominent character in Ed McBain’s 87th Precinct stories, from the mid ’60s onward.
In the movie Fuzz, James McEachin (who was a cop in real life before becoming an actor) played Brown, and got some good reviews for his efforts. (That was the one where Burt Reynolds played Steve Carella, Jack Weston played Meyer Meyer, and Tom Skerritt played Bert Kling (who was the groom in So Long As You Both Shall Live, FWIW.)
Just thought I’d mention it …
Harrison Page, who ranks high on my favorite-actors list, was a supporting player on two season-and-a-half sitcoms: the so-so CPO Sharkey (a Gomer Pyle remake of sorts, with Don Rickles in the sergeant role and Page as his buddy in uniform, 1976-78), and the very fine but ahead-of-its-time spoof Sledge Hammer (1986-88, with Page as the long-suffering police captain).
Glad to hear someone else likes “Sledgehammer” – I thought it was very funny indeed. David Rasche was excellent, and those dreading the last few Columbo episodes have nothing to worry about as regards “Trace of Murder” wherein DR is superb. “ToM”, amazingly, anticipates bysome years the CSI genre …but in a very “Double Indemnity” sort of way
OMG I haven’t seen Sledge Hammer since it originally aired. Loved watching that as a little kid with my pops, I need to revisit. Page was quite good.
This is terrible television and arguably not a “Columbo” episode at all. The good news is that all of the remaining five episodes are better than this one. Series finale “Columbo Likes the Nightlife” is quite good, helped a lot by up-and-comer Matthew Rhys as the killer.
You are correct, it’s not really a Columbo episode in a way because it deviates so far from the character. I have no problem with trying different plots and storylines, but not a complete change of behavior from the main character. You are also correct about Nightlife, though Falk was really showing his age and it was obvious it was time to retire the great Columbo, this final episode was very well done.
“All of the remaining five episodes”? “Strange Bedfellows”?
Strange Bedfellows contained the most egregious police behavior of all Columbo episodes in my opinion, and the case would have been tossed by any reputable judge if even brought to trial. That being said it was still more entertaining than Undercover. Bedfellows was kind of silly though which seems to be an unfortunate theme for several later year episodes.
You understate the gravity of Columbo’s reprehensible conduct at the end of “Strange Bedfellows.” This Columbo was someone I didn’t want to know. He acted less like a cop and more like one of the murderers he investigates (and undoubtedly would also have had to falsify his reports and testimony about his “gotcha” to protect himself from criminal prosecution). I’m sure that if he “solved” the murder of Carol Flemming in “Prescription: Murder” by having mobsters threaten to murder Ray unless he proved his own guilt, there would never have been another episode.
True, it makes you wonder what happened to the writing in these later year episodes.
Screenwriter Peter Fischer insisted on a pseudonym for Strange Bedfellows so that gives us a hint.
I didn’t know that but i can see why. He should have been wearing a fake nose/mustache/eye glasses disguise ever since.
Glad someone else appreciates “Nightlife.” To me, it’s the only revival episode that totally stands up against the best ones from the original series. Even the couple of others I like have this low-budget cheap quality, whereas “Nightlife” seems more like the quality production we always got in the original series. It also does a very impressive job of updating the show so that it’s more in tune with contemporary sensibilities without making any changes to the basic format or the character of Columbo himself.
My opinion (and it is a bit of a soap box, so be warned):
I have watched very little broadcast TV since 2009. I prefer to punch the buttons for MeTV (my favorite), or TV Land, or BUZZR the game show rerun channel. In my own opinion, TV has just left me behind.
There are a lot of reasons, but a big one is the “grittiness” of TV drama. We saw a major effort in Miami Vice, where the sheer cruelty of the murders and the number of gun battles seemed to far outstrip all but the most violent of previous TV shows. Also, these shows were often proud of filming in the bleakest neighborhoods, using point-of-view camera angles to make it look like the viewer was standing in the middle of a group instead of watching from outside it (the bobbing and weaving of the camera during these scenes especially irks me), and a lot of depressingly low-lit indoor scenes.
It’s natural that NTTD and Undercover got such high ratings, because they are closest to this “gritty” theme and drew lots of younger (more cynical?) viewers. But it probably put off lots of older viewers, and even those not so old at the time (myself) who had enjoyed the much more restrained episodes, and indeed restrained TV itself, in the ’60s and ’70s.
Comments are very welcome.
So much is made of the search for the jigsaw pieces yet the drab grey picture that finally emerges when they are all put together is the dullest thing ever!
This episode “Undercover” is so far away from the concept of the real Columbo that I actually can’t see this as an episode of Columbo, but rather as a very so and so random detective tv-show in which Peter Falk happens to be an actor (and not as good as he use to be in Columbo or other of his films).
The funny thing is how negligent or lazy the production team (including mr. Falk himself) has been on this episode. In chapter 8 around 59–60 minutes when Columbo talks to Dorothy, she first has a big red rose on her cleavage or right breast. Then, after a few seconds when she has let Columbo in to her flat, she has no red rose at all on her cleavage or breast. That’s a real blunder of the production team!
