Pack of Lies

Hugh Whitemore is listed as the author of the teleplay of PACK OF LIES. It would be more accurate to say he co-wrote it. He wrote the original TV play that was then the basis of the stage play the was a success in London. It was less successful when it played New York and I saw it. He was signed to write the adaptation for HALLMARK. He delivered a draft. For some reason he decided to leave the project and I was brought in to do a rewrite. I made some substantial changes. I gather these annoyed him. He had the right to sign the script. I was told he disliked what I did so much he didn't want to be associated with it, so he signed his pseudonym, Ralph Gallup. I was billed as creative consultant.

The show was successful. "Ralph Gallup" was nominated for an Emmy, as were the show and Ellen Burstyn. (I watched the Emmys in my living room with a bowl of popcorn on my lap.) It was also part of the basis for HALLMARK's Peabody Award that year. If the credit were accurate, Whitemore would certainly have first position. I wouldn't make comment except that, of everything I've worked on for television (pilots, episodes, assignments, sitcoms, TV movies, soaps), this was my favorite project, and I remain pleased with my part in it.

I am one of Whitemore's fans, by the way.

The story of this movie is classical Hitchcock stuff. It tells about fear, suspicion, innocence, betrayed trust and delivers a considerable amount of suspense. It is based on real events and is basically a movie about the invasion of privacy and its devastating effects – thanks to the excellent performances of all the actors a rewarding experience, but one that left me feeling sad and uncomfortable.

The question of loyalty looms large over the whole situation. So, your neighbors who happen to be your best friends, are suspected of being spies. But those who want you to believe that are very secretive about it, giving away only shreds of information, leaving you more or less in the dark. Is the neighbors' friendship a total fake, merely a tactical gimmick? Are they ignorant about all that is going on and maybe just victims? You can't talk about it with your friends - which basically is what friends are for - you must lie to them, faking the "usual ignorance". No wonder that the concerned family get to the brink of insanity, especially because - as if this were not enough - they have to deal with permanent house-guests who more or less take over the dwelling, spying on the neighborhood for some not really clear reason – creating an all around surreal situation. Remains the question: Whom can you trust? You have to trust somebody.

It does this movie great credit that it distributes the pack of lies evenly, not demonizing anybody. There is nothing „bad" about the neighbors who are revealed in the end as hardboiled spies and did what they did because of their political convictions. They are perfectly civil and likable, up to their arrest which comes through as a general defeat for everybody concerned in the immediate surroundings. The effects on the family are truly devastating, and that is hard to take – even if in all probability there wouldn't have been more sensible ways to deal with the situation successfully. So probably they belong to the anonymous victims of the Cold War to whom, as far as I know, nobody ever erected a monument.

The only thing I regret about Pack of Lies is the stylistic approach, which is flat and undramatic and makes it almost a documentary in appearance. In my opinion, the surrealistic elements of the story and the moral turmoils the family has to go through would have justified a slightly more "cinematic" approach to the issue. After all, the whole situation is really far from normal. Or so I hope.

Television adaptation of Hugh Whitemore's play about an older British couple in a suburb of London circa 1961 learning from the police that their best friends of three years--a Canadian couple who live across the road--may be involved with a notorious Russian spy. Not-bad "Hallmark Hall of Fame" production is a bare-bones dramatic presentation coasting on the performances of its cast, with the emphasis on Ellen Burstyn as the otherwise-friendless housewife who feels betrayed by chatty, lively neighbor Teri Garr. Garr is working seriously here, but there's too many close-ups of her looking puzzled, asking the same redundant questions; Burstyn fares a bit better, even if her accent comes and goes (which can be overlooked). Still, Ellen's character deteriorates under the pressure of falsehood far too soon (everyone, at some point, becomes a liar in this teleplay--a gimmick that is heightened in the dialogue but, thankfully, not underscored too strenuously). The downbeat conclusion--and the two useless melodramatic tags--is unsatisfying, as is Alan Bates' role (and over-the-top performance) as a British agent. Worth-seeing for the intriguing first-half, but the hysteria which follows feels canned.

The perspective from rating this film is based on the knowledge that it is largely a true story. Initially, the close friends were generally happy and contented in their suburban neighborhood. This tranquility was destroyed by the government surveillance program using neighbor against neighbor. This program that was forced on a law-abiding family probably wouldn't be allowed in many countries at present. Legal protections would probably be available to protect innocent citizens. Alternative methods should have been employed. But it has to be viewed quite differently 60 years ago near the height of the Cold War. Intrusion issue aside; the story was suspenseful and the acting, especially from Burstyn and Garr, was excellent. That said, it difficult to watch the build up to the emotional collapse. The irony of betrayal left a very bitter taste in one's mouth.

Interesting well made drama with brilliant performances from Alan Bates and Ellen Burstyn and a very good one from Terri Garr. Well worth watching James Welch Henderson, Arkansas 3/28/2021.