alanbnew

The late 1970s saw three well-remembered extended public information films warning children of the dangers of playing in hazardous places such as railway lines ("The Finishing Line"), farms ("Apaches") and in this instance building sites. All three used graphic imagery of shocking fatal accidents. This one doesn't quite have the reputation and notoriety of its predecessors but it still makes a lot of impact.

The film centres on three children - brother and sister Paul and Jane and their cousin Ronald. Ronald has dreams of becoming a surveyor or architect but they feel he is too big for his boots and doesn't understand the risks of being on building sites. In fantasy sequences they are scientists in a futuristic control centre and they conjure up imaginary scenarios to expose Ronald's recklessness, each of which sees him fall victim to some terrible accident such as being buried by rubble, crushed by falling bricks, hit by a building vehicle and being electrocuted.

Unlike the earlier films it is made clear that these are just imaginings and Ronald in reality hasn't come to any harm. Even if the viewer has been in any doubt the fact that he reappears to fall victim to another catastrophic incident would leave no doubt. These accidents are certainly realistically depicted and have the potential to shock. Suspense is also created by the amplified sound of his heartbeat before each fatal event. As the end credits make clear these were based on real events of children who had lost their lives on building sites.

Compared to the other films the harrowing impact is softened by the mode of presentation. Not only does the viewer know that these are just imaginings but the sequences in the control centre and the somewhat flippant, light-hearted tone of the children reduce the level of unease. This can be viewed both as a drawback or as an asset, The film has less capacity to really unsettle or even upset the viewer but on the other hand that made it easier viewing. Viewed many years later through adult eyes this makes the film not quite as effective or memorable but of course that was not the target audience. None of these films were intended as quasi-horror and instead were intended to deter children from playing in unsafe places. It doesn't always follow that the more shocking a film the more effective it is in deterring risky behaviour - indeed the horror may end up as a distraction from the overall message. It's hard to know how effective this and other films were but it would be surprising if they didn't have a positive effect in improving safety as well as still provoking middle-aged memories almost fifty years later and fascination from those of all ages who didn't see them at the time.

I am a lifelong fan of the Steptoe and Son TV series - indeed it is probably my all-time favourite sitcom and one of the true greats of that genre. There is no doubt that much of that appeal remains in this film version but all the same it is often an uncomfortable, bittersweet viewing experience.

It doesn't give too much away to say that the film revolves around Harold finally marrying and then his father ensuring that things do not work out. Albert thwarted many of his son's romances and other plans for happiness in the TV show. In this film version though what happens almost seems depressing, even cruel. It's hard to explain why. The TV series did a great job of injecting serious and reflective moments and even pathos alongside the comedy but here it becomes overpowering, maybe more of a comedy-drama rather than comedy with dramatic touches. Perhaps because of the longer running time the snatching away of Harold's hopes just becomes too drawn out. Or maybe it's because in the TV series he never reached this prospect of happiness, of actually having a wife and a chance of a normal life. Maybe it's also the fact that Harold's girlfriend and later wife Zita is a genuinely appealing and sympathetic figure that makes the final outcome harder to take. If Zita had been selfish, manipulative and generally unpleasant (but maybe Harold unable to see it) Albert's interventions would have been more palatable.

The 90 minute film is generally too much of a stretch even for an excellent sitcom and so we do see even some very funny scenarios drawn out too much for their own good and maybe one or two elements added to pad out the running time which would have been better omitted.

It's certainly interesting to see the studio-bound TV format translated to the much more expansive medium of film and this is done well so we avoid seeing the Steptoe home looking entirely different to its TV origins as sometimes occurred with sitcoms translated to the big screen. The character of Albert does have his crudity and contempt for basic hygiene pushed a little too far, maybe making him even more dislikeable than was necessary. It's worth pointing out that at times Albert does show he genuinely cares for his son and his predicament and that was a welcome feature and true to the series. In essence Albert is a conflicted man who does care for his son but is so desperate not to be alone that he cannot let him go, no matter the cost to his happiness.

All the performances are fine and there is certainly still a lot to be commended here. There are some brilliantly funny moments that stick long in the memory, most notably Albert and a packet of Flash! However overall this seemed like a missed opportunity. The later film "Steptoe and Son Ride Again" is more plainly comedic and a better adaptation of the show for the cinema but the ultimate versions will always be the TV episodes.

Arnold Haithwaite is seventeen. In addition to work as a fisherman and helping in his elderly father's shop he works as a sand pilot in the remote village of Skirlston, helping locals and visitors across the treacherous sands. One day he is helping a strange visitor called Sonny through the waters. Sonny asks his name and Arnold tells him - Sonny is incredulous and says it's impossible because his own name in Arnold Haithwaite. Soon after comes a terrifying incident which starts a chain of events that leaves Arnold fearing not just for his future but also his whole identity - and even his life...

The Intruder was a remarkable serial produced by Granada and broadcast on ITV in early 1972. It is a gripping story with a "cuckoo in the nest" theme. Sonny - brilliantly played by Milton Johns - soon gains the trust of Arnold's elderly adoptive father Ernest and makes him believe that he is his nephew and a real relative unlike Arnold. Sonny says he plans to not just take over the shop but also live in the house and Arnold fears that while he is tolerated for now he will later be thrown out - that he will be seen as "the intruder" rather than Sonny. In addition Sonny has ludicrous plans to redevelop Skirlston and turn it into a resort with a marina and casino. Sonny is a deceptive man in all senses of the word. Little is known about him or his past and he makes sure it stays that way. Although not physically imposing he is able to make others do things just through sheer force of personality (certainly not charm) but he is not above either threatening or using force and he is unexpectedly strong. How far is he prepared to go?

Arnold has two allies in the form of two other visitors to the village - fellow teenagers Jane and her younger brother Peter. Peter is without question the more reliable and greater ally. He is a perceptive and brave youngster who often guides Arnold in the right direction. Jane can also be very supportive and it is also clear that she is very attracted to Arnold. However she is also unreliable and sometimes manipulative, seeming to use Arnold to make her boyfriend Jeremy jealous. They are from a very affluent middle class family and this injects a class contrast and sometimes tension. Jane's mother seems disapproving of Arnold and far happier that she spends time with the fellow middle class Jeremy. Jane is herself not above snobbery, not least towards local girl and family maid Norma. Norma is also attracted to Arnold and clearly sees Jane as a rival who she feels will take him away from her.

