User Reviews

This episode has several nice twists to it : the murderer genuinely helps Columbo, providing him deliberately with questions, answers and even evidence to incriminate himself ; the murderer is a narcissistic TV show detective, and he works alongside with Columbo, playing his role throughout the episode in an amusing and convincing fashion.

The murder itself is very nicely conducted (especially the trick with changing the time on the gofer's watch), and could have almost fooled Columbo. I was really wondering how Columbo would figure it out as I was watching, and in fact he didn't : a fingerprint the murderer forgot to wipe off, and that we spectators had no clue of, pops out of the blue at the end. That was a little frustrating, because the story worked so well in favor of our murderer and that this mistake seemed quite amateurish for a murder so well conducted on the whole.

Overall, I liked the nice slow tension, great acting and great plot, but the conclusion left me a little disappointed, given that I like to figure out how Columbo will crack the case as I watch. It was impossible this time.

This doesn't feel as serious as most Columbo movies for some reason. Ward Fowler never really seems that concerned about being investigated for murder, or bothered by the long, confusing series of lies and fake identities that have characterised his life before becoming a massive celebrity playing Detective Lucerne. It's not like he's covering up his insecurities in front of Columbo, he just doesn't come across as even remotely worried.

For much of the time he seems to be playing the role of Lucerne, even while talking to Columbo. So we have someone (John Schilling) pretending to be someone (Charles Kipling) pretending to be someone (Ward Fowler) pretending to be someone (Detective Lucerne), and it's never entirely clear who Columbo's actually talking to.

For all that, the murder itself is very clearly executed, in my opinion too well thought-through for a character as sloppy and disorganised as Fowler. He doesn't seem together enough to be a cold-blooded murderer, often talking gibberish to Columbo, changing his story willy-nilly and showing off the video machine which was used as an accessory in the murder. I don't even think he's deliberately goading Columbo by demonstrating the VCR, he's just incredibly careless and slapdash.

How much of all this is down to Shatner's "ironic" acting style and how much is down to the script, I don't know.

It almost seems a bit of a pantomime this episode, like a parody of a Columbo show. Not that it's terrible, just quite tongue-in-cheek and comical, nowhere near as suspenseful as normal. Which is what often happens to shows nearing the end of their run, and "Fade Into Murder" marks the beginning of the end of the 70s Columbo shows.

But it's always good to see Shatner, not for the subtleties of his acting skills but because he's genuinely entertaining to watch. However I preferred "Butterfly In Shades Of Grey", the 90s episode which saw Shatner return as a Columbo villain.

Bill Shatner has long been hugely popular over here in England & is currently on our screens in a series of self-parodying cereal commercials. I've enjoyed everything he's done, except the atrociously bad "T.J.Hooker". Anyway. Back to 1974. Shatner plays Ward Fowler, a TV detective with a shady past, a dodgy present and an uncertain future. He solves all 3 problems by murdering his blackmailing producer in a staged hold-up. "Detective Lucerne" then finds himself dealing with Lt Columbo and they "work together" to solve the crime. The chemistry between Shatner and Falk is excellent throughout and they were re-matched in another episode 18 years later. William Shatner is a marvellously smarmy villain and quite magnanamous at the end when he's finally unmasked: "She was a blackmailer.I think, in this case, the murderer has the sympathetic part?" Well worth seeing. I'm wondering if anyone else noticed a similarity between William Shatner & Gene Hackman in this role? The 2 could have been interchangeable.

May contain spoilers OK, first to summarize a few of the other comments: 1. Great chemistry between Falk and Shatner This is wonderful to see as a fan of both. But they really do have fun together.

2. Different sort of process where Columbo isn't leading the suspect around, instead it's the opposite The impact of this I'll highlight more later

3. Lucern does quite a good job of the murder, but fails in something seemingly obvious It may be obvious to us now, after watching 200 episodes of CSI, but not so much back then

4. Lucern is brazen in almost giving himself up to Columbo by helping the investigation Some suggest because he thinks he will get away with it 5. Lucern is not confident and constantly changing things, which doesn't coincide with his character/actions Which directly conflicts the prior note – clearly a split audience here

What's going on here is far better than previous shows. In addition to the chemistry between them, we finally see the vision of each of them as well. We don't watch Columbo putter around and reveal everything bit by bit and annoy Lucern – why? Because both are too good for that. Immediately Lucern realizes this and just moves things along. He does this because to wait around for petty details is beneath both of them. He realizes Columbo has done his homework, it's time to see how far he can go.

This is beautiful. Two players knowing the other is strong, and knowing what their moves will be. Aside from finally having a good opponent and switching the flow of the show, it triggers the Lucern – Fowler conflict. Notice that above I refer to Lucern though that's just the TV character Fowler plays. But here is where I think the show was trying to elude to Lucern was trying to convict Fowler. Maybe not that Fowler was completely schitzo, but that his conscious would not let him get away with it. And I think this was triggered once Fowler knew he was probably going to get caught by Columbo anyway.