Follow this link and check these two photos of mine for yourself.😊
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/oas4s4seqydke01/AABLC_RH4V6oJWUjGgd4-MdPa?dl=0
PS However, I do love Columbo and consider this tv-show as the best tv-show ever (apart from “Undercover”, though😉).
Falk’s impersonation of a gangster a throwback to his early movie roles in which he played heavies. The role that really got him noticed by audiences was as hitman Abe Reles in the 1960 movie “Murder, Inc.” Falk was actually nominated for an Oscar (he lost).
The later we get into the 90s run, the less likely I am to have actually seen these episodes on TV. However I did seek out ‘Undercover’ and watch it online, just to see how it broke from the typical formula. I don’t find it as hideously offensive as some other people do – it would probably work fine as an episode of some other cop show – but it’s obvious from the start that it’s not really a Columbo script. If you changed the main character’s name and cast someone other than Falk, you’d never guess it had anything to do with Columbo at all.
That said, I’d forgotten how truly awful those trousers are – not to mention the scene where Columbo changes in the car. Ugh! The painfully-forced ‘humorous’ scenes are some of the worst moments of the newer episodes.
This episode was brutal, and completely agree it’s 2nd last to the horrible Murder In Malibu. The scene where Columbo is all of the sudden a tough guy with a gun was ridiculously out of character and i just couldn’t understand why that was done. Nothing personal to Ed Begley Jr. though, he is a great fan of Falks, and was a good friend. As several have wrote, an episode i probably wouldn’t watch again.
As much as I love Columbo, it’s just too easy to mock and ridicule the 90s era of the series. Granted, there were a couple of episodes that weren’t that bad but the sad fact is the rest were just incredibly disappointing. Whoever’s fault it was, Falk or Mrs. Columbo, doesn’t really matter. The series revival was a mistake and the damage was done, period. But at least Falk got to live comfortably the rest of his life so I guess that’s all that really matters.
But why? That’s the question I always come back to. The formula was sound. Falk did some fine acting during the later period (e.g., Roommates). It’s not as if his gifts had left him. Many of the original writers (Gillis, Fischer, Van Scoyk) were still available. Same with directors (Frawley, Penn, Wanamaker). Granted, the guest casts were not as full of luminaries, but Jack Cassidy wasn’t exactly a movie star during the initial run either, and he worked out. As David Koenig shows, budgets were no less rigidly enforced during the 70’s. So why couldn’t the quality be replicated?
This is the real question, and I wish I had an answer!
I can go only by what I have observed in almost every long-running TV show, even the best ones: At a certain point, the air is gone, too much is drained out of the whole which made it good in the first place. It almost seems like there is some universal law that is not to be understood by us mere mortals, no matter how much thought we put into it!
But what IS the mysterious problem that keeps overly mature works within a series from being as good as the earlier ones (at least generally)?
Often it seems to be a tendency to overemphasize certain aspects, while neglecting numerous other aspects that are not so easily identified with the “typical” aspects of the specific fictional matter … and a rising lack of the naturalness and levity that serves to tell or present a story, without trying to desperately conform to certain patterns – and the (meta-) expectations that come with them. This applies to almost every TV show or film series I have ever watched. The “typical” stuff is all that matters, and the quality of the rest suffers by neglect.
In the case of “Columbo”, Peter Falk and all the others responsible for the ABC years were most likely conflicted between two drives: 1) To be recognisably “Columbo” and 2) to be new, “fresh”, “different” and at least a little bit “cool”.
Add to that the somewhat cheaper-looking production values of late 80s/early 90s TV, and it becomes a little bit more understandable – but no less bad.
The details of that process, however, remain somewhat elusive.
The only evolutionary pattern that I’ve observed concerns “workplace dramas” — which Columbo isn’t. Workplace dramas, with an ensemble cast of characters who all work together in some workplace, always start out exploring the cases and issue arising in that workplace. It’s as if the creators had pitched a long list of workplace-related story ideas. But then they arrive at the end of their list, the workplace story ideas get more difficult to find, and the stories begin to shift their focus to the individual characters and their lives outside the workplace. Cue the shark!
Velvet’s points are insightful. As it pertains specifically to the evidently comical Undercover, what stood out to me was the general artlessness in its humorous approach. The 90s run continually underestimates the viewer’s sophistication — or, based on ratings/ad sales, perhaps their estimate was spot on. Certainly the network was trying to attract more than old Columbo diehards to these one-off specials.
Undercover loudly announces which scenes are meant to be funny. Columbo is inexplicably asked to flip undercover personas and portray a mafia don to an Italian nonna? Don’t think, just laugh at Falk hamming it up. A pointless hospital stay results in a stupid-looking pair of pants? Exists solely to score a cheap chuckle. Every scene in every episode involving Shera? The showrunners are practically screaming at us: DO NOT TAKE THIS PART TOO SERIOUSLY!
I want to make it clear that I’m not interested in judging when these attempts at humor work and when they don’t. No two commenters on this site are in perfect alignment with what tickles their respective funny bones. Many young people were introduced to Columbo in the 90s (me, for one), still love these episodes today and appreciate their, shall we say, broader appeal.