The Intruder has sometimes been labelled as a "children's series". In part this is because it was based on a contemporary novel of the same name for children / teenagers by John Rowe Townsend but the TV series is more "adult" in all regards than the book (that is no criticism of the book which is an excellent work and well-worth reading). It also had an article in the children's TV magazine Look-In but if it really were considered a children's show it must be one of the most "adult" children's series ever produced. It was actually broadcast in the Sunday teatime "family" slot which was for shows which certainly could appeal to children but also to adults as well and which could be seen by parents and children together. For all that, the content of these shows would generally tend towards catering for children and teenagers but The Intruder was very different. It is likely its languid pace and often "arty" or avant garde direction would go over the heads of younger children and they would find it relatively hard-going.

However it is the casting and content that makes the show radically different and distinctly "adult". Actors well into their twenties were used to play the teenage characters with the exception of the youngest one Peter. Not much emphasis is given to the age of the characters and they come across very much as young adults rather than teenagers. There are sexual undercurrents with both Jane (particularly) and Norma often rather flirtatious and even provocative. There is a lot flesh on show, most notably from Jane and Norma but even Arnold is usually seen in shorts (necessary for his job, wading through waters) and occasionally bare-chested. There is also an unusual level of violence and threat including an attempted drowning, fights and one character being threatened with a cord being pulled round his neck and a knife pointed at him. The first episode even includes quote a strong swear word, justifiable given what had just happened but still muffled or edited on original broadcast although now clearly audible.

Although there are scenes that would rarely have been seen in a "family" show (the production team's previous show The Owl Service a noted exception) the content never strayed into obviously "adults-only" territory. There are no passionate kisses, no couples in bed together, no sexual innuendoes or references, no characters are murdered and there is no regular use of "strong language". All the same the content even now has led the new blu-ray release to have a "12" certificate unlike the "U" or "PG" categories almost always used for "family" shows.

The serial was shot all on location on 16mm film and this definitely gives it a very different feel from many shows of that era which were mainly or wholly studio-bound. Indeed it would have been pretty much impossible to have done this show any other way. The direction by Peter Plummer is - as it was on The Owl Service - remarkably bold and imaginative and strikingly different from the more straightforward styles employed on TV shows of the time. As on The Owl Service he also composed (uncredited) for flute and harp all the incidental music heard on the show and on this occasion the title music. These sounds are haunting and melancholy and complement the mood perfectly.

Along with other works of great depth and imagination there is lots of room to speculate about what is seen on screen such as the motivations of the characters. Not least is this true of the very last scene. This follows extremely dramatic - indeed traumatic events - and leaves open so many possible interpretations. It rounds off a quite superb serial and its release on blu-ray now allows a wider audience to appreciate its qualities.

Dr Carmichael tells John Parker that his wife Ethel will need special care because she has a serious heart condition. However John is having an affair with a young woman called Julie and sees Ethel's condition as an opportunity to get rid of her and inherit her wealth. He doesn't want to risk resorting to conventional murder so hatches upon the unusual plan of trying to scare her to death.,,,

Without question the most unusual episode of Shadows of Fear and one with a peculiar background. The previous episode "Come Into my Parlour" had aired as far back as March 1971. It's unclear when this one was produced but it does seem to have been long after its predecessors. This episode was written for a half-hour slot (around twenty-five minutes of screen-time) but with its Edwardian period setting - very well recreated on-screen - and extensive (and skilful) use of incidental music it's a striking contrast from the more austere look of its counterparts. The story editor was now George Markstein rather than John Kershaw. - the former was a very experienced story editor who had worked on shows such as The Prisoner and (another Thames show) Callan so he may have been brought-in to revamp the show although John Kershaw was by this working on Public Eye so may have been unavailable. Although background to this episode and the future direction of the show is lacking the reduced running-time, new story editor and look of this episode do suggest that this was a de facto pilot for a relaunch, perhaps with a looser focus on the original darker style. This episode - whatever its merits - is one that really would fit better in a new or different anthology (in many ways akin to an episode of Tales of the Unexpected) or just as a standalone production.

That is not to deny that this certainly does have some good use of suspense and it does play on some everyday fears and issues. Various Shadows of Fear explored plots by a spouse (usually the husband) to kill their partner and issues of infidelity and doubts about one's spouse are not uncommon. However these links are not really strong enough to make it a comfortable fit with the rest of the series.

Leaving that aside though it is a very engaging story although the premise of trying to scare someone to death is rather far-fetched and helps to make this what might seem a "quirky" or "offbeat" tale rather than a darkly-serious one. It also manages to provide not just one but two twists at the end. These are common in the thriller genre and are well-done here but again they were rare in Shadows of Fear which relied more closely on suspense rather than surprise.

As it transpired there were no more Shadows of Fear episodes in any format. Whether this new style didn't meet audience expectations or the producers felt it wasn't right or just wanted to do other things isn't known. It's even possible that the very successful arrival a few months later of ATV's Thriller series put paid to plans of a new series simply because it was felt Thriller had cornered the market as it were. While this last instalment was not the best it was still good viewing. It was a shame the series did not continue although it would have been even better had it retained the exceptional style of the first ten episodes.

Gwen and Michael arrive happily at a Spanish villa for a holiday. All seems well until Gwen discovers some blood in the bathroom sink but they just dismiss it as left behind after a minor accident and lack of diligence by the cleaner. However more worryingly a broken window is later noticed. Then a burly German man (he is given no name on screen or the credits) knocks at the door. He speaks no English and they speak no German but at first it just seems strange when he walks in and starts drinking straight from their bottle of wine. However matters then take a very serious turn when he points a gun at them. Despite their communication difficulties it becomes clear that this man is dangerous and they need to keep him on-side for however long it takes or risk their lives.

Generally this my least favourite episode of the core series (the final episode "The Party's Over" really being an untypical case) but on a very recent viewing I found it to be rather better than I remember although it's still one of the excellent show's lesser efforts. It's an episode I've generally been reluctant to watch, largely due to an unpleasant scene in which the German finds a live chicken which he wants to eat (it must be stressed the bird seen on-screen is a prop) and then proceeds to wring its neck. The camera focuses on his upper half with the bird out of shot but it's simulated shrieks can be hard and the looks of revulsion by Gwen and Michael are highlighted. The pair are then required to pluck the dead bird, prepare it and cook it for him. The scene is designed to show his brutality but there is ample evidence of it elsewhere and the risk is that for some viewers it distracts me from the storyline in general which is otherwise pretty good.

Leaving that aside this is a rather tense hostage drama. There is some similarity early-on with Roger Marshall's opening script for the show "Did You Lock Up?" Both depict a happy married couple on holiday who soon see their happiness shattered when they encounter evidence of an intruder (in this case in their holiday home). While the Astles in the earlier episode had to contend with a burglary and were understandably very shaken, being in the house with an intruder - one seems only too prepared to kill - moves fear to a horrifying level. Typically this was the show exploring fears felt by us all: we look upon home (including a temporary one) as a place of safety and refuge and one of our most basic fears is to have an intruder within it - most terrifying of all a violent intruder.

