Columbo: Strange Bedfellows

Columbo Peter FalkAt last, an episode of Columbo that follows the usual format: we are shown the motive and then the murder, and then Columbo shows up and starts pestering the murderer, figuring out little clues that all add up to a bigger picture. Columbo actually sums up the way this show should always work, in a nutshell, when he says, “these little things, ashes, tiny mice, they lead you to the big things.” It seems like it has been forever since we had such a textbook approach to a Columbo episode. There’s just one problem. If you ever assumed Columbo has strong moral principles, this is the moment he throws them all away.

The Motive

Graham McVeigh is a wealthy horse breeder, but he has a problem. His brother Teddy is an idiot who owes a dangerous man with local mafia connections $200,000 in gambling debts. Graham has had enough.

The Murder(s)

Graham tricks his brother into trying to clear his debts by giving his debtor, restaurateur Bruno Romano, a dead cert tip on a horse. Graham then dopes the horse to make sure Teddy is now in a world of trouble. He then tricks Teddy into a roadside meeting, where he shoots him, and frames Romano for the murder.

The really clever bit is the second murder. Graham offers to settle Teddy’s debts, kills Romano when he arrives at his home, plants the murder weapon that he used to kill Teddy on Romano, and then phones the police. It looks for all the world like Romano killed Teddy, tried to kill Graham, and then Graham shot dead the murderous intruder in self-defence.

The Mistakes

Lots of clumsy little ones that add up only to circumstantial evidence. Graham smoked in Teddy’s car, removed the butts but left the ash, which is matched to Graham’s brand of cigarettes. Graham attempted to throw extra suspicion on Romano by releasing a mouse in his restaurant to distract him while he made a call from there to Teddy, establishing a link between the two. There are all kinds of problems with this. When he was in the restaurant, Graham was in disguise, but he let somebody see his lighter and he foolishly ordered his usual drink. Columbo eventually scrabbles around in the dumpster to find the dead mouse (ewww… and he even touches his face contemplatively with the same hand he just used to touch the tail), but the mouse is native to the mountainous region of Graham’s ranch and isn’t found in LA. Romano also had a cast iron alibi for the time of the murder of Teddy. But the mistake that is his downfall and also his saving grace is hiding Romano’s real gun in the earth under a small ornamental fountain in his own garden.

Columbo

I mentioned last week how weird it was to see Columbo getting beaten up, and it seemed so wrong for the show, but here we are again in the very next episode, with Columbo being violently treated, bundled into a car and kidnapped by the mob, and later attacked by a couple of henchmen… or so it seems.

Just One More Thing

Columbo’s ruses to gain evidence are becoming more and more transparent, to the point where the writers are having to make the killer an absolute fool. “Could I bum a cigarette”, indeed. But this whole episode relies on Graham doing lots of silly things, without which he would have actually had something close to the perfect crime.

The Verdict

Let’s start by acknowledging that this is the best episode in a long time, whatever you think about Columbo’s dodgy tactics. It’s gripping to watch, there are some great acting performances, it follows the classic Columbo format, and if you leave aside the silly mistakes then it’s actually a really clever crime, particularly the way the second murder frames the red herring suspect. But Columbo’s tactics are really dodgy. This is an example of an episode that has a trap being sprung on the murderer rather than a gotcha moment that relies on the revelation of some evidence. They are always going to be the less satisfying option, but there have been some effective ones, although they almost always rely on Columbo acting in a way that is not necessarily strictly ethical: planting evidence, risking somebody’s life, manipulating people, creating false evidence, entrapment; these are all familiar tactics, most of which we have seen him employ on more than one occasion. But this is a giant leap further into the moral abyss, with Columbo working with a mafia boss who makes it perfectly clear that he will kill Graham if Columbo doesn’t co-operate. Worst still, when the ruse is revealed to the viewers, Columbo seems proud of himself rather than regretful. His refusal to share a drink with his co-conspirator at the end goes some way towards ameliorating the problem, but this is still a man who is willing to get a confession by having the killer beaten up by undercover police officers, and then threatened with execution at the hands of the mob. It’s not even great writing, because the confession isn’t enough and Columbo needs the murderer to provide evidence, with said evidence given in the form of the gun under the fountain, but (a) Graham had no reason to implicate himself like that in the first place – why not just dispose of the gun somewhere it couldn’t easily be found, and (b) the only reason for him to act so irrationally is so the writer can provide him with the means to reveal that evidence and save his life.