My beef is that this one-dimensional approach limits how good an episode can be and often ruins it altogether. If a scene is meant to be funny and only funny, when the comedy fail to land, the episode comes to an annoyingly crashing halt. Conversely, if a straight-forward plot-driven scene lacks the charm to hold viewer attention, we get bored or confused.
I compare this to the 70s run that did such a remarkable job of skillfully blending humorous moments within plot- or character-developing scenes. In Death Lends a Hand, Columbo hams it up as a fool palm reader — to spot an important clue. He then struts directly into a closet, which leads him to Lenore’s golf pro. These goofy moments later add to the suspiciousness of Brimmer offering him a job, as Columbo has (purposefully) looked silly to this serious man on multiple occasions and now the latter abruptly admires his intelligence? Similarly, an earlier scene poking fun at Columbo’s junker uses his exchange with a cop to reveal backstory and personality traits of the Columbo character to the viewer. Maybe you find each of these moments funny, maybe you don’t. But regardless, the writing approach is what I would deem “artful” humor, and it made so many of the 70s episodes feel more fun, more efficient and more rewarding.
To praise or pan Undercover boils down to whether or not it made you laugh. Period. Personally I feel a Columbo can, and should, strive to achieve more than that.
I’d call it multi-dimensional humor, where the humorous moments serve story purposes beyond the comedy. DLAH is full of them. It’s Link and Levinson’s own (Emmy-award winning) script after all.
G4, you’re right about Classic Columbo’s skill at the balancing of drama and levity. Even though the common complaint is that the longer 70s Columbos suffered because of the need for filler, those eps rarely induced the groans of the painfully unfunny added 90s content (“Last Salute” excepted….much groaning there).
I have a theory that I introduced in the comments of CP’s “Funniest Scenes” piece. There’s a huge difference between the viewer laughing at the reactions of others to Columbo and laughing at Columbo himself. At “Negative Reaction”s homeless shelter, Columbo himself does nothing remarkably funny, but it’s the Sister of Mercy’s reactions to him – and how she makes assumptions about someone poorly dressed – that elevate the encounter. Lawyer Cunnell’s reaction to Columbo’s curiosity about his shoes, the oblivious snobbery of Mrs. Chadwick ordering about the lieutenant in “Lady in Waiting”, Vito Scotti’s fitting Columbo for a suit in “Candidate for Crime” – these are excellent comedy scenes because of the behaviors of others, responding to the Columbo that we are already quite familiar with.
Contrast that to the 90s scenes where we’re invited to laugh AT Columbo – wiggling on his back under a showroom car, bumping multiple fenders with Wade Anders (I swear I could see Sideshow Bob there stepping on rakes), prancing around looking for clothing labels in trashbins….Too often in the 90s, we were asked to laugh at our hero. That delicate balance of the droll and the dramatic was gone.
Sure, New Columbo could’ve used much better scripts. But the scripts that existed wouldn’t have stunk so much if the powers-that-be-named-Peter understood the equilibrium that the Classic Era generally mastered.
Awesome viewpoints! Classic 70s Columbo is a series I can watch over and over and will never tire of. It’s truly timeless! Sure it did have it’s share of clunkers but even those are still fun to watch. CP deserves special praise for his outstanding website, where Columbo fans from around the world can gather to celebrate the series we all love. Cheers!
I think we should bear in mind something that to us fans may seem totally inconceivable – 70s Columbo formula was sound indeed but 90s audience did want something different regardless.
According to Koenig’s book both Undercover and No time to Die were among the top ABC Columbos in terms of ratings (Undercover actually was THE BEST with #11), Batshit crazy Malibu also did relatively well with #20, while Agenda, which most long-time fans consider the closest to 70s run in terms of quality got miserable #59.
At the outset of the ABC run Falk and the studio did declare their intention to stick to the formula. EP for the first ABC season Richard Allan Simmons vowed “no major changes to Columbo,,, The audience has made it very clear that they don’t want any changes”. Apparently he was making a mistake, tastes did change significantly by 1989.
But what do these rating really mean? Columbo fans, eagerly anticipating another Columbo episode and hoping against hope for something as captivating and clever as the best Columbos, and ignorant of what they were about to see, sat down to watch “No Time to Die” or “Undercover.” How is their bitter disappointment at what they witnessed reflected in the ratings? Nielsen ratings aren’t a critique; they’re just a measure of how many people watched. How many disappointed people watched.
Of course, the 90’s Columbos attracted large audiences. Even the worst 90’s Columbos attracted large audiences. Because we were all hooked in the 70’s and remained in the grip of that addiction twenty-plus years later. Of course, we watched. Maybe this time, we thought. Maybe this time, it’ll be as special as it used to be.
And the saddest part is that the purveyors of “No Time to Die” and “Undercover” KNEW we’d watch, counted on the fact we’d watch, and took advantage of our devotion to the good Lieutenant.
Rich beat me to it.
You. Just. Hit. The. Nail. On. The. Head.
Thank you!
I concur with m’learned friend. If promoted well, these episodes could have looked like exciting changes to the norm (It’s Columbo like you’ve never seen him before!), so I can understand why a lot of folk would’ve been intrigued enough to tune in. Perhaps some were expecting a car crash and weren’t disappointed! Ratings are really just a measure for networks to sell advertising space, so ‘hits’ like Undercover and No Time had a prolonging effect on the series despite them failing the test of time.
