"Alfred Hitchcock Presents" I Killed the Count: Part 1 (TV Episode 1957) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
8 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
A big investment for a very small reward!
planktonrules24 February 2021
The story begins with the dead body the disreputable Italian, Count Mattoni, in a hotel room in London. The maid who discovers him, incidentally, is played by Pat Hitchcock, the director's daughter....and she appeared in quite a few episodes, often in small parts. The police inspector investigating is John Williams, who also appeared in tons of episodes as well as in "DIal M for Murder".By the time episode one has completed, you have two men who BOTH claim to have murdered Mattoni...a bit of a sticky problem for the Inspector, as both clearly did NOT kill the man.

Overall, it's hard to rate the entire story...I'll get to that a bit in part 3. But part 1 has very good acting and is very interesting. Where it all goes, you'll have to wait to see.
16 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Down for the Count....
classicsoncall22 August 2021
Warning: Spoilers
It almost feels like cheating to write about this episode and the next because they are parts of a larger story. The principal characters are introduced here, and the murder mystery that follows is made complicated by the actions of multiple claimants to the death of Count Victor Mattoni (Anthony Dawson). Interestingly, all have credible stories with evidence to back them up. Bernard K. Froy (Charles Cooper) is an American businessman who wrote Mattoni a letter that implicates himself, and he becomes the first, and at this point, only suspect. The plot thickens in Part 2 of 'I Killed the Count'.
12 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Very effective set up
TheLittleSongbird6 July 2022
The "I Killed the Count" three parter was a unique episode of 'Alfred Hitchcock Presents' up to this point of the series' run, with it being the only story arc to last for more than one part. Even after the series ended, it continued to stand out from the rest of the episodes due to how few times 'Alfred Hitchcock Presents' did more than single parters. On the whole, it was a solid three parter, apart from feeling like it ran on for one episode too long and despite issues with pacing in all three parts.

"I Killed the Count Part 1" is a very strong and effective start for the "I Killed the Count" three parter. A first part of any story arc should have the main objective of setting things up, which "I Killed the Count Part 1" does incredibly well on the whole while also being a very solid episode in its own right. Not one of the best 'Alfred Hitchcock Presents' offering or one of director Robert Stevens' best, but it hardly disgraces either (the complete anti-thesis of that).

So much is good. It is extremely well acted, especially from an exuberant and authoritative John Williams, a regular lead of the series, as a character that has a lot of presence and entertains from the get go. Can't fault his chemistry with Charles Davis, who holds his own. Alan Napier is great value. Hitchcock's bookending is entertainingly ironic and Stevens directs with good sense of style and assurance.

Furthermore, "I Killed the Count Part 1" is thoughtfully scripted, provoking a good deal of thought while also providing an equal amount of fun. It is shot slickly and atmospherically and the story engrosses right from minute one with not a dull moment. It also doesn't feel too predictable, already delivering on the twists and turns, and nothing feels silly or too rambling.

Did feel though that with such a lot going on that the episode did feel rushed at times and tried to include too much, some of what was the final act could have been as part of Part 2 quite easily and the end of Part 2 in Part 3 (which would have helped make that part a lot more eventful).

Also that some of the interplay between Williams and Davis occasionally over-explained.

On the whole though, a very well done set up part to a solid if flawed three parter. 8/10.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Agatha Christie (Sort of)
Hitchcoc16 June 2013
It's hard to review a single twenty-five minute episode of an old TV drama. I mean, it's not exactly Star Wars or Lord of the Rings. In this episode we meet the first of the four murder suspects. He is a rich American who goes through the murder with some precision. The only thing that stood out to me was the mugging of British actor John Williams and his little sidekick who keeps analyzing his every move. Beyond that, we are introduced to the murder, find out a bit about the count (he, apparently was an ugly, grasping worm who always got what he wanted). I believe the whole thing could have been made a bit more fun by writing at least a post mortem flashback so we could observe his evil ways.
14 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
First episode of a single experiment on Alfred Hitchcock Presents
theowinthrop9 January 2009
Warning: Spoilers
In the years that ALFRED HITCHCOCK PRESENTS was part of television the format was stories that were told in half an hour episodes. Later the episodes were expanded to full hour episodes. But only once did the show try to do this format: a three part retelling of the story, which was based on a play by Alec Coppel (who did the novel for MR. DENNING DRIVES NORTH and worked on the screenplay for VERTIGO). Coppel's play had (by 1957) been twice telecast in Great Britain, once in the late 1930s and once in 1947. But given the 30 minute episodes (actually more like 24 minutes due to commercial interruptions) there were three half-hour episodes that were made for the series. It was never repeated, possibly because it required a degree of exposition of the previous episodes before the next one could be shown.

Count Victor Mattoni (Anthony Dawson) is found shot in the head by a maid (Patricia Hitchcock - Hitch's daughter) in his London flat. The case is being handled by Inspector Davidson (John Williams) assisted by Detective Raines, a new man at the Yard (Charles Davis). In the course of the investigation Davidson constantly finds Raines an ironic counterpoint due to what he has to what they both discover, and Raines honest (perhaps too honest) reaction to the evidence or statements.

