User Reviews

Roald Dahl introduces this story by stating " This is a story about those school days of mine, and for once, I have not made anything up. It's all true". Well, I wouldn't know how true, but it does have a pretty good aura of credibility to it.

Right out of the gate I was amused and certainly surprised to see an overhead sign directing passengers at a train station on the 'Way Out'. That was the title of a very short lived at one season of horror based stories also hosted by and based on the works of Roald Dahl. It aired in 1961 and was done in black and white, with only a handful of episodes available to my knowledge.

The other thing that made me sit up and take notice was that flashback scene in which Mr. Perkins the father (John Mills) dropped off son William (Paul Spurrier) at the Saint Wilfred's School. Upon saying good bye, Mr. Perkins states to young William "Now keep your pecker up!" Talk about a head scratcher there for early 1980's television!

As for the story itself, there's only the hint of dubious possibility at the end after all was said and done regarding schoolboy Perkins' association with the notorious Bruce Foxley (Jonathan Scott-Taylor). If you're like me, you'll come to the expected conclusion that the gentleman calling himself Jocelyn Fortescue (Anthony Steel) is really the presumed villain Foxley. In that regard, the story could have it both ways at the expense of the viewer, without resorting to the typical irony that often comes with these Tales of the Unexpected.

Tales of the Unexpected: Galloping Foxley starts like any other for businessman William Perkins (Sir John Mills) who has been catching the 8:12 train to the city 5 days a week for the past 36 years & sitting in the same seat next to the same people for that time. However he gets a shock when he discovers that someone (Anthony Steel) has had the nerve to stand in his place on the station platform & not only that but this absolute scoundrel actually has the temerity to sit in his seat, William is understandably distraught especially as this continues over the next few days until William reclaims his seat & recognises the stranger from his schooldays which brings back terrible memories...

This Tales of the Unexpected story was episode 3 from season 2 that originally aired in the UK during March 1980, the first of three Tales of the Unexpected episodes to be directed by Claude Whatham I'm not really sure who this is meant to appeal to & in the end I decided it wasn't me. The story by Roald Dahl was dramatised by Robin Chapman & in his filmed introduction Dahl states that this story is true which is probably why it's not very good. I simply don't get the point of Galloping Foxley or who it's meant to appeal to, it has no supernatural or horror elements, it has no crime or thriller elements either & most Tales of the Unexpected episodes fit into one of those camps so while this may be a personal story for Dahl that doesn't automatically make it any good & I'm also thinking if this is true where is Dahl in this? I mean he didn't become a businessman & we all know he became a successful writer so the events of this story couldn't have happened to him without him making some of it up & in his introduction he says he didn't so that's a bit of a contradiction if you follow what I mean. For me this is a pretty weak 30 minutes of TV that I'm struggling to find anything positive to say about. Average at best & since it's short it won't waste much of your time although I'm being kind by saying that.

This one looks alright & is well made although those ancient trains really date it as do the stereotypical English businessman in a suit & bowler hat carrying an umbrella & suitcase which it presents, I live in the UK & believe me businessmen don't walk around wearing stuff like that anymore. The acting is good & again there's an impressive British cast here not least the late Sir John Mills.

Galloping Foxley didn't work for me & is a pretty pointless story that has no real twist & is utterly forgettable. Not recommended, there are better stories out there.

In its short-story form, Galloping Foxley is an excellent and typically horrifying tale of British public-school abuses and ritual humiliation. I have always loved Dahl's most sinister and dark work and this story is darkened further by the clear note of autobiography evident within it.

As an episode of "Tales Of The Unexpected" it shines even brighter. Dahl opens the episode with his usual address to the audience. He tells us that "every single word of the following tale is perfectly true" - ramming home the fact that this is an autobiographical venture. The story concerns a typically-British businessman, William Perkins, who loves the routine of his life. One day, turning up as usual at the railway station for his journey to work, he finds that a rather obnoxious-looking man has taken his place first on the platform and then in his usual carriage.

Breaking the silent code of the commuter, the new traveller addresses our man Perkins and engages him in uncomfortable conversation. These privations go on for several days until Perkins finally recognises the man as Bruce Foxley, the older boy from his school who had brutally beaten and abused him during his childhood. Foxley seems not to have recognisers Perkins.

Perkins determines to expose Foxley in front of the other commuters and proceeds to do so with relish, waiting until the train is nearly at its destination.. And at this point the written and televisual versions diverge.. I feel that the written story has a weaker ending than the TV version. In the original, the supposed bully Foxley simply denies that he is Foxley and gives his real name and old school - there the tale ends. In the TV version the denial is made and then we see the other embarrassed commuters leave the carriage. 'Foxley' addresses Perkins in the empty carriage whilst holding his distinctive cane over his shoulder in the manner we have previously seen earlier in the school-time flashbacks. This implies that the new man is indeed Foxley whilst leaving us in enough doubt not to be sure of it. A rather clever improvement, I thought. It gives subtlety to the ending and affords the possibility that the man is really Foxley and that he has once again and after all of these years, humiliated poor Perkins.

Middle aged and coventional, John Mills meets a new commuter, Anthony Steel, on his morning train whom he recognises as a boy, Foxley, who made his school life a misery many years before. Incensed by that and also by the man's general demeanour he finally cracks a few days later and tries to expose his old enemy to the others in the carriage for the brute which he believes him to be. To his anger the man simply claims to have a different name and to have gone to a different school (Eton).