As I’ve always acknowledged, my perspective is from the vantage point of someone who watched the classic-era Columbos when they first ran on the NBC Sunday Mystery Movie. From someone who would grab the new TV Guide, flip to the Sunday night lineup to see: is it a Columbo? (Rats, it’s McCloud this week.) Even when I went off to college in the fall of 1973, I managed to watch the new Columbos (although, I confess, I don’t remember how).
So I can’t speak to why those who never experienced the classic era live tuned in beginning in 1989 and kept tuning in through 2003. I can only speak to why someone hooked in the 70’s kept tuning in. It wasn’t the plot summaries or guest stars. It wasn’t the promos. It was simply the fact that a new Columbo was scheduled to air. And the hope that a new Columbo would be a great Columbo never died.
Be nice to McCloud. (Not a jab at anyone; just a chuckle). It’s my favorite show after all these years. Stylistically, it is a mile different from any other Mystery Movie component, with broad humor and an enormous amount of violent action (I guess NBC shoehorned it into the wheel series because its initial ratings were decent but not decent enough to be a weekly), but for me it was a fun romp.
Besides, it got me watching Columbo.
Thank you, dear Richard, for another insightful comment. In this particular case, the high ratings can only be interpreted as a sign of greater antecipation or curiosity towards an episode that promoted itself as an ostensive break from the Columbo formula, up to unrecognizableness. On the other hand, one must not forget we aren’t dealing with a weekly show whose ratings pattern would have a more discernible meaning.
Keep in mind that this is not the time of elaborate plots and DVD sets yet. TV is produced to be shown and the idea to establish a brand which would run beyond the three or four seasons a reasonably successful show has to offer, is just not planned. It is more or less financed by selling time for commercials or by syndication which itself is financed the same way.
In a weird way the 70s Columbo episodes feel a lot more eternal, as they fall into a vintage sensibility. But in the 90s they were still just old TV with slightly outdated fashion. The world was heading for The X-Files, Deep Space 9 was on air and Twin Peaks was a huge success, which should have increased the pressure to take the format somewhere. At the same time the room for innovation was limited, with the change of police work away from the lonesome detective work on the one side and the limits of the format having to reset everything for each episodes, and therefore preventing elaborate plot lines and character development.
This pushed the show into the sequel problem: somehow topping what has been but with limited ability to rewrite the lore.
The new run would have needed a recurring side-kick to allow new patterns. The coroner and lab guys should have become known faces as well, as they would influence Columbo’s work. Or perhaps changing the concept to the degree of Columbo being a superior getting involved in cases getting pushed over his desk would have allowed a new lease of life while keeping charming parts of the format.
A couple of days ago, I was going through a drawer of old magazines I’d kept for one reason or another, and happened upon a December 1975 issue of The Pennsylvania Gazette (my college’s alumni magazine) that I’d obviously saved because its cover story was about two Penn graduates: William Link and Richard Levinson. This was mid-season five of Columbo, remember. L&L had “gradually phased off the show. Now other people do it. They send us the scripts, we make notes — and that’s all.” Nonetheless, I was amazed to read the following: “Despite this enormous success, the creators of ‘Columbo’ insist the show is ‘boring as hell now because it wasn’t meant to go on for five years.’” (It also said: “Since Falk’s contract is up at the end of this season, and he too is tiring of the formula, there probably will be no more new ‘Columbo’ shows next year.”) So even the 70’s run outlived its creators’ interest.
All true factually, though I struggle to accept the assumption that high ratings reflect high viewer satisfaction. Aren’t ratings more a byproduct of past experiences, network promotional efforts, and time slot competition than they are content quality? More people may have tuned into Undercover than did Agenda, for example, but isn’t it possible that a lower proportion of those people came away impressed? Might the ratings for each Columbo tell you more about viewer satisfaction with the previous episode(s) than the current one?
That said, I admit that inserting simplistic sight gags and over-the-top mannerisms into the commercial trailers can be assumed to have attracted viewership. And I suppose they can’t do that without filming those scenes to begin with. If only internet boards like this existed in the early 90s, there would be a record of how fans received each episode after the airing. 🙂
Eleven year hiatus is almost unheard of in Hollywood for a TV show. Most shows peak at around season 3 and Columbo certainly went out still in it’s prime in 1978, It seems almost impossible to live up to the 70’s standards after that much time passed. Almost like a sports star or musician i guess.
I’ve only seen this episode twice, and not in the last three years. I’ve no desire to go back and watch it ever again.
I know CP disagrees with this, but I cannot stand the scene with Tyne Daly. It seems to drag on far more than the eight minutes.
Maybe I just don’t care for Tyne, as I also couldn’t take her in the “Bird in the Hand episode.
Serious question: Is Tyne Daly supposed to be a sex symbol actress or something? I find her annoying and physically unattractive. I just don’t get the love for Tyne Daly. (Same as I don’t get the love for William Shatner)
I had totally forgotten that Ed Begley Jr’s character was the killer. (I guess that’s how totally disinterested I was…or that I found the story so convoluted and difficult to follow)
This episode is firmly in my bottom five.