So in each Lucern "reveal" he's actually doing a few things. He's showing how smart Fowler was in committing the crime, also trying to convict Fowler, and confirming Columbo's strength as an opponent (and thus his decision to incriminate himself more with dignity than getting caught). In the end, there are only two ways it can play out: Fowler gets away with it (here presuming he thinks he left no concrete incriminating evidence) and him showing off as Lucern boosts all egos; Fowler gets caught and Lucern is at least vindicated but also Fowler has dignity in defeat (only a true master could have caught him after all, and who else better than himself/Lucern).

The above may sound weird, but watch the last 15 minutes again. Shatner does a great job of just jumping back and forth between Lucern and Fowler in his thinking. He seems to embrace the thrill of the chase (of himself) and the high risk/reward this implies. And when caught, the last bit is funny for true Shatner fans "and up until now, I was glad I killed her." Maybe the whole thing was just a device to change the pacing/predictability of the show and there was no intended Lucern – Fowler conflict, but that's how I saw it, and I think it plays much better with that in mind.

Wow. I was surprised. I remember Columbo positively, but this episode had poor acting, oh-too-obvious clues, and it just didn't "entertain". It was boring, pretentious and quite frankly, a bit immature. It was like the episode was made for pre-teens. I kept up with it because I'm a Star Trek fan (features, of course, Bill Shatner and a short appearance by Walter Koenig), and still want to like Columbo, but with this, I'm not sure anymore.

I could not empathize with the criminal (Shatner), I could not try to figure things out with Columbo, his genius was not obvious, as he just seems to come up with solution to the crime based on very flimsy evidence. When presented with Columbo's (correct) version of the crime, Shatner's character happily confesses. I mean, does he *want* to go to jail, if not get executed? It didn't seem like that to us. It seemed like he wanted to live his life without his victim, who was blackmailing him.

The whole thing was just too bizarre.

A highly-paid television actor is being blackmailed by his producer, who knows about his somewhat sordid past. He fakes a hold-up as a cover for killing her and uses a video-recording of a sports game as an alibi, but Lieutenant Columbo is on the case.

This is one of the best-known Columbo movies and is very entertaining, not least because the killer is a pompous, overpaid TV detective (in the seventies, Falk was the highest-paid actor on television). Shatner gives a woodenly likable performance, made all the more whimsical towards the end when he starts to turn a little schizoid. The rest of the cast are good, with nice little bits by Carey (playing another shopkeeper), Koenig (an old pal of Shatner's from Star Trek) and Danese (Falk's real-life wife). There are some lovely moments, especially a how-do-you-open-this-door gag, but the actual denouement itself is a little pedestrian. It hardly matters though - the pleasure of seeing these two actors swapping shots is a sheer delight

While Peter Falk provides his usual equanimity with the killer, this episode has a very unique killer: William Shatner, as John Schnelling, as Charles Kipling, as Ward Fowler, as Lt. Luscerne....

Forget the pickiness about Bill's height/weight/hair!! I personally think Shatner does a fantastic job of playing the schizophrenic Ward Fowler. This guy is vain, as a Columbo villain should be, but he segues between his character's character and the TV cop that the character is supposed to be... He even HELPS Columbo in his investigation, beCUZ he thinks he's a real police detective. If it wasn't for that - and that DAMNED very rare videotape machine - he would have gotten away with killing that nasty Claire!

It's an entertaining episode, with William Shattner as the heavy. He's "Lieutenant Lucerne" in a highly successful TV detective show, always impeccably decked out in white suit, wide-brimmed white hat, and ornate walking stick. (I wonder if they borrowed the whole set up from Tom Wolfe.) He's being blackmailed by his producer, Susan Oliver, because in his pre-thespian days he deserted from the Army and exposure would deflate his public image. So -- he murders her during a staged hold up.

Enter a real detective, Peter Falk as the eponymous sleuth, a sartorial calamity, gauche of speech and demeanor.

What plays out is a battle of wits between the fake detective who knows how these scenarios go, and the real detective who pretends to be a bumbling idiot but by the end is able to piece together all the seemingly unrelated pieces of the logical puzzle. The final, damning evidence is that Shattner may have remembered to wipe the murder weapon clean of fingerprints, he forgot about the cartridges in the revolver. It's such an elementary error that even if he escapes conviction, Shattner should definitely be replaced in the show.

There are few comic bits. One involves a witness's description of the murderer as "about average, or maybe shorter -- about your height." Columbo repeats "a little shorter" with evident gloom. Another has Columbo fiddling around with multiple locks on Shattner's door, and it's barely amusing.

There are a couple of holes in the plot too. The scene in which Shattner destroys his robbery disguise must have been edited out because we have to guess at what happened. There are some other questionable assumptions not worth going into.

Shattner is just fine as the ever-smiling and cooperative phony detective. He seems to be having a hell of a good time overacting. Timothy Carey is always lovable as a despicable character -- that elongated and irregular face, like a horse whose mother used crack. And Bert Remsen as the unwitting enabler is good too, but that may be only a minority opinion. He's always struck me as engagingly unpretentious and has an admirable working-class New York accent. Best award for a performer having only one or two lines: Shera Danese as a succulent toy working her way to the top.