The way it’s written and acted, we are clearly supposed to be delighted with the cleverness of Columbo working with Vincenzo Fortelli, and root for the two of them. We are basically invited to enjoy the sight of a double murderer getting his comeuppance by being terrified to the point of confession, but the sight of Columbo working so closely with a mafia boss is as hard to stomach as the bad clams that made him unwell at the start of the episode. The mafia are shown to be more powerful than the police, beyond the reach of the law, and Columbo seems quite accepting of that status quo. When Fortelli tells him about the crimes in his past, does Columbo show any interest in bringing that killer to justice? Of course not. And that’s depressing, because Columbo has always been somebody who beats those kinds of dangerous odds and lets nothing get in the way of his pursuit of justice. He has faced off against hugely powerful enemies who threatened his career and his life, but this particular brand of monster is instead accepted and almost celebrated. He gets the job done, but do the ends justify the means? This was the moment that Columbo came face to face with organised crime, gave it the thumbs up, and walked away.   RP

Read next in the Junkyard… Columbo: A Trace of Murder

About Roger Pocock

Co-writer on junkyard.blog. Author of windowsintohistory.wordpress.com. Editor of frontiersmenhistorian.info
This entry was posted in Reviews, Television and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Columbo: Strange Bedfellows

  1. James McGrail says:

    This, in my opinion, is the worst Columbo ever made. Where do I start? The paint-by-number script, the abysmal performances of George Wendt and Rod Steiger, the implausible way Columbo catches the killer by cooperating with the Mob. Perhaps they should stayed with adapting Ed McBain stories. They didn’t fit Columbo, but at least the stories were intriguing in their own right.
    This is also an example of why the revival series is inferior to the 70s version. The 70s version had great guest killers, well-written scripts, and at 90 minutes, less padding that slows the story down. Even if it was weak episode, it doesn’t drag it out for two hours. The 70s episodes had there turkeys, like Last Salute to the Commadore, but that entry was brilliant compared to Strange Bedfellows.

    Liked by 2 people

    • scifimike70 says:

      Definitely my least favorite gotcha in Columbo. With nothing more than the obvious appeal of the special guest stars like George Wendt and Rod Steiger matching Peter Falk, it’s sad but true that Columbo near its end is at its weakest. There may be a few episodes left and we’re entitled to like or dislike them for whatever reasons. But it can take an episode like this one to make me prefer to nostalgically revisit the old days of my favorite shows. The 90s were a decade better suited for new stuff on TV. Even the Star Trek shows considerably suffered to some extent because of that. But Columbo still had some great moments and certainly with Faye Dunaway and the returns of Patrick McGoohan. Thank you, RP, for your review.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Mike Doran says:

    I am trying have become unintelligible to comment on this post, but your instructions have become unintelligible.
    Please advise.

    Like

    • Mike Doran says:

      As the above comment shows, your instructions are incomprehensible to the human mind.
      Too Bad – I had a really good one here …

      Like

      • Roger Pocock says:

        I’m sorry to say I have no idea what you are referring to with these two comments. If it is the way the wordpress system handles the submission of comments, unfortunately we have no control over any of that.

        Like

  3. Mike Doran says:

    TRYING AGAIN:
    I would direct your attention to Peter S. Fischer’s memoir, Me And Murder, She Wrote, in which he gives his account of exactly what went wrong with “Strange Bedfellows”.
    … and what led him to put his “red-flag” pseudonym ‘Lawrence Vail’ on the finished product (as he’d done once before).
    Briefly, Fischer maintains that Peter Falk and his cronies had such control over Columbo at that point that the script got rewritten to the point of incomprehensibility; plot points got lost in transit, and trying to get around the industrial-strength miscasting of George Wendt as the Villain (Fischer wanted James Woods or James Spader) sent the whole show off the rails from go.
    Fischer makes his case far better than I could – this turned out to be the last Columbo he’d ever write, and years after the fact, he was still rankled by the whole thing.
    Anyway, there it is … now, the rest of you can have at it.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Roger Pocock says:

      I found “Shooting Columbo” is the best source for behind the scenes information – it is an excellent book. However, I held off on reading anything like that until I had finished the process of rewatching everything and writing all my articles, as I feel there is far more value in reflecting the experience of a viewer who simply experiences what made it to the screen, rather than somebody who approaches each episode with pre-researched insider information. Contemporary viewers had no access to any of that. But it is great to see some of that information being discussed in the comments section and I am grateful for your comments.

      Liked by 1 person

    • scifimike70 says:

      James Spader as an adversary for Columbo would have been great. Such missed opportunities for all our favourite shows can so often encourage good discussions.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. epaddon says:

    Columbo’s chumminess with Steiger just put me off completely in this episode. Steiger should have been playing a guest killer that Columbo nabs.

    Liked by 2 people

    • scifimike70 says:

      It’s always interesting to look back on the guest stars like Rod Steiger, Vincent Price and Leslie Nielsen who could have played guest killers for Columbo and yet somehow didn’t. Steiger as a guest killer would have certainly been great.

      Liked by 1 person

      • epaddon says:

        Yeah, its even stranger that Nielsen appeared twice without being a killer. I always thought once he started doing “Naked Gun” movies the best way for him to have shown he could still do dramatic would have been to play a Columbo killer (The very last dramatic role he ever did before the first “Naked Gun” movie, he tries to kill Barbra Streisand in a movie called “Nuts”)

        Liked by 1 person

      • scifimike70 says:

        I remember him in Nuts. Quite an unsettling role and performance for Nielsen.

        Liked by 2 people

Leave a comment