Speaking of Tyne, I would have rather seen Goldy play this role. Talk about sass! And it would have been great to see her again, albeit a few years older. And God bless her, she’s still with us in her 90s!
It is absolutely a Shatner vibe. I like that a lot as long as the context allows it to play out. But there is a sense of “meta” in there. But then again – this has always been the case for Columbo.
Thanks for reminding me (in excruciating detail) how much I disliked this episode. Tyne Daly almost makes it worthwhile. Almost. But even with Daly’s wonderfully whiskey-redolent performance, Undercover should be allowed to quietly fade from the Columbo Universe and never be spoken of again.
I’m always amazed how fans often understand characters better than the very people who created them. How could Falk and company not realize the episode was inconsistent with everything that made Columbo Columbo?
CP said it best with regards to this episode as well as the 90s series debacle: “Who is this man? And what has he done with Lieutenant Columbo?!”
This episode was – sadly, I must say – often shown on TV back in the day. I never got through it …
The only episode not yet reviewed that I remember finding quite enjoyable would be “A Trace of Murder” … mostly thanks to the great Barry Corbin, who didn’t even play the murderer! But he is such a fascinating and charismatic character actor – and was clearly the highlight of that show.
Maurice Minnifield is one of the most hilarious and complex TV characters ever created, and I think his one and only “Columbo” role as the framed (but defiant!) husband was quite a rare highlight of the lacklustre latter era.
Agreed. I actually like “Trace…”
Trace Of Murder was a fun episode indeed.
Hopefully CP will do “Trace of Murder” full justice when the time comes – of course he will ! It’s the best episode of the disastrous latter years by a country mile. It ranks very high overall – maybe tops. After decades of unseen toiling by “the boys in the lab”, one of their number – an incredibly cool, charming individual (David Rashe, excellent !) gets to do his own thing… hey I gotta tell ya “that cat is well and truly outta da bag”
Yes I enjoyed “Trace…” and Shera was quite good in that I thought. …and crossing the street – “that cat is well and truly outta da bag!” 🙂
I’ve said this before but Mrs. Columbo did look mighty juicy in Trace. It really was her shining moment in the series, and she knocked it out of the park. I can’t wait for CP’s review, should be especially entertaining!
Agreed! She(-ra) was very good and appropriate in “A Trace of Murder”.
The role was perfectly played!
But Columbo’s obsession with fruit, on the other hand …
This is the one Columbo episode that I have never watched all the way through. (To be honest, I have only seen No Time to Die in nonsequential pieces, but all of it, I think.)
It occurs to me that Falk might have bought the rights for these two McBain books in the hope that he would have a chance to play an anti-Columbo character as a change of pace. If he bought them before the ABC reboot was underway, I would guess that he was hoping for a totally new and different series to ensue (e.g. Perry Mason-to-Ironside for Raymond Burr). Falk then likely found that no studio or network would back him unless the character were named Columbo. He went ahead anyway. Bad choices all around.
David Koenig (“Shooting Columbo”) doesn’t say explicitly when Falk bought the rights to the two McBain books — except he does say that “30 years earlier [Falk] had appeared in an episode of a short-lived 87th Precinct TV series.” That episode was in 1962 (“The Pigeon”). A 1992 purchase would be well after the ABC Columbos had started their run.
He bought the rights after the series revival, when he became sole Exec Producer circa 1991, when seeking new Columbo material. Remarkable decision…
This one for some reason reminds me of the classic Mickey Rooney/Judy Garland bit: “Let’s put on a show!”
Thirty minutes later the kids have professional level arrangements, dancing, and a mysterious orchestra, and at the end everyone gets a lot of money.
Page Harrison, as Sergaent Brown, speaks to Columbo with more impatience and less respect than any other officer, sergaent, lab tech, or even captain has ever done, which put my teeth on edge!
The guilty civilians were allowed their abusive anger, but part of the magic of Columbo is the distinct admiration that told the viewer the LAPD
knew the real deal!
He may have been directed to be impatient and a bit disputacious to PREVENT his race from making him seem servile, but plenty of other black officers and assistants on Columbo carried on regular patter with him. He could have been played by anyone of any race as far as 80’s viewers were concerned, but
the impatience bordered on disrespect!
I don’t think he was disrespectful to Columbo at all! Their relationship seemed more genuinely comradely than almost all other cop sidekicks Columbo has had. They had a bit of playful fun with each other, but no disrespect. Compare that to Sergeant Hoffman telling Columbo to go home and have a shave in ‘Negative Reaction’, or his superior officers telling him off for not paying attention in ‘Death Lends a Hand’ and ‘Candidate for Crime’ and the impatience and surliness dishes out by Sergeant Kramer and Co. in ‘By Dawn’s Early Light’ and there’s no comparison. Heck, a uniformed cop even chastises Columbo for being late in ‘Butterfly in Shades of Grey’, as does Sergeant Robertson in ‘Bird in the Hand…’ Brown commits no such sins against the good Lieutenant.
The actor’s name is “Harrison Page”.
A very funny review of a terrible episode…but one small correction: Robert Donner wasn’t in Negative Reaction; he was the drunk at the bar watching TV with Columbo in Any Old Port in a Storm
You’re quite right! Silly me, I will amend that.