The language barrier adds another dimension. With the couple and the German not sharing a common language they have no means of finding out what he intends to do: his demeanour and actions make clear that he is dangerous but they don't know his specific and ultimate intentions. They do have an advantage of sorts in that they are able to talk about their predicament - and any possible ways out of it - without him understanding them but as it turns out that doesn't help them much. They know they are trapped and a safe way out seems unlikely. He is a heavy drinker and they hope that ultimately, he will lose focus or fall asleep but he shows remarkable staying power - maybe because his own liberty and maybe even his life is at stack. It is an irony that the fact they are a couple reduces their chance of an escape. Possibly one could try to get away but that would mean leaving the other so loyalty keeps them hostage. Both are aware that a miscalculated attempt to disarm the man or escape could be fatal - not just for the one making the attempt but also for their partner.

The fact that all this takes place in or immediately outside the villa intensifies the scene. Unusually for the show a courtyard outside the villa is recreated inside the studio - big enough to drive a car into - but the lack of genuine outdoor scenes or ones set in a different building amplifies a sense of claustrophobia and indeed was a feature of the series as a whole.

The final stages inject some further intriguing themes and round off a provocative and well-performed, if not wholly satisfying, episode. The following week would see another Roger Marshall script but a return to more humble British setting and one of the very best episodes of all - "Come Into my Parlour".

A man called Harry climbs through the window into a flat. However Harry is no typical intruder because the flat is his home - or was his home. Harry has just been released from prison after serving a nine-year sentence for killing a child - a crime of which he proclaims his innocence. Harry wants to return to family life but his wife Margaret definitely does not want him back. She and their adult son Terry have tried to rebuild their lives after Harry's conviction and now she fears his return will bring them crashing back down.

Margaret urges him to go as soon as possible before Terry and the neighbours see him. However that plan is to no avail as her friend Betty sees him and soon word is round the community. Margaret's unhappiness at Harry's return is mild compared to Terry who is seething when he hears the news - he particularly resents his father and blames him for his lack of progress in life. The neighbourhood shares Terry's hostility and soon there is a campaign to get Harry out and while they do try peaceful means, a brick through the window shows that violence is on the agenda as well. Harry needs to get out quickly before they go much further...

Shadows of Fear was not a typical "thriller" or suspense series and nowhere is this more evident than in this story. The series tried to generate suspense out of everyday situations in more realistic scenarios than usually found in the genre. The subject matter here of a man released from prison and trying to restart his family life and return to the community - especially after being convicted of a very serious crime - could easily be the subject of a "Play for Today", "Armchair Theatre" or some other socially realistic "kitchen-sink" drama and the episode certainly does consider those issues. Maybe this is why it has left some viewers who prefer more "traditional" thrillers underwhelmed. However there certainly is considerable menace, fear and suspense here and throughout a feeling that something terrible is going to happen - the only questions seem to be "how" and "when". For me it is an episode that works supremely well as a thriller built around a social issue.

Harry is a convicted killer but the nature of the crime for which he was convicted is only briefly mentioned. He insists his innocence but is he telling the truth? There are plenty of genuinely guilty people who falsely protest their innocence and the bigger their crime the harder it is for them to ever admit doing it. However the justice system is not perfect and genuinely innocent individuals are sometimes wrongly convicted, finding their justified claims of innocence ignored. In this case we never know whether he committed the crime or not. Harry seems a genuine, heartfelt man who just wants a fresh start but that doesn't mean he was innocent of the crime. He has served his sentence and is legally entitled to start again but - as he finds - that is easier said than done. The court of public opinion can be a very harsh, unforgiving one. Harry may have served nine years in prison but that is likely to be a life sentence in terms of public condemnation.

One can understand the predicament of Harry's dispirited wife Margaret and why she wants him out of her life. The family of a convicted criminal - especially someone convicted of a terrible, notorious crime - often find themselves considered guilty by association. While Harry was in prison there was a chance of her getting some sort of acceptance and normality but now it seems shattered. It's never clear whether she believes her husband's claims of innocence. If she thinks him guilty one can understand her determination not to have him back. However even if she thinks him innocent - or at least a genuinely changed man - she feels she can never have a normal life while he is with them. The same is true of their son Terry but his attitude is deeply hostile rather than crestfallen like his mother. He feels his mother will lack the resilience to make Harry leave but maybe the wider community will play its hand and get rid of him.

We see the court of public opinion most definitely move into action as the episode progresses. Margaret's friend Betty cuts her off and she is one of many - as long as Harry is around Margaret is also condemned. Some of those cutting her off and joining the protests may themselves be in fear that they too will be condemned if they don't conform. All this helps to bring about a change in Margaret's attitude and she quietly rallies behind her beleaguered husband, feeling that he is being persecuted. However all this may be too late as danger moves even closer.

The final stages are powerful, poignant and ultimately moving. At the end a mournful flute piece plays and then segues into the end titles which unusually mix credits with apparently random pictures of members of the public - perhaps the sort of apparently ordinary people who might have joined the campaign against Harry. As the music fades away these images are accompanied by mumbling voices, the sounds of a siren and what seems like a prison door repeatedly slamming. These are novel and very memorable titles superbly rounding off a brutal conclusion.

For me this is an exceptional episode which lasts long in the memory. It is excellently written, directed and performed with very fine performances by Godfrey Quigley as Harry and Margery Mason as Margaret while Geoffrey Hughes brings a brooding intensity to the role of Terry. It may not be the easiest watch for some viewers and may be something that needs to be revisited to really appreciate it but it certainly does provoke the mind and show how well suspense can be generated out of such a story.

Sharon is still upset about her break-up with Eric but Maureen feels she can help her out. Meanwhile Eric is trying to move on and that involves winning a decorating contract from builder Mr Matthews. "Get to the daughter, get to the man" seems to be his approach so he has Mr Matthews's daughter Shirley in his sights...

Another rather patchy episode with continuing interest in fondly-remembered characters making up for a moderate story. We do get to see the unusual sight of Maureen acting in a provocative, flirtatious manner around Eric when she sees him with Shirley in the pub. Maureen clearly sees Shirley as Sharon's replacement as Eric's girlfriend so she adopts a somewhat bizarre persona to give Shirley the impression that Eric is already attached. It's not a wholly successful sequence but at least we see Maureen in a rather different guise to her generally demure demeanour.

One of the other positives of these "Fenn Street" episodes is seeing the guest cast. "Please Sir" had a large central cast of staff and pupils so had little room for guest actors unlike other sitcoms like this one. Some of the guests were well-established, even veteran, actors of the other time, others were newcomers whose screen careers proved to be rather brief. Here though two notable young actresses play the parts of Eric and Peter Craven's potential love-interests. Cheryl Hall plays Brenda whom Craven makes a play for while Eric settles on Shirley although that is more because he sees her as the route to a lucrative decorating contract than because he really wants her. Shirley is played by Jan Francis in what seems to have been her first screen-role. Both she and Cheryl Hall give good performances and went on to have very long careers.