That's it, really, and I fail to understand the praise heaped on the story by others. Was Mills simply mistaken or was the man lying? And where was the 'unexpected element?

William Perkins a man of absolute routine and good form becomes convinced that the upstart now commuting on the train, who's taken his seat, his place and upset the routine is in fact 'Galloping Foley,' a boy who's hand he suffered by in his days at Public School. Perkins gets himself extremely worked up, and in an almost frenzy, he opts to challenge the commuter.

Dahl announces in his introduction that every word of this story was historical, the events had actually happened to him, and that the thought of his School days filled him with dread. I wonder.

This episode evokes thoughts of a bygone British era, Public School, beatings, a system where background, class, wealth etc impacted hugely on an individual's life.

I really like this episode, very unique story, so different to ever other episode in the show's history, John Mills is just wonderful in the role, you can see the change in his character, the build up, and the huge deflation, he's wonderful. 8/10

In my view one of the most gripping tales by RD probably because as he says, it is based on facts, his painful experience in his youth.

This episode goes swimmingly until the last two minutes. It has the solid acting by Mills and the surprising appearance of the young actor who played Damien the devil boy in Omen II who I thought was American, but was completely ruined at the end, one of the best ending of RD tales, by adding unnecessary extra lines.

In the story, hoping to take the former bully by surprise and see his reaction, the Mills character greets him, only saying his name and school name, and extends his hand. To which, the former bully, or Mills character thought he was, equally tersely answers by name and the school name, Eton, leaving the reader in no doubt about what happened.

In this dramatisation, before introducing himself, Mills character starts to harangue at length how this man made his school days miserable, which make viewers, me at least, think, ''hang on, if you do that, the dude would simply lie and say 'I don't know what you are talking about. I am not who you think I am'' Mr Mills simply believes the dude's denial and looks at camera devastated.

Incidentally, one of my best friends at uni went to Repton, the bullying rife school in question. In his days in the early 1990s, this system, called fagging, of younger pupils serve older pupils persisted.-I don;t know now- although whipping and any physical bullying had been long banned. He said ''yea I had one - the junior pupil who is, in he drama, a ''slave'' to his ''master'' senior student- when I was in the final grade but I didn't want to tell him what to do. I didn;t give him jobs. And I could tell that the young chap was looking down on me, not holding me in high regard, because I am not tough enough to boss him round, tell him what to do what not to do''

Human relationships are never simple. Oh Humanity. But back to my point. This dramatisation is flawed.

Roald Dahl was always open how one of his former headmaster was a brute who loved to use the cane on the school kids.

The headmaster went on to become the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Dahl mentions that even after all these years he is still affected by the harsh beatings when he sits on a hard chair for too long.

Galloping Foxley was a public school prefect who made life a misery for young Perkins.

Many years later the elderly William Perkins (John Mills) sees Foxley on his regular train journey. It stirs Perkins horrid memories of his schooldays.

Unfortunately the twist was weak here. When challenged Foxley claims mistaken identity.

This review was written during the period of mourning for Queen Elizabeth II. The footage of the Queen being crowned during her coronation in 1953 was Dahl's old headmaster. He was the Archbishop of Canterbury at the time.

Dahl was always angry that such a brute was allowed to crown the Queen or reach such an elevated position in the church.

This episode featured alongside 'Georgy Porgy' on Sky Arts. Both are about men deeply affected & damaged by childhood trauma. Interestingly, they feature an actor/actress playing dual roles, one in the past and one in the present. The child & adolescent actors also excel in their roles of oppressor & victim.

This is an uncomfortable watch as it is about the (profound) sadism & cruelty of life at boarding school and, as other reviewers mention, Dahl admits that much of it is based on his own experience at public school.

Like 'Georgy, Porgy', this episode deftly weaves between past & present through flashback & the voice-over of William Perkins (John Mills), a middle-aged, middle-brow commuter who finds his usual, clockwork routine turned upside down by the arrival of a new upstart commuter.

Gradually, Perkins becomes convinced that the man is Foxley, the prefect who victimized him at school as a boy.

John Mills also plays the role of Perkins' father, who unwittingly sets in motion the events of the story after he reprimands Foxley at the beginning of the episode. Foxley, in turn, begins to pursue a remorseless campaign of bullying against the son out of spite.

The ending of the televised adaptation is more ambivalent than the one in the original short story (where Perkins only talks to the man to ask him his name): here, the object of Perkins' righteous indignation sidesteps any showdown by informing him that he actually went to another school, & that it is a case of mistaken identity.

But was Perkins mistaken? Or has he been forced to suffer one final humiliation at the hands of his former nemesis, with the rest of the train carriage making a swift exit in embarrassment (the boys in the dormitory), leaving him once again shame-faced, and denied the recompense that he thought was finally his.

There are enough clues to make us think that the stranger in the train was Perkins' childhood tormentor. Earlier in the episode, the commuter subtly mocks Perkins by comparing his stern manner to a former officer of his in the Army. And what was Foxley wearing on one occasion when he thrashed Perkins as a boy? An OTC/cadets uniform.

There are other tantalizing clues: Foxley's wavy hair, now grey, hanging over the right side of his face; his distinctive attire; his sang-froid under pressure; and perhaps most obvious of all, the cane he used to beat his childhood victim with, and how he still carries it in the same manner over his shoulder.

(Browsing stills from the episode, Perkins pere is smoking a cigar when he first accosts Foxley outside the school. The mysterious stranger provokes Perkins' ire when he lights up a cigar in the railway carriage).