All in all, an enjoyable entry.

***SPOILERS**** Unusually talkative murder mystery even by Det. Columbo, Peter Falk, standers that has the clever killer make so many mistakes that it's a wonder that the great Det. Columbo didn't smoke him out, with his cheap .50 cent cigar, before the first chimerical break.

Being the #1 Detective Show, like Columbo, on TV the ego-maniacal star of the Emmy-winning "Det. Lucerne Mystery Hour" Ward Fowler aka unknown Canadian bit-part actor Charles Kipling aka Korean War US Army deserter John Schilling, William Shatner, is holding out for big bucks from the studio or else he'll take a walk for greener pastures on a rival network. Fowler has only one problem in his high expectations of himself and his future and thats his agent and co-producer of the show he's the big star in Claire Daily, Lola Albright. Claire discovered the heel back in Canada ,when he was on the lamb from the US Army for desertion during war-time, and made him over the years into a big TV star in the USA.

Fowler goes into full throttle in planning to get the pasty Claire out of his hair and his life in a staged hold-up of a delicatessen that he found out that she's going to that night to buy herself a baloney and cheese sandwich. Getting himself an air-tight alibi by having his best pal and favorite gofer Mark, Bert Remsen, watch a baseball game with him. Fowler has him knocked out with a couple of crushed Thiobarbital pills, that he slipped into his drink, and then sneaks out, with a muggers outfit, to Tony's Deli. Catching Calire at the counter and, after knocking out the terrified owner Tony(Timothy Carey), blast Claire right between the shoulder blades hitting her heart and killing her. Fowler video-taped the baseball game that he was watching with Mark and reset the time on the clock on top of the TV and Marks $1,000.00 platinum watch. When Mark woke up, after more then an hour, it looked like he was only out for some five to ten minutes.

For all his planning Fowler's enormous ego turned out to be his undoing by later trying to lock horns with cop investigating Claire'a murder the great Lt. Columbo. Fowler should have known, if he ever saw any of his shows on TV, Columbo is an old hat in catching armatures who think of themselves as being super smart master criminals like himself. Which, as it turned out, Fowler was anything but.

It was really Lt. Columbo's fascination with Fowler's character on TV, Det. Lucerne, that had him let the murderer play-act out the crime making it look, to Det. Columbo, that he was solving the very crime that he committed. At the same time Fowler was really trying to implicate an innocent man the murder victims husband Sid, Alan Manson, in the killing.

Columbo on top of Fowler like butter on white bread is with him throughout most of the movie as if he were his Siamese twin brother. The arrogant killer went on and gloated about what a big expert on criminology he was in solving Claire's murder with his magnificent and superior powers of deduction, like a modern late 20th Century Sherlock Holmes. Where he instead was secretly using trickery to throw Columbo off the track in finding that he himself was Calire's killer.

Fowler made a number of very telling mistakes, that were quickly picked up by Let. Columbo, in his grand plan to commit the perfect murder. They had to do with the murder weapon, a handgun from the TV props department, and his friend and all around gofer Mark's expensive platinum watch. Fowler,finagled with the watch not knowing that Mark always kept it five minutes ahead of time so he'll always be on time when running errand's for the big star.

In the end Fowler proved that he was just a petty criminal with an overblown ego who thought the world of himself. Let. Columbo deflated him, and his ego, with the sharp pin of what he developed over the years in the LAPD. Hard learned police methods and intuition and just plain common sense.

Big fan of Columbo and Star Trek, so I really enjoy two of my favorite old time leads going head to head. And that is what is so watchable to me.

As a one time acting student, I have often wondered why Shatner decided to play the role this way. Yeah, the way he is written is uneven. Sometimes smart, sometimes not so bright. Ultimately playing Fowler the way he did, while somewhat inconsistent, was a fine choice. In fact, Columbo, the smartest detective ever, must know from the first moment he meets Fowler, that Ward is guilty. I can't see it any other way. Fowler keeps describing things he knows about Claire and why the killer would do the things he did (like not take Claire's purse during the robbery) - and Columbo wonders how the killer would know that!

So, Columbo works to get the proof. The ultimate reason he is able to nail Fowler is one of the weaker reveals of the early Columbo run. It is also something that would have been known from about the middle of the episode on. Instead, the interplay between these two continues.

With all these faults, I have watched this episode countless times. The scenes between Falk and Shatner are super fun. There are some good laughs. I still use the phrase "bundled up like a downhill racer" whenever possible!

It's great to see Lola Albright from Peter gunn get evil and Shatnet is perfect. pramatic solutions throuout that most viewers can agree wirh. you have a fred draper wak. on and Timothy Carey to bolster the fun, but of the 6 or 7 Hollywood centric teleplays a unique look without the glamour and a direct mirror to Falk real cop and the entertainment sleuth that, no matter how ward Fowler plays it becomes just a performance. above other more deviant villains he is paletably digging a hole with every tossed off conclusion and ingratiating self aware ploys that, in the end, are just as damming in the very effort.

a must watch to see the back and forth between two iconic players that are sorely missed today.