Thanks for writing, “Columbo is confined to bed at the hospital,” instead of, “…at hospital,”! That’s one for US. Although, later you write, “…at hospital.” Eh. 50/50. Anyway, great review of a terrible episode. These last ones are bleak, but Ashes to Ashes is pretty good. I rewatched it recently in anticipation of your upcoming review and I liked it. I hastily skipped forward through the funeral director’s approximation of a rave in a bar, but otherwise, it was a good episode.
Hilarious review, much more fun that the episode, thanks!!! You hit the nail on the head when you describe the tacky way the whole puzzle plot was shown on screen. Why were all these pieces in such good condition? How come Gerry’s piece didn’t just fall out of the frame when it was so loosely held? It felt more like the puzzle had been made the previous day by some grade school kids to show where they hid their candy. Terrible!
CP hits another homerun with his awesome analysis! As with most of the 90s Columbo, this farce deserves it’s place in CP’s hall of shame. The only good part of the episode, besides Tyne Daly playing herself, was Mrs. Columbo getting the ax. Too bad she keeps rising from the dead!
Lots of lol moments in this review, enjoyed it very much. This is very much a Columbo does a guest star spot on another mystery show, but it is so full of actors that I love so much that I managed not to notice too much. I do wish we could go back in time and swap Ed Begley Jr. with David Rasche in A Trace of Murder. Not enough Ed Begley for me here. I absolutely hate the role of Columbo passing himself off as a Mafioso figure. If I’m going to turn the TV off in disgust, it will be on that scene. I hated all the lazy Italian stereotypes throughout Columbo, which includes the awful Strange Bedfellows. (They only did this in the New Columbo series on ABC, if I remember correctly.) Makes me want to throw up. But I cannot agree with the ranking – whereas this episode has a light enough style to try to pass off in a Columbo series (even if not a good idea), I cannot watch No Time to Die. That episode does not belong in the Columbo repertoire at all!
It’s a fun crime-comedy TV movie starring Peter Falk and a good cast beside him. As a Columbo episode… mehh.
I make a bet that the Hungarian dubbing helps a lot for this episode as it happens quite often. 😉
BTW I like Undercover, and you described perfectls, why. This is a rather lightweight piece regarding humour, being in contrast with over-the-standard quantity of violence.
Wow, can’t believe it, I’m not the only one who likes this! And like the other person said a couple of posts above, I think this can be considered a columbo, although the formula is a little different, more than “no time to die”, which imo is the worst episode ever, I watched it once and I don’t intend to watch it a 2nd time.
Boy, are you right about that puzzle. One of the few things I remember about that episode (because why on Earth would I watch it again?) is how utterly useless about 70% of the puzzle was. It’s water. All those pieces are nothing shy of absolutely worthless. I’d hate the be the robber stuck with one of them 🙄
Indeed – there are 4 pieces to identify the spot. If the X had been further in the water, the other pieces might have helped to estimate the distance. But as it is, the two puzzle pieces of the street already give all the hints needed to find the treasure, unless the street has been fixed and the pattern of the cracks would have changed. In which case the puzzle is about as useful as just knowing what road it is.
I remember this episode almost solely for Tyne Daly – a standout, especially the “Hey what’s going on here?!” kiss. I recall thinking at the end of the parking meter scene that the fingerprint evidence was pretty iffy, but it just seemed a way to introduce more of the goofy comedy into the show. Columbo could just as easily have received a phone call that told him Kutch’s print was on a coin taken from a meter in front of Weinberg’s home. Like the tuba scene in another episode, these seemed to be just vignettes that give us a glimpse of the Columbo we love to love. Mercifully, this is nowhere near as wretched a viewing experience as the other McBain-based attempt. It possibly goes a little too far in the other direction and veers into slapstick – reminiscent of Falk’s parody of a character in ‘The Cheap Detective’.
I don’t know, I like it, it’s not only significantly better than the other unusual-formula-columbo, as in no time to die (actually I hate that one, it’s an episode I always avoid rewatching, I end up watching even episodes I don’t like that much 5 times rather than watching no time to die a 2nd time), but it’s one of my favourite episodes overall.
I think the main reason is that I like the treasure hunt formula and I’m evidently not as critical as you, so I am really not able to notice any of the issues you notice with it, when you said for example “The execution of the entire treasure hunt and the puzzle piece premise is weak and tacky”, so looking for pieces of a puzzle was interesting for me and I actually liked that columbo is unusually aggressive here, in a way it’s something we’ve seen before, in his rare bursts of anger, for example against mayfield or in deadly state of mind, when he gets angry with collier’s assistant.
I like how he caught weinberg red-handed, about to shoot him and distracted him with that piece of paper (and honestly weinberg asked for it) and also how he gained his trust.
I particularly liked the scene with geraldine ferguson, also when he says his first name is lieutenant!
And indeed, I also think the sergeant was good.
Obviously agree with the criticism against the scene where he’s changing pants!
Yes, I also thought the much derided Shera Danese was quite good – “What are you going to do – arrest me for drinking in my pyjamas ?”
Sergeant Brown is played by “Harrison Paige”, not “Paige Harrison”.