For soon they are deluged by statements. It seems that Mattoni was a bad gentleman, and he may have had more enemies than a man should. For instance, Viscount Storrington (Alan Napier) hated Mattoni for his treatment of his daughter, whom the Count has married. There is a child by the marriage. The Count wants custody of the child, and has threatened to take his bitter wife to court for a fight for the custody, unless she agrees to return to him. Then there is Bernard Froy, a wealthy American sportsman, who is in love with Countess Mattoni, and has written him a threatening note (which Mattoni is using for some blackmail) and now wants to get the letter back. Then there is Mullett (Melville Cooper) who works in the hotel, and whom Inspector Davidson claims that he seems to recall having seen before. Cooper cannot place Froy in the hotel, but he can place Storrington there.

The secret of the play is that several of the characters confess to the murder of the ogre Count. Davidson and Raines have to sort it out, in the wake of a fourth confession. In the end of Part III they have an answer, but they realize it is not an easy answer for the law to reach justice here as in a normal case.

The performances were all good, especially Williams again as a Scotland Yard Inspector. A young Rosemary Harris as another person who is in the ill-fated residential hotel rounds out the cast of this amusing play-let.
29 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
It can't have been one of us, Inspector!
lucyrfisher17 November 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Except that everybody involved seems to keen to pin the blame on themselves.

Nice to see Pat Hitchcock as a Cockney maid - she screams, but at least she doesn't drop the tea tray. John Williams gives his puzzled Inspector from Dial M for Murder, and Anthony Dawson reprises his seedy villain - this time an Italian count.

Proceedings are spun out over three episodes by Hitchcock breathlessly summarising previous sections.

Several people confess, all claiming that "We struggled for the gun - it went off - it was an accident!" This doesn't fit the appearance of the corpse, with a neat hole in his temple. Nor does it fit the discovery of the cartridge in the adjoining flat. Couldn't forensics tell from the wound how far away the assailant was?

All the self-confessed killers claim they shifted the body to the armchair where it was found, with realistic re-enactments. It's really not easy to manhandle a body. Wouldn't his clothes be all rumpled after this treatment? And they weren't.

The ending is as usual a bit abrupt, and left to our imaginations.

I am enjoying catching up with this series, and relishing Hitch's witty intros and outros.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
IF YOU KILLED THE COUNT, PLEASE TAKE A NUMBER!
tcchelsey13 September 2023
I agree with the last reviewer as this three part mystery was sort of an "experiment" done by Hitchcock, a broad continuation of a story, which obviously was later streamlined in his one hour tv show years later.

If you are willing to wait and watch all three parts, which are generally aired on separate nights, it's worth your time. If you miss an episode, however, you have some catching up to do. That said, the actor who was born to play diplomats and British detectives, John Williams, is front row and center here as inspector Davidson, who tackles one of the most baffling cases of his career.

Who killed Count Mattoni, your average, egotiscal, manipulative man of means by no means. In short, EVERYONE hated this guy!

Now it gets complicated, and rather clever as the first rule of mystery writing is broken here. You have as many as three people confessing to the crime who are actually proud of what they did or didn't do? How can that be? A particuarly smooth job of writing on the part of Francis Cockrell, who wrote a total of 18 episodes for his boss, Alfred Hithcock, who obviously enjoyed his work. Of course, to all of us kids back in the day, Francis was our hero, writer for BATMAN.

Sit back and try to figure this one out. It's not easy, but at times amusing.

John Williams, a distinguished stage actor for many years, appeared in three of Hitch's films, the best of the lot playing the dogged police inspector in DIAL M FOR MURDER, starring Ray Milland. He was outstanding. If you are a good movie buff, you may recall he repeated a very similar role in the Doris Day thriller MIDNIGHT LACE (1960). And I often wonder how that movie would have developed had Hitch tackled it.

Also in the cast in Alan Napier, best known as Alfred the butler on BATMAN, and veteran Melville Cooper, usually as pompous types, and a perfect fit here. Hitch's daughter, Pat, plays the maid who discovers the count's dead body. Pat, having some roles in her father's tv show and movies, was actually a very good actress in her own right. Watch her in STRANGERS ON A TRAIN.

This is very good, again provided you have the patience to watch each separate episode. That could be a plus or minus for devout fans.

SEASON 2 EPISODES 25, 26 and 27 remastered Universal dvd box set. 2006.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
1 Episode's Worth of Story in 3 Episode's Worth of Time
pnolname20 March 2024
3 people confess to 1 murder and we learn why by the end of the last episode; I had already guessed it before the end of episode 1. Most of 90 minutes of this triplet consisted of the nearly futile combing over of various mundane details of the crime. Between the old-fashioned British accents and the somewhat distorted soundtrack (this was MeTV, but I suspect the other services get their content from the same old prints), it took a lot of concentration to make sense of the dialog, but most of what was discussed was just incidental to the real story. The story had potential, but by the end I was bored and happy only to see an ending I had already guessed. If this had been packed into an hour or a half-hour, it might have been worth watching.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed