Alfred Hitchcock Presents

Alfred Hitchcock Presents 466g13

1955
Alfred Hitchcock Presents
Watch on
Alfred Hitchcock Presents
Watch on

Alfred Hitchcock Presents 466g13

8.5 | TV-PG | en | Drama

A television anthology series hosted by Alfred Hitchcock featuring dramas, thrillers, and mysteries.

View More
Watch Now

7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
SEE MORE
SEE MORE
SEE MORE
SEE MORE
SEE MORE
SEE MORE
SEE MORE
SEE MORE
8.5 | TV-PG | en | Mystery | More Info
Released: 1955-10-02 | Released Producted By: Revue Studios , Shamley Productions Country: United States of America Budget: 0 Revenue: 0 Official Website:
info

A television anthology series hosted by Alfred Hitchcock featuring dramas, thrillers, and mysteries.

Genre

Mystery

Watch Online

Alfred Hitchcock Presents (1955) is now streaming with subscription on Prime Video

Cast

Alfred Hitchcock

Director

Joan Harrison

Producted By

Revue Studios , Shamley Productions

Alfred Hitchcock Presents Videos and Images 1i3n4x

View All
  • Top Credited Cast
  • |
  • Crew
Joan Harrison
Joan Harrison

Producer

Alfred Hitchcock
Norman Lloyd
Norman Lloyd

Producer

Alfred Hitchcock Presents Audience Reviews 5f5h32

Aedonerre I gave this film a 9 out of 10, because it was exactly what I expected it to be.
Bea Swanson This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.
Ava-Grace Willis Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.
Isbel A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.
inioi I back in the 80's when all my family and me all together around TV to see this gripping and fascinating TV show.Of course there are a lot of episodes, and not all has the same level or interest. But anyway, the series worth to see it because of the good plot, production, direction, acting, etc.Anything could happen in every episode. Drama, comedy, murder, thriller...always surprising. The black and white photography gives a "noir" touch in some episodes. All dressed with the always fun/enigmatic introduction by Alfred Hitchcock with that mystery piece of music.....the music of "the unexpected"
jc-osms I am a massive Hitchcock fan and would argue that his creative peak in features was in the mid-late 50's, ironically just at the time he commenced production of this short-form series bearing his imprimatur, even if he only had time to personally direct a handful of episodes. Of the first four episodes I've watched from series 1, I've been impressed by their coherence, consistency and diversity, for instance one was set in the wild west, a genre you can hardly imagine the Master covering in his own work. Snappily scripted, plotted and edited, these short programmes prefigure the likes of "Twilight Zone" in the 60's and "Tales Of The Unexpected" in the 70's. The production values are high as is the acting talent involved; famously this is how Hitch discovered Vera Miles, who was to feature in two of his features in the years ahead as well as a penchant for a low budget, black and white shoot which would result in a certain movie centring on a psychologically disturbed motel owner, the title of which escapes me. All the episodes benefit from acerbic intros and outros by the man himself, playing up to his curmudgeonly persona while the sinisterly jocular theme music still conjures up that famous pencil-profile image which he would fill over the titles. I think it's great that a top Hollywood director in his prime could make time to adapt so well to the TV market as Hitchcock did here. These programmes are fun, pithy and entertaining and still worth watching today.
dougdoepke 1950's television was pretty bland by almost any yardstick. That's not to say that certain series, such as the early Gunsmoke, were not daring and edgy in their own way. Or that the early I Love Lucy did not have its hilarious moments. However the governing concepts were unadventurous at best, or just plain dull, at worst. After all, no matter how good some of the episodes, bringing law and order to the Old West or following the humorous escapades of a zany housewife were not exactly novel concepts in TV programming.Two series, however, did come along to challenge convention. The Twilight Zone, at decade's end, attacked frontally with huge doses of imagination and exotic story-lines that often overwhelmed viewers, thereby opening American living-rooms to the expanding world of unthought-of possibilities. It was, and remains, a classic appreciated by young and old alike. However, the other ground-breaking series did not attack frontally. Instead, in true stealthy fashion, it snuck past the guardians of Good Taste and Morality, otherwise known as the department of Standards and Practices. That's probably because each episode was introduced by a funny-looking fat guy with a British accent, who came out to crack a few bad jokes and abuse the sponsors. Who could suspect that what followed such a slow-talking Humpty-Dumpty would subtly undermine some of TV's most entrenched conventions.Yet that's exactly what the Hitchcock half-hours did. Perhaps the most subversive change lay in the series's really sneaky treatment of wrong-doers. To that point, convention insisted that culprits be apprehended on screen, the better to teach the audience that Crime Doesn't Pay. And while that may have conveyed a comforting societal message, it also made for a very predictable and boring climax to even the best stories. What the Hitchcock show did that was slyly revolutionary was to transpose the comeuppance from the story to Hitchcock's often humorous epilogue. There the audience would learn that the culprit was duly punished and that justice had once again prevailed, apparently enough to keep the censors of the day at bay. So the story-line might end on screen with a grotesque murder, while only later would the audience be told by Hitchcock that justice had indeed caught up. Maybe that seems like just a minor change. But in fact, it was highly significant. For now the audience could follow plot developments, without knowing how the story itself would end, while the deadening element of predictability was transferred to the easily ignored epilogue. It was a truly ground-breaking event in the evolution of TV.All in all, that element of uncertainty made for the kind of programming that continues to entertain, even into today's super-charged era of technicolor and relaxed censorship. It also s largely for why Hitchcock Presents remains one of the few series from that long-ago time to still be re-run. There were other sly subversive wrinkles such as the black humor that sometimes accompanied the most heinous crimes. Or the subtle insistence that murder often begins at home. In fact, the series as a whole managed to mirror much of Hitchcock's movie-making personality, which suggests the producers (Norman Lloyd and Joan Harrison) were very protective of what the Hitchcock brand name implied. Anyway, like any other series, some episodes were better than others, but only rarely did one really disappoint. In fact, the high quality remained surprisingly steady throughout the half-hour run, before dropping off noticeably during the over-stretched hour-long version.Some of my favorites: "Mr. Pelham" (good semi sc-fi); "The Creeper" (suspense & fine acting); "The Glass Eye" ( well-done horror); "Back for Christmas" (typical Hitchcock irony); "Poison" (you'll sweat a bucket load); "Design for Loving" (off-beat premise well executed); "Human Interest Story" (Hitchcock meets the Twilight Zone); "Special Delivery" (truly spooky); "Specialty of the House" (It ain't Mc Donalds); "Breakdown" (Why don't they hear me?), and anything with the deliciously repulsive Robert Emhardt.I'm sure there are many others not so fresh in my memory. Anyway, in my book, a big thanks is due Alfred Hitchcock for doing something no other movie heavy-weight of the time was willing to do. He risked his big league reputation by squeezing into millions of little black boxes once a week for seven years to bring the audience outstanding entertainment. His snooty peers may have sneered, but generations of grateful viewers have since proved him right.
skorcher Check out the Alfred Hitchcock Hour in the 1965 season (episode 17 season 3). This is the episode you're talking about. I just saw it on TV a few nights ago. There are two nurses and a drunken housekeeper. You got most of the story right. The hefty one, Nurse Betty, and the pretty one, Nurse Sheila are at a rich man's house. The rich man is in an oxygen tent over his bed and is an invalid. The electricity goes out during a storm and the three women stumble around in the dark, carrying candles. The housekeeper keeps hearing a man's voice telling her that she has a pretty neck. The two nurses sedate her and then hear a noise downstairs. Nurse Betty goes down to check it out. Turns out the male gardner is trying to get back in the house. Nurse Betty is heard screaming. Nurse Sheila grabs a fireplace poker and descends the staircase to help out. Betty is found cowering by the wall, but very much alive. Sheila sees a man behind the door and throws the poker at him. She sees that it is the gardner and knows something's wrong. Nurse Betty hovers over Sheila and peels off "her" wig to reveal "herself" as the man you describe. The ending is one of the eeriest in the Hitchcock series.

Copyright © 2016 - 2025 gowatching.voirdesfilms.net