Night Stalker

Okay. I understand that Chris Carter and his *The X-Files* crew were inspired by the original *Kolchak: The Night Stalker* TV movies and series. I understand that Frank Spotnitz, the head writer for the 2005 *Night Stalker*, was a member of Carter's X-Files crew. I also understand that Darren McGavin is in his 80s and ailing, and even if he were in perfect health he'd be too old to reprise the role of Carl Kolchak.

I'm a pushing-50 baby boomer who watched the original Kolchak movies on ABC's Movie of the Week when I was in high school and watched the one season of *Kolchak: The Night Stalker* when I was in college. I'll even point out that I grew up watching reruns of George Reeves in *The Adventures of Superman*, and never had a problem accepting Jeff East, Christopher Reeve, Dean Cain and now Tom Welling taking over the role of Clark Kent/Superman in his various subsequent incarnations. I wish I could say the same for Stuart Townsend's incarnation of Carl Kolchak, but I can't.

Inspiration and imitation do NOT equal replication. Kolchak may have inspired *The X-Files*, even to the point that Chris Carter and Frank Spotnitz may have created a guest character for Darren McGavin in that show in tribute, but Spotnitz missed the mark completely on what Carl Kolchak was about. Kolchak was an irreverent, sarcastic and wisecracking rogue who could get knocked down but never out, who always got back up laughing, still irreverent and sarcastic and ready to keep swinging. Humor and irreverence were the lifeblood of the original Carl Kolchak, and Spotnitz sucked it out of this incarnation of Kolchak as thoroughly as Janos Skorzeny, Dracula, Nosferatu, Lestat or any other vampire who appeared on the big or small screen.

Many are touting *Night Stalker* as "the new X-Files," and I can't disagree with that; Stuart Townsend's Kolchak doesn't resemble Darren McGavin's original Kolchak so much as he does Fox Mulder-- if Mulder were taken off Prozac. It's obvious that the Generation Xers (pun definitely intended) like their TV shows about the supernatural dark, depressed and humorless; this show may be the new X-Files, but don't try to pass it off as the new *Kolchak: The Night Stalker*!

Somebody stake this vampire before it hurts anyone!

I see a lot of raves, people pumping the "new" Night Stalker on this site. I can't imagine why, other than they work for the production company or are related to the actors. Because this thing is terrible. And I don't want to hear from people angry about its dismal comparison to the original series. If the makers of the show didn't want a comparison, they shouldn't have called it Night Stalker and named its leading character Carl Kolchak. (And, by the way, I'm not against all contemporary remakes. The "new" Battlestar Galactica is a wonderful show, light years ahead of its infantile predecessor.)

Aside from its failure as a true descendant of the original series (that honor goes to this season's WB series, Supernatural), Night Stalker is a clunker because of its too loose story lines, its cast members who look like fashionistas, and its failure to come to grips with an interesting Carl. This one is a moody adolescent. Not too surprising, since the major networks seem intent on catering to 19 year-old nitwits whose notion of deep seated drama comes from watching anime. I could care less what happens to this Carl, the useless Perri Reed, and the bookend of the overly obvious gender bending of names, Jain (the fact that the little name game is what passes for humor in this series makes the effort even more pathetic). In fact, while I made it through the pilot episode, I only lasted 35 minutes into the second episode before I had had enough. Cross this one off the list. It deserves to die.

Let's forget for a moment that this pathetic excuse for a television show (which would fittingly describe 99% of what's on TV at this time - have you watched "The War at Home" lately?) is a remake of a cult classic of television, and judge it by itself.

It still sucks.

This show is the usual slickly shot, professionally made crap. It's a pile of rotting blubber wrapped in a fancy package. The writing sucks, the acting sucks. Gabrielle Union once again proves herself to be excellent at playing the cheerleader from BRING IT ON. Maybe add another character to your portfolio, Gabrielle? Every time the main character (was this guy just some underwear model before this show?) said his name was "Carl Kolchack," I shuddered. This show is an insult to the makers of the original (though I did see Dan Curtis listed as an Executive Producer; I hope he simply allowed them to use his name and didn't actually have any involvement in this atrocity).

I remember when movies and TV cast actors like Darren McGavin, Elliot Gould, George Segal, Shelly Winters, Richard Roundtree, Warren Oates, Jill Clayburgh... They were cast because they could ACT. Not because they were impossibly good-looking. They fit the character.

Now, the main criteria is that actors be as generically attractive as humanly possible, and their acting ability (or lack thereof) seems to be the last thing considered. I blame the audience as much as the filmmakers for this repugnant trend. Anyone who doesn't think that American audiences are becoming more and more superficial as each decade passes should take a look at the new NIGHT STALKER. There's your proof.