Typically all does not go to plan. An episode that is certainly worth seeing to chart the progress of the Fenn Street alumni and to see some familiar TV faces even if it is not the source of any great comedy.

Although Dennis is happy in his job tending the brewery horses he is struggling to find friends. This and his gullibility make him easy prey for a group of thugs who draw him into their efforts to break into a machine selling chocolate. The police arrive and arrest Dennis and his new "friends" and he finds himself in court.

A fair episode with a moderate storyline improved by some broader social comments and realism. The three thugs (who rather come across as Frankie Abbott-types who have actually moved to the wrong side of the law) are pretty unconvincing and there are shaky elements more broadly in the story and characterisation but the episode deserves credit for offering a deeper look at Dennis and his life situation. At school in 5C Dennis was well-supported by his classmates and the teachers but the outside world is a tougher place. Dennis's kindly work colleague Charlie (nicely played by Joe Ritchie) enquires about whether Dennis has any friends or girlfriends and can see that while he has acquaintances among his former classmates he doesn't really have any friends at all - certainly not outside of his old school circle. Dennis tries to see if he can go out with a couple of other work colleagues but they are clearly not interested. This makes Dennis vulnerable when he visits the pub and bumps into the thugs. He doesn't understand their real activities, they ply him with drinks and he is easily drawn into their criminal plans.

This is a good depiction of how the period after leaving school can leave some youngsters adrift. The problems are amplified for Dennis because his learning difficulties make others more likely to reject him or at least not pursue firm friendships with him. This can provide a space for unscrupulous people to either bully the likes of Dennis or take advantage of them as these thugs did. Dennis's role in their crime though is not well-defined - one would have assumed he would have been used either as a look-out or to actually break into the machine with them safely at a distance - and therefore only he would carry the can. Instead he just seems to be tagging along as a loose part of the gang and it's unlikely they would have used him in that way. Fortunately for law and order (but unfortunately rather unrealistically) the police are right at the scene and arrest all those involved. The story would have packed more punch if the others had got away and the injustice would have been clearer although maybe it was felt that was too socially realistic.

Given their poor screen presence it's no loss that the thugs are omitted from the trial scenes. Duffy and Craven who caught the end of events speak as witnesses, Dennis's drunken and dissolute father offers his typical lack of moral support. Dennis's former teachers Mr Smith and Mr Price reappear to see the events and the former vehemently asserts that Dennis is incapable of the crime (or indeed any crime) while the latter offers his usual cynical observations. These characters are rather shoe-horned in here and not at their best but it's still welcome to see them in the spin-off show.

Geoffrey Bayldon is an excellent actor and gives a typically fine performance as a frustrated magistrate who is somewhat behind the times while Tenniel Evans also gives a typically good display as Dennis's solicitor who tries against the odds to keep the case on track.

The ending of the episode seems somewhat odd. Sitcoms almost always would end with a gag or clearly funny scene but the last one here falls rather flat. It's rather symbolic of patchy writing and production and maybe a show that was relying chiefly on warmth and nostalgia towards its characters rather than the quality of its stories or scenarios.

Miss Petting asks the pupils to write about how they spent their Saturdays. She gets all sorts of essays rather strong for her sensitive soul but most alarming is one by Terry Stringer. He writes about visiting his father in prison where he is serving a sentence for a bank robbery. His father is due to be released and a key witness to the crime was Mr Price; Terry makes clear that his Dad will be looking for revenge against him...

A good episode, the first to give much focus to Terry Stringer. As Price makes clear the crime committed by Mr Stringer was nothing like a bank robbery but an attempted handbag snatch with the elderly victim able to apprehend him and with various other witnesses but somehow Terry portrays it as a far more serious offence. It's uncertain here whether Terry is engaging in some Frankie Abbott-type fantasising to impress his friends and maintain a "hard man" image or whether he's been misled by his Dad, his Mum or someone else. It certainly does seem that Terry needs his Dad to attack Price because he's told his friends it's going to happen and doesn't want to lose face. Even his eccentric mum wants Mr Stringer to hit Mr Price to preserve the "family honour"!

It's good to see Stringer's parents and home life and a curious scene it indeed is. There are some similarities with episodes featuring Dennis Dunstable's parents - especially his feckless father - although there are a couple of key differences here. It's literally a welcome change of scene from the usual school-based settings. There's also some outside filming on a London street showing Mr Stringer's crime although there is the irony of his actual minor offence being overlaid by Terry's dramatic narration about a supposed bank-job. Whatever the truth of his crime Mr Price is very fearful of Mr Stringer turning up at the school to seek vengeance and the other staff try to shield him; by contrast it seems the pupils are eagerly awaiting Price suffering retribution.

"Please Sir!" had occasional brushes with social comment and this is one such example. There is a brief discussion among the staff about Stringer's background. Some see him plainly as a bad influence who deserves harsh treatment but others have a little more sympathy seeing the roots of his behaviour and attitude in his father being in and out of prison. This doesn't unbalance the comedy but it does provide the viewers with something to mull over.

There is an ancillary and seemingly unrelated plot about Potter installing an intercom for the Head so he can make contact with the teachers and Potter in their rooms. Typically the Head treats it like a toy and equally typically Potter has installed it badly and it needs repair. Mr Price is asked to help and sensibly calls out an electrician although as it turns out maybe that wasn't the best decision but not for the expected reasons.

The episode ends in shocking fashion for Mr Price and it seems Mr Stringer has exacted payback but appearances are not all they seem!

Potter has to give up his desk as it's needed in the Head's office for a new secretary. The staff are expecting a plain, middle-aged woman so they are shocked at the arrival of the glamorous and young Miss Knightley who is the "niece" of the Chair of Governors. She certainly turns the heads of the male staff and pupils but one male is particularly smitten - Mr Price. However it may be a short-lived affair as Miss Knightley is also hopeless at her job...

One of the better of the Series 4 episodes. It was quite common in that era for at least one episode of a sitcom to have a plotline around the arrival of an attractive young female character and "Please Sir!" was no exception and had done similar a couple of times before. While it wasn't a novel storyline it's still well-done. Miss Knightley may be good at garnering male attention and is a pleasant personality but she can barely type, is disorganised and has a limited work ethic. Her arrival at Fenn Street seems to be a "favour" by her "uncle" the Chair of Governors who had previously been seen with a different "niece" (played by Wendy Richard) early in the series. Her surname also seems to be a play on her lifestyle with her revealing that she is in male company every night!