I seem to remember that in this episode Columbo can’t speak Italian where doing so would have been useful, despite the fact that he spoke a few lines of Italian in one of the 70s episodes. One of many disappointments.
Adapting 87th Precinct to Columbo was a bad idea. I watched this episode of Columbo ages ago and I don’t have the mental strength to see it again. Among the weaker episodes of the 90’s.
Per “Shooting Columbo”, Peter Falk was not dissuaded from using the McBain properties he bought, even after realizing that they were far removed from the usual “Columbo” fare. In fact, Patrick McGoohan “had long encouraged Falk to think beyond the format, to realize that the most enduring component of ‘Columbo’ was Columbo himself, Columbo the character.”
No, no, a thousand times no! The show’s inverted mystery format clearly would have suffered without Falk’s interpretation of the Columbo character, but conversely, Falk’s interpretation of the Columbo character suffered without the inverted mystery format. Without the format and its clever scripting to establish and amplify the psychology behind Columbo’s behavior – appearing ineffectual, hounding and invading the villain’s personal space, deploying discrepancies in the killer’s story – we are left with the character stranded in an ordinary generic TV police procedural. Seeing our lieutenant looking for psycho kidnappers and donning awkward disguises is (almost) as dispiriting as it would be watching two hours of Columbo making grilled cheese sandwiches or standing in line at the Building and Safety Department of City Hall to get a permit to dig up a pile of a building that’s already under construction (oh, wait). Character and context are of equal value. Levinson and Link provided the context – the format – first, and Peter Falk came along to elevate it. But thinking that the Columbo character could carry junk like “No Time to Die” and “Undercover” is a serious misunderstanding of the appeal of the show.
Sadly, I think that Peter Falk’s pride prevented him from seeing or admitting just how dreadful those McBain novels were going to be as “Columbo”s. Instead of simply writing off the money spent as a bad investment, once Falk made the decision to buy the rights, the die was cast, and those books were going to be turned into Columbo gruel come hell or high water-parachute pants.
So my interpretation is that Falk was badly advised by McGoohan. Classic Columbos are essentially “class comedies” – which was also a key component of Raymond Chandler. We delight in the character’s infiltration of the Bel Air new aristocracy – as well as picaresque interactions with the attendant lower classes – waiters, bel-hops, gardeners, cleaners and so on. But once the Columbo character becomes too mannered or self-conscious – the magic starts to fade.
Patrick McGoohan strikes again. Or is that: strikes out again? He should have folded his Columbo tent after “By Dawn’s Early Light.” How he also won an Emmy for his cartoonish turn as Oscar Finch is anyone’s guess. If only Falk hadn’t had such a penchant for listening to the wrong people: McGoohan, Elaine May, etc.
As for the importance of the format, I agree wholeheartedly that you can’t have a cat-and-mouse game — the essence of Columbo — unless you know quite early who is the mouse. That doesn’t mean that all format deviations are off limits. But it does mean they require a most compelling justification. An empty writing cupboard isn’t good enough.
Dare we say that the main reason why ABC Columbo’s are so far below NBC run in quality is Peter Falk himself? In one of the comments above you asked why they failed to replicate the winning formula of the 70s despite seemingly having access to all the necessary ingredients. One major difference in the 90s recipe I see is that while the 70s was all about tug-of-war between Falk and the studio in the 90’s run Falk achieved practically undisputed control in all production matters whatever his actual management title (or lack thereof).
Reading Koenig’s book I was amazed at how many questionable and downright bad decisions I always blamed on the studio and ABC turned out to be Falk’s personal input from minor annoyance of the infamous tuba scene to a major mistake of indulging McGoohan in his eccentric approach to directing. A great line from “Make me a perfect murder” comes to mind when I think about Falk’s managerial record: “You don’t make decisions, you make guesses. There is a difference. Guesses just aren’t good enough”.
But on the other hand if Peter Falk didn’t (as you put it) have “such a penchant for listening to the wrong people” we might never have our beloved Columbo as we know him. After all according to Koenig one of the major reasons he agreed to commit himself to doing a series in 1971 was a simple need for money, because his business manager had just swindled him out of a large part of his savings.
Except that Koenig also portrays Falk as a fierce advocate for script quality. Exhibit A: Falk’s reaction in April 1975 to the news that story editor Peter Fischer had accepted the offer to produce the new L & L “Ellery Queen” series. Koenig also portrays Falk as constantly pushing for big name guest stars that Universal rejected if their salary demands exceeded the studio’s monetary ceiling.
The ABC run began with Richard Alan Simmons, not Falk, shaping the episodes. And Simmons’ approach, focusing more on the murderer’s story and less on the clues and the Columbo-killer interplay over the clues, didn’t work.
Falk’s purchase of the two McBain novels, according to answers from Falk quoted by Koenig, was because the other stories in the pipeline “didn’t have a good pop” and “were all soft in the middle.” It wasn’t as if he chose McBain over other great scripts.
Falk deserves criticism, but I’m not convinced he deserves all the blame. The failure is due equally to the absence of a trusted team around Falk to solve problems before they reached Falk’s desk.
The best scene (by a mile) is Tyne Daly as Dorothea McNally.