When the show was first announced it sounded promising, mostly because producer Frank Spotnitz was a veteran of "The X Files"...and as we all know, several "X Files" veterans were big fans of the original "Night Stalker" movies and series.

Now, whenever a cultural icon is reinvented for a new era, one always expects a few changes. I don't think we were expecting this many.

Carl Kolchak, as you may recall, was a down-on-his-luck loner, a middle-aged, average-looking has-been reporter whose primary positive qualities were his investigative skills, his tenacity and his flair for mocking authority. He had a part buddy/ part adversarial (mostly the latter) relationship with his boss, Tony Vincenzo. The adversarial part of their relationship came to a head when Kolchak came upon the story that first piqued his interest in the supernatural: a killer who appeared to be an actual vampire. The police, not wanting to look stupid, were not about to admit that there really might be things that go bump in the night running around their city...and Vincenzo (being not exactly akin to Ben Bradlee) was only too happy to quash the story in order to keep the authorities happy. This, of course, rubbed Kolchak the wrong way. Kolchak was dedicated to getting the truth out, no matter what.

Well, that brings us to the new Kolchak.

In ABC's latest incarnation, Kolchak is changed almost beyond recognition. Now he is young, good-looking and morose. He no longer seems to have arguments with Vincenzo. Most surprisingly, perhaps...he was married. His wife was killed by one of these bumpy-night-things, and now he pursues stories about them. Instead of operating alone, he's joined by his partner Peri and staff photographer Jain.

This makes for an awfully weird feel. Watching a young, handsome Kolchak investigate a story with his capable partner Peri and wide-eyed photographer Jain, you get the feeling you're actually in Metropolis with Clark, Lois and Jimmy.

Those changes alone are enough to alienate a number of the "Night Stalker" faithful. But there's an underlying feeling, a style, that's also very different from the original books, movies and series.

Whereas the "old" Kolchak used to narrate events in a snappy, factual way, Spotnitz has fallen back into his "X Files" habit of just using opening and closing narration which, even then, is more on the philosophical than factual side. It's a change that removes a considerable amount of the pacing and realism from the show. And if you're looking for the old Kolchak who had a smart mouth and was ever quick with a quip...forget it. He's not here. This Kolchak is more moody than mouthy.

Even the music is languid. In the original movies, the score was jazzy yet kind of morbid, a style that fit the stories to a T. Here, you'll find music more like what you'd hear on...well, "The X Files".

Then there's the Vincenzo thing. "Old" Kolchak had to battle not only the authorities but his boss. This one is clearly Kolchak's pal, which removes half the conflict from the show. Believe it or not, there are none of those wonderful Kolchak-Vincenzo screaming matches here. Instead, we're offered an FBI agent who wants to pin the death of Kolchak's wife on Kolchak himself. Shades of The Fugitive. (Ironically, the agent's name is Fain. Bernie Fain was an FBI agent buddy of Kolchak's in the original novel.)

One truly bizarre feature of the show: this Kolchak drives a newish yellow Mustang and lives in a penthouse suite with a built-in swimming pool. Give me a break!

The true test of whether this is a worthy "Night Stalker" or not is...if you removed the title from the show, and changed the names of the characters to Smith and Jones...would anybody recognize it? Chances are, beyond the fact that the stories are supernatural and the hero works at a newspaper, no, you would not. Kolchak no longer resembles Kolchak, either figuratively or literally.

The one bright spot in the show was a digitally-inserted "in-joke" in which Darren McGavin, replete with seersucker suit and straw hat, was inserted into the foreground of a shot of the newsroom. Unfortunately, it served only to remind the viewer of the big difference between the original Kolchak and Spotnitz's Kolchak.

And finally -- without giving away spoilers -- there's the puzzling shot of Kolchak's hand at the end of the episode which ties in with the murder of his wife. That was just weird.

The fault does not all lie with Frank Spotnitz. In a TV Guide interview, he stated that the "mission" aspect of the show -- finding the killer of Kolchak's wife -- was inserted at the insistence of the suits at ABC, who felt Kolchak needed a stronger motivation for going after ghoulies and ghosties. Nevertheless, this "Night Stalker" does not have the jazzy music, the narration, the pacing or the comic patter -- in other words, the feel -- of the original. It looks more like "The X Files" than "The Night Stalker".

Oh well. It's not a bad show. It just should've been much, much better.

When I was a kid, the original show bearing this name was awesome and one of my all time favorites. Enough so that I bought the Series on DVD when it became available. This show is virtually nothing like the original. While disappointing, it is not as terrible as some reviews have made it out to be. It is just...different. I discovered it on YouTube and have actually enjoyed watching it. The stories are interesting and hold your attention. The characters are fine so long as you don't try comparing them to their namesakes from the '70s. It would've been nice to see how another season would've turned out. Particularly if you consider some of the real dreck that was on network teevee back then...