The pupils have little role in this episode and probably by this stage and near the end of the series the producers realised it was wise to concentrate on the dependable comic performers - the staff. Mr Price - excellently played by Richard Davies - was always one of the highlights of the show and it's pleasing to see him centre stage here. He always had an eye for the ladies but this was really the only episode to centre on this aspect of his personality. His pride in his Welsh identity had always been present and is prominent here; the "Blodwyn" name being a reference to a crush of his when he was a boy. It's interesting to see that he and Miss Knightley do have a rapport and it isn't just a fantasy on his part but how far could their relationship go?

The female staff are less impressed by the newcomer. Miss Petting seems jealous - given her budding relationship with the Head she is worried that she will have competition. Typically Miss Ewell has more principled reasons for being unhappy with Miss Knightley - her incompetence - and she has to resort to doing the secretarial work herself.

Small subplots concern anniversaries for Potter and Miss Ewell (although she doesn't realise that any special day is forthcoming). Potter's birthday is imminent and typically he has hopes of the boat being pushed-out by his colleagues but will they be so generous? These themes are quite well-done and round-off an appealing episode.

Fenn Street's footballing fortunes have been unfailingly dismal - until now. Aided by the forward prowess of former Weaver Street pupil Des and the coaching of Mr Hurst they have reached the Final of the local Cup. The staff have joined in with the excitement with one exception - Miss Ewell who resents the squeezing-out of what she sees as more worthwhile activities such as her school orchestra. When Des insults her during an orchestra rehearsal she bans him from playing for the team, unaware that he is the star player and without him the school's chances are slim.

Another episode that doesn't show any great comedy invention but does offer some different themes through the focus on the football team and to a lesser degree the school orchestra. Although staff and pupils get kitted-out as either supporters or players no actual football footage is shown. This was probably a practical decision as it would have involved outside filming as well as the business of setting-up a game and match scenarios. However this is no great loss as attempts to recreate footballing action on-screen - even amateur football for comedy value - are often very unconvincing. The staff do talk about football (typically Potter is clueless) and the best moment of the episode comes when Price sets up what seems to be a sad tale of how he missed out on footballing success. He said only one thing held him back - he was never any good!

Although this is comedy it does raise some interesting issues about punishment and expediency. Ordinarily Miss Ewell's actions would have seemed uncontroversial but the staff take a more pragmatic (or cynical) view that this punishment is simply going to harm the team's chances and therefore look for a way to get it removed, commuted or delayed until after the Final. The decision makes her very unpopular but it is typical of her that she sticks to her guns and to principles even if those are not convenient for others.

This is the first episode to focus much on Des (Billy Hamon). The character so far has been portrayed as a purveyor of musical mayhem displaying no ability whatsoever - and unfortunately no comedic value either. He hasn't had much dialogue but does emerge more here and kept away from music we see a bit more depth and thoughtfulness to the character with an especially good interchange with Miss Ewell late on and a sting in the tail at the end.

The secondary plot concerns the school orchestra. Largely this amounts to the lack of interest and ability of the pupils and staff other than Miss Ewell. Inept efforts at music-making are a comic staple and had indeed previously featured in "Please Sir!". Such comedy is pretty basic but does have its moments.

As a final point the Head and Miss Petting continue their warm relationship with her knitting a scarf for him with all the school team's names on it - only he has given her the cricket team's names by mistake! Continuity wasn't always strong in sitcoms (sometimes for practical reasons so episodes could be shown in any order) but here the theme of the previous episode about their budding relationship had been maintained and that is good to see.

Miss Petting's attempts to teach country dancing to 5C are a predictable failure and leave her very dispirited. Meanwhile Daisy is also feeling downbeat, lacking confidence in her appearance and feeling rejected. Both have some helpful words for each other but things may be looking up for them in terms of relationships. Miss Petting seems to be striking up a bond with the Head while Celia offers the prospect of a date partner for Daisy...

While this is no great shakes in terms of comedy it is an interesting and appealing episode in terms of showing us a little more about the feelings of some of the characters and there is a heart-warming aspect to it that sits quite well with the comedy. Miss Petting (whose first name is revealed as Gloria) had shown promise as a character but hadn't hitherto been given much air time. While there is obvious comedy at her expense as a pretty inept teacher there are also elements of pathos at her plight - a fish out of water at Fenn Street but undoubtedly well-intentioned, dedicated and warm-hearted unlike some of her colleagues.

Typically Mr Hurst reaches out to her but the real boon for her is striking up a real rapport with the Headmaster Mr Cromwell. He is also feeling adrift as he is engaging in a production of The Mikado by Gilbert and Sullivan and finds none of the staff except the sycophantic, self-serving Potter is showing any interest. Miss Petting though is genuinely helpful and interested and he returns the compliment. In a sense both are rather naive, out-of-touch characters who feel a meeting of minds. There are hints of romance and despite the considerable age difference the innocence of both characters means any potential relationship seems quite endearing (and would very likely be platonic in any event). Miss Petting feels particularly invigorated by this change of fortunes and it's good to see her more upbeat.

Daisy also feels very much on the shelf. Her friend Celia - who has no such difficulties - offers some help and the possibility of a date with a very promising boy. Daisy always looks up to Celia and it's striking that despite the girls' very different fortunes Daisy is never jealous or resentful towards Celia as might happen in real life. Although the scenarios are broadly played for laughs the scenes do allude to the insecurities and issues with self-esteem that many people have, especially teenagers.

The episode also highlights how much the relationship between the Head and Miss Ewell had changed. For a long time she had doted on the Head, almost rivalling Potter in terms of devotion while also taking on much of his workload. By now though she has much more critical view of him and is not afraid to tell him so. Perhaps her relationship with Mr Sibley has led her away from him, giving her the confidence to challenge him. As the Series has progressed the virtues of Miss Ewell have become more apparent and with the Head she is much less prepared to suffer a fool gladly.

Another virtue of the focus on these different characters and relationships is that there is less time devoted to the other three new pupil characters who frankly had contributed little of value since their introduction. While clearly the show was not what it was in its first three series it was still showing the occasional ability to produce engaging episodes which hinted at broader themes beyond the comedy.

Headmaster Mr Cromwell is trying to clean up the school, a task made more difficult by the "help" offered by Potter. To make matters worse Potter asks Gobber to assist him in separating materials to be incinerated and those which are not. Gobber - not the best-informed at any point - is given no guidance by Potter and even dangerous chemicals are sent for burning. When Price realises this he concludes the school is at imminent risk of explosion,...