Again, this is borrowed from a Chandler novel – Jessie Florian in “Farewell My Lovely”.
If you’re going to break with an established, winning formula, it’s either to add an ironic twist to the established format designed to astound the expectations of the audience, or because someone has come up with a stand-alone, sure-shot brilliant idea. You don’t break with the formula simply because your well of good formula-based story ideas has run dry. The latter was clearly the impetus for “Undercover” and “No Time to Die” — not to mention the inexplicable resurrection of the previously rejected, then shipped elsewhere “Uneasy Lies the Crown.”
Falk admitted as much after “No Time to Die”: “I had to make a choice between what was on hand and the script that we chose to shoot. I was happier with the one we shot than I would have been with the alternatives we had. I just can’t stand the ones that don’t have a pop at the end, which are the hardest to come up with. We didn’t have a good pop in any of the scripts I saw, and I thought they were all soft in the middle, so we decided to go with that one.”
So “Undercover” was an act of desperation. And it shows.
Stories abound about how unknown Columbo-loving writers got their scripts in front of producers and story editors. How Peter S. Fischer got a spec script to Steven Bochco who forwarded it to executive producers Dean Hargrove and Roland Kibbee. How London writer Michael Sloan got his script “Quicker Than the Eye” (later retitled “Now You See Him”) in front of now story editor Fischer. Even known Columbo-loving (but not Columbo-working) writers like Stephen J. Cannell, with time on their hands, might knock off a Columbo script “for his own amusement” that would become “Double Exposure.”
Why had things changed? Why had it become so impossible for new writers with creative ideas and scripts to get those ideas/scripts before anyone with the power to push them forward? When I told the story of Olivier Cazeaux (“Columbo’s Alpine adventure – the episode that never was”), it was amazing the obstacles Cazeaux faced, and chicanery to which he had to resort, to get anyone to read his Columbo episode treatment. Fear of litigation, no doubt, is the primary reason no one is allowed to read anything anymore. But how much creativity has been lost as a result?
And what we’re left with is “Undercover.”
I had been wondering how Cannell came up with Double Exposure. One of the very best Columbo scripts in my opinion.
According to David Koenig (“Shooting Columbo”): “Cannell remembered his college thesis on subliminal cuts in advertising and thought it would make a great gimmick for Columbo.”
The puzzle-story is ridiculous (kids can play that kind of game when they’re between 8 and 10), and it is never explained why the police is interested in it .
If my memory serves, the remaining episodes quality is going to fall off a cliff. I hope you prove me wrong.
I remember Ashes to Ashes being decent, and Nightlife having its moments but it’s so long since I watched them that they may also be major disappointments.
The first time I saw Ashes to Ashes, I thought it was a classic. The second time I saw it, I found McGoohan’s acting and the story Last-Salute-ish, though I’d have to admit the undertaker theme was clever. I’d put it in third tier, with the episode’s style being most similar to “Identity Crisis” and “Murder Under Glass.” All three of these episodes are clever, but fantastical.
Funny enough, I thought “Strange Bedfellows” was a blast the first time I saw it, and I didn’t mind George Wendt a bit – mind, that was before I watched “Cheers!”
That said, I’ll probably be disappointed when I watch Strange Bedfellows again. The California scenery and opportunity of Steiger and Falk going head-to-head were enough to win me over to the absurd plot then, but I’m not sure it would do it for me this time.
I’ve never seen “Columbo Likes the Nightlife.”
Your memory is partially wrong. “A Trace of Murder” is actually extremely good. Amiable David Rasche is excellent & intelligent as the corrupted crime lab guy ‘assisting’ (i.e. actively hindering) Columbo solve the murder he (Rasche) himself committed in what is a surprisingly tense and effective reworking of classic 40ies noire “Double Indemnity”. Plenty of good lines & great scenes. The subsequent Billy Connolly debacle episode however is vile beyond imagining.
I must have purposely block this form my memory. As I’ve said before, there are much better fitting Ed McBain stories. I would love to see Columbo in He Who Hesitates, King’ Ransom, Killer’s Payoff and my personal favourite, The Empty Hours.
This one’s obviously so ghastly & you’re so very persuasive about it ….I can’t even bear to finish reading your review in full, much less watch the episode. Instead of wasting time on “Undercover”-like ordure, the Lieutenant would have been better out in the real world plying his trade….
Top Ten Real Life episodes where Lt. Columbo would have done a much better job:
10. Taking the glove(s) off: Columbo v. O.J. Simpson
9. A Sunny, pre-meditated, medicated death: Claus von Bülow poisons his wife.
8. The truth about Natalie Wood “drowned out”: Columbo drains murky waters
7. Death Facilitates a Correction: the case of the incarcerated Jeffrey Epstein
6. Be-Jinxed: Columbo meets Robert Durst (and doesn’t believe him).
5. Peril in Perugia: the Kircher murder case featuring Foxy Knoxy (foreign location)
4. Slaying of a True Crime Anchor: the Jilll Dando execution (gratuitous London loc.)
3. Killing of a Baby Doll: the JonBenét Ramsey case.
2. Monkey business beyond Neverland: what really killed Michael Jackson?
1. Chappaquiddick: Senator Ted Kennedy gets it in the neck from Columbo