Typically for Series 4 this is not the greatest story but it does allow for some interesting sights as we see large numbers of pupils charging around the school corridors in panic and then them assembled "outside" (actually a studio backdrop but a change of scene nonetheless), film of a fire engine arriving at the school and even some special effects. There are also some scenes in Potter's boiler-room where the incinerator is based. These all provide variations on the standard classroom situations or corridors with pupils walking down them. In a sense this is the show's "disaster movie" and the scenes of panic and changes of scene do add to the rather basic story.

We also see early on that the unfortunate Miss Petting is completely out of her depth, not just reduced to tears by the pupils but even sent out of the class by them because she was talking too much! Later on when the school is evacuated we see her carried out by the charging pupils. The good-natured Mr Smith and Mr Hurst offer their help but clearly Fenn Street seems too much of a challenge for such a diffident teacher. The character of Miss Petting (played by Vivienne Martin) is a rather different teacher to those seen before and is a useful addition to the cast.

Another interesting scene occurs when Mr Smith tries to rescue some of his geography models wrongly sent to be incinerated and he is in the boiler room with Celia and Daisy. These two pupils had barely featured earlier in the episode (or much since they arrived) and it is good to see more of them. Daisy does most of the talking and she mentions about Celia's Indian heritage, something briefly covered in other episodes. Although non-white faces regularly featured among the pupils this was almost always as non-speaking extras so a little more focus on cultural and ethnic issues was welcome.

We also see how class ringleader Terry Stringer is unable to function without the thuggish Gobber's support. This marks him out from the earlier Eric Duffy who was the class leader but never needed to rely on anyone else for his power. Gobber though receives much the most screen-time and as another reviewer stated this is bewildering given how poor the character is - if this were not evident to the producers it seems really surprising. The new cohort of pupils didn't generally have much to offer but the others had a little more potential with the character of Daisy (Rosemary Faith) the best comic presence and certainly under-used.

Overall this is again far from vintage "Please Sir!" but at least the episode offered some variations in style and perspective.

Headmaster Mr Cromwell decides that to emulate the fee-paying public schools he will create an "Old Fennians" Association". He schedules a reunion, Potter devises some ties and hats to signify the Association while the staff work on some musical numbers...

This episode saw a one-off reunion in "Please Sir" for the six original pupil characters - although only four of the original actors returned. Carol Hawkins had taken the place of Penny Spencer and had indeed already played Sharon in the show's feature film while Leon Vitali replaced Malcolm McFee who was temporarily unavailable to play Craven. Carol Hawkins seems more convincing as Sharon as she has a similar vocal delivery as well as catching the original character's demeanour well but Leon Vitali doesn't convince as Craven aside from hair-colour and might as well be playing a different character.

The rest of the gang are present and correct but it has to be said that apart from the nostalgia value the episode has little to commend it thanks to a weak story which in the later stages degenerates into some awful songs - while these were meant to be funny they are not. It is interesting to have a short scene in which the former pupils meet the new characters of5C and this has some neat interplay but there would probably have been much better ways to have a reunion story.

"Please Sir!" and its spin-off series "The Fenn Street Gang" featuring the former pupils were running concurrently at the time so the old characters hadn't really been away so perhaps this would have packed more of a punch had there been no spin-off or a few years had elapsed. While this was perhaps an attempt to revive interest in the revamped "Please Sir!" by trading on its (recent) history it may also have backfired by showing the decline from the first three series. In terms of actual quality an episode with the new cast would probably have been better than this and it reflected a lack of fresh ideas; however for nostalgia value this will probably still attract more interest than most Series 4 outings.

Potter finally gets his fellow members from an Old Comrades group to let him carry the banner for a parade commemorating El Alamein. He seems to have bored them into submission rather than being a popular choice. He is excited by the event but a visit by his former commanding officer Bell strikes him with worry as he fears his less than distinguished war record will now be exposed.

A very Potter-centred episode with a little interplay with the other staff and the pupils barely featured at all. It's a far from great outing but it has some very unusual and interesting elements. There is a night-time recreation of the fateful battle scene.- quite a bold piece of filming and Potter, his comrades and Bell are shown with their modern appearance rather than trying to portray as they would have been back then. While this may have been done to save costs it probably makes the scene seem more distinctive - these are literally "old soldiers" and the unconvincing attempts to make characters look thirty years younger are avoided. Later the old soldiers, the teachers and the pupils are filmed on the streets as the parade makes its way including some scenes approaching the Royal Albert Hall. "Please Sir!" rarely used location filming so this was very welcome to see.

Among the guest cast is the welcome sight of veteran actor Joe Gladwin, then starring in "Nearest and Dearest" but later in "Last of the Summer Wine". Tim Barrett as Bell was another actor with many comedy appearances although his part here is quite "straight", perhaps to make Potter's predicament more intense.

Questions of cowardice and Potter's war-record are raised. The abrasive teacher and former army man Mr Dix had questioned Potter's record earlier in the series and we could see how this could wound him. Another former army man and fellow teacher Ffitchett-Brown helped Potter on that and this occasion. Unfortunately this was Ffitchett-Brown's last episode with the character moving to work in Malawi. He gave good comedy value - never fully exploited in the show - but also showed himself to be a genuinely likeable individual who really tried to help people. Richard Warwick did a very good job in this role and it's unfortunate he and his character did not stay longer. Mr Hurst and Miss Petting who arrived in the last broadcast episode did not appear here - perhaps there didn't seem room for them in the script given all its wartime and Potter-focus.

Altogether a sign that this last series was very much focused on the staff, often with a particular focus on Potter after the departure of Hedges (John Alderton). Far from vintage "Please Sir!" but one of its most distinctive outings all the same.

Another fourth series episode of Please Sir!, another episode of cast changes...

Two new teachers - Mr Hurst and Miss Petting - arrive at Fenn Street. Mr Hurst (Bernard Holley) feels like he's seen it all before having taught many of the pupils at Weaver Street. By contrast the nervous and timid Miss Petting has only taught infants before and feels out of her depth. It's certainly a tough time to be joining as the Head's new rules on shorter hair for boys and longer skirts for girls are causing uproar and lead to a sit-in protest led by Stringer and his henchman Gobber.

This is a sound enough episode but yet more cast changes make the viewer wonder what is going on and suggest a show that is struggling to turn things around. It seems not dissimilar to a football team that keeps changing its line-up, convinced that some new players will turn things around. What we often see in both scenarios is there isn't an improvement and sometimes the results are worse because there isn't enough consistency. The new characters of Hurst and Petting show a little promise. Bernard Holley is a genial actor although his part in this episode is almost a straight one with little use of humour; Miss Petting is a rather different teacher to those seen before and offers more comic potential. No reason is given for these new arrivals and there is no mention of the whereabouts of the most recently-appointed teacher David Ffitchett-Brown (he did appear again once more but it seems odd to have no mention of him). Original writers Esmonde and Larbey wrote this episode so presumably took the lead in creating and introducing these newcomers, and maybe they felt again that the show needed new blood. That may be so but it's usually best to make the changes before a series or introduce newcomers more gradually.

The theme of protest and efforts to enforce - and challenge - more traditional standards was certainly topical at the time and is well enough handled. The pupils have more role than earlier in the series but even then it's only Stringer and Gobber who attract much focus. The character of Gobber remains poor but at least in this outing there is an attempt to develop his character a little more and highlight some of his insecurities about his learning problems and not just highlight his thuggishness.

This was pretty much the central cast that saw the programme through the rest of the series. Some stability therefore was in the offing but these characters seemed to be lacking the quality that made the first three series so appealing.

The school is due to have an inspection - a difficult event at any time but on this occasion the former Weaver Street pupils are determined to wreck their new school's chances. They especially want to take revenge on Miss Ewell who has taken them to task over their behaviour. Meanwhile Miss Ewell is having problems on the home front as her elderly mother sees her daughter's fiance Mr Sibley as a threat and seems determined to end the relationship.

Quite a good episode but it would have been better with more capable pupil characters. What is clear is that the former Weaver Street pupils are prepared to challenge their teachers well beyond their established Fenn Street counterparts who knew their limits. The character of Terry (Barry McCarthy) does a good job as ringleader but if he were modelled on the former class leader Eric Duffy (Peter Cleall) he presents little of the latter's wit and ultimate good-spiritedness. The character of Gobber who is his cousin and "enforcer" continues to be inept - simply making a character stupid and thuggish does not make them funny. The character of "musician and singer" Des is less prominent here and a little more bearable but of little value. The new female pupil characters Celia and Daisy are barely present so altogether these five new pupils are a far cry from their memorable counterparts of Series 1 to 3.

There is still good humour from the staff who continued to have to carry this fourth series. For the first time we see Miss Ewell's mother and her home life more generally. Oddly she hasn't yet met her daughter's fiance and in typical sitcom fashion this leads to some misunderstanding later on. "Dodo" is her nickname for her daughter and Georgie is the family budgie and it is clear Mrs Ewell would prefer the family unit to be just these three. A nice scene is when Mrs Ewell pops into the school and calls the ageing Mr Smith "young man"! It is remarkable generally how little we see of the home lives of the staff. Although Potter and Mr Smith often talk fondly of their wives these are rarely seen while nothing is known of the domestic arrangements of the Head or Mr Price.

The focus on the inspection means little screen-time here for Ffitchett-Brown, Price or Smith which is unfortunate. What is nice to see is Ffitchett-Brown's willingness to help out Miss Ewell and despite their differences in teaching there is a mutual loyalty between them. Miss Ewell may be strict but she is principled and fair; by contrast we see that characters such as the Head and Potter are opportunists whose loyalties switch according to what seems their own advantage.

Halfway through Series 4 "Please Sir!" continues to be fair entertainment but shows signs of decline. Maybe this might change as the new pupils find their feet or perhaps the inspiration was fading? The latter seems more likely but this fourth series should not be written-off.

The gang come across an old industrial boiler and believe they can turn into a rocket, become astronauts and head for Mars, They even improvise spacesuits made out of old sacks. All are aboard for the mission except for Peewee who is asked to do the countdown which they assure her is a very important job. They are amazed to later "lift off" and make it into space - or do they?

Although there aren't many laugh-out-loud moments in this short film it is an engaging tale that puts a smile on the face, appropriately timed given the Apollo missions of the era. There is even some 2001-style music to accompany their journey. As is always the case with these films it makes good use of location filming and is a nice piece of nostalgia for life over fifty years ago.

The Magnificent Six and and a Half were a group of children, mainly young teenagers, who were involved in a series of adventures that formed the basis of short films in the late 1960s (and later with a rather different team in 1972). I feel this is probably the best and certainly the funniest of these short films.

In this one the gang are trying to do good deeds. These involve such things as retrieving a child's balloon, resetting a TV aerial and helping a woman who has been locked out of her house. Each time they need a ladder and they borrow what they think is a spare one - however it is actually being used by a painter and decorator who finds himself in all kinds of mishaps as a result.

The Magnificent Six and a Half films were always very focused on visual humour and this is very much to the fore here with the emphasis very much on slapstick. In many ways slapstick is the most primeval form of humour - something that can appeal to people of all types at any time - but that doesn't mean that it's easy to do. Here it is done very well with Cardew Robinson in excellent form as the hapless decorator, well-supported by .George Roderick as an over-eager policeman who gets caught-up in the colourful exploits.

These films are interesting in their own right. At a time when film and TV was still very studio-bound they were shot on location on 16mm film and there are many scenes of the outer London surburbs, generally not far from the base of Shepperton Studios, so they can provide some nostalgia value of changing locations. However they are also important as the basis of the very popular 1970 TV show "Here Come the Double Deckers". The same production team were involved and the team of (mainly) male children plus a teenage tomboy and much younger girl were retained although the cast aside from Michael Audreson and Brinsley Forde (not in this film) changed. The style of humour with a strong emphasis on visual gags (especially slapstick) backed by jaunty incidental music and sound effects with a little dialogue remained. The chief difference was the TV series had much bigger funding, more American influence and more emphasis on song and dance (including a very memorable singalong theme tune).

While "The Double Deckers" is slicker and better-remembered these short films deserve not to be overlooked and are a fascinating insight into late 1960s children's entertainment.

This is a pretty important episode in the history of "Please Sir!" as it marks the arrival of five new pupil characters who then featured in the remainder of the series. Original writers and creators John Esmonde and Bob Larbey returned so presumably set the mould for these newcomers. It is fair to say their arrival is a mixed blessing after the earlier part of the series revolving almost wholly around the staff.

The cause of this change is the arrival of 87 pupils from rival school Weaver Street which is closing. The staff speculate this may be due to plans to turn Fenn Street into a comprehensive school which could mean them having to compete for their positions with staff from the other schools, a prospect that fills them with trepidation.

The Weaver Street pupils certainly come across as more defiant and challenging than their Fenn Street counterparts who were hardly the most dedicated or obedient individuals. The leader - or ringleader - of them seems to be Terry Stringer who to Ffitchett-Brown's amazement walks out when he dares him to go home if he is unhappy with school. His cousin Gobber - an aggressive but slow-witted individual -follows him as does aspiring protest singer Des.

Based on this episode the future presence of Gobber (Charles Bolton) and Des (Billy Hamon) is going to be truly painful. The Gobber character speaks with a Neandertharl delivery and appears to be an abysmal reworking of the Dennis Dunstable character but with none of the subtlety or charm. Des is little better as he hammers away at a guitar and sings tunelessly. It's hard to know if the awful results on-screen are due to poor writing, direction or performance but it's a demoralising start. The Stringer character (Barry McCarthy) is rather better and does convey more threat.

Two new "girls" (as per "Please Sir!" tradition played by young women) also arrive - Celia (Drina Pavlovic) and Daisy (Rosemary Faith). These two girls bear some similarity to Sharon and Maureen from the first three series although Celia seems more understated than Sharon and Daisy clearly admires her friend whereas the relationship between Sharon and Maureen was more ambivalent. These two characters work quite well based on this episode. They don't make a great impact but certainly seem far more promising than Gobber and Des.

The staff continue to offer some good humour. Most notably we see Potter dramatically change his tune when he wrongly believes a visiting teacher (played by Harold Goldblatt) is going to be the new Head. He fawns before this imagined new Head much as he did with Cromwell but he then completely changes his tune with Cromwell who he now treats with disdain and tells him what he really thinks of him. This shows Potter up to be an utter opportunist in his sycophancy and that his previous devotion to the Head was far from sincere. These are funny scenes and Cromwell is predictably confused with Potter's transformation.

Altogether a solid episode. Its certainly a good thing to have some new pupil characters but compared to the classic team of the first three series they have a long way to go.

Potter is pleased to be receiving from the council a new assistant. However his pleasure evaporates when he discovers that the new assistant is a black man - Sidney Noakes. Potter's discomfort intensifies even further when it becomes apparent that Sidney is much more efficient and proficient at the job - his mission now is to get him out.

In the 1970s there were very few black characters on TV and when they did appear it was almost always in stories where their race was an issue and that is certainly the case here. In comedy the handling of ethnicity was commonly very heavy-handed and that is regrettably demonstrated in this episode. It must be borne in mind though that for its time this would not have seemed controversial. These were very different times and while racism remains a problem in Britain today it was much worse and often openly tolerated back then. In some respects this episode did try to strike a progressive tone for its era and it needs to be judged in the context it was made.

For example it's significant that the prejudice was largely focused on the character of Potter, the most flawed and least sympathetic figure in the show. The other staff simply regard Sidney as another equal member of staff and appreciate his competence and work ethic set against Potter's incompetence and inefficiency. However some of the pupils do feed Potter's prejudice and gullibility by telling him that Sidney is a black power radical although typically he garbles their information. It might be argued they were trying to expose the foolishness of Potter rather than being prejudiced themselves but the end result was still to make him more determined to get Sidney out.

The show had actually addressed racism in a much earlier episode - "Panalal Passes By" from Series 2. In that instance the prejudice was focused on narrow-minded parents while staff and pupils were fully behind the diligent and intelligent pupil Panalal and his committed parents. While that episode still had some flaws it was rather better than this one, perhaps due to it being penned by original writers Esmonde and Larbey and being produced when the show was fresher. Perhaps in different circumstances this would have been more sensitively done and more successful as a result. Derek Griffiths as Sidney is an impressive actor and does a typically good job but he was not helped by the material here.

It must be said that there is effective humour on screen at the rightful expense of Potter's racism but we also know that there would be plenty of racist viewers - certainly in that era - who would have felt only too comfortable with his views. This was often the dilemma of such comedy back then - were viewers laughing at the stupidity of racism or more disturbingly laughing with it?

It's worth noting that Potter possibly having an assistant had been raised before early in Series 3 when Dennis Dunstable - who was struggling to find a job - had been suggested as a candidate and once again Potter displayed his narrow-mindedness, in that instance because of Dennis's learning difficulties. No doubt Dennis would also have been better at the job than Potter - as indeed would be almost any assistant. Maybe it would have been better to have written the story of a new assistant upstaging and embarrassing Potter without the issue of ethnicity being involved and there would still have been plenty of good humour in that scenario..

There is a small sub-plot in which Ffitchett-Brown tries to get permission to teach some sex education to his class with the out-of-touch, prudish Head trying to block him. Again this theme had been covered in a much earlier episode which may have been why it was not fully explored here. Interestingly the generally traditional Miss Ewell is more approving of Ffitchett-Brown's ideas and this shows that she was generally a much more perceptive and open-minded teacher than the Head. The fact though that this story wasn't opened-up maybe also indicates that this new - and promising - teacher wasn't being fully utilised on screen. Deryck Guyler as Potter now had first billing on the credits so perhaps it wasn't surprising to see him take centre stage but it did seem a missed opportunity.

Finally the pupils are again barely featured in this episode and as mentioned earlier their contribution is largely to fuel Potter's prejudices. While the staff were generally doing a sterling job sustaining the comedy the pupils at this stage had become a pale shadow of those of the first three series.

Mr Price, brilliantly played by Richard Davies, is my favourite "Please Sir!" character so an episode centred around him was always likely to have plenty of appeal for me.

Mr Price has long had an abysmal relationship with the pupils of Fenn Street. The other staff are also well aware of his cynicism and disaffection with teaching so they jokingly speculate in his absence on alternative jobs for him. Most of these are obvious non-runners but one of them as a representative for a pharmaceutical company is much more suitable. Price later discovers this and decides to apply for that job. While his academic qualifications for the post are more than adequate would they be prepared to offer a job to someone with such a negative attitude? Or will he rise to a new challenge in which he is rather more valued?

This is a very entertaining episode, allowing once again for the virtual insignificance of the pupils so far in this fourth series. The focus is much more on the possible consequences of life outside Fenn Street for Mr Price - and for the school. Perhaps surprisingly given earlier events the other staff are genuinely worried about his possible departure. It has to be said that for Mr Cromwell and Miss Ewell this is much more about the practical difficulties of replacing a Science teacher rather than genuine valuation of his work. However there is a nice scene where Mr Smith shows genuine affection for his colleague and regret over his possible departure. This typifies Smithy who was always a very sincere and well-intentioned man. The newest member of staff Ffitchett-Brown appreciates Price's subversive character and sense of humour but also looks out for him. What is certain is that the pupils certainly wouldn't miss the teacher with whom they share a mutual contempt.

There are some interesting signs of different times. Despite his negativity cynicism and antagonistic relationships with pupils Mr Price's job security is never in doubt - he has a job there for as long as he wants. In today's tougher teaching environment he would be under notice to improve and his job most definitely at risk if he didn't do so. In fact scarcely any of the Fenn Street teachers would get a classroom job in the real world, nor indeed would almost any sitcom teacher but of course if they were all conventional and fully competent where would the humour be in that? He also gets an interview with the pharmaceutical company at short notice with no apparent difficulty, a sign of an age when employment seemed very plentiful and obtaining and changing jobs seemed far more straightforward than it is now.

The final outcome won't come as a huge surprise but in sitcom the entertainment comes from seeing how that outcome will be devised. Certainly a good episode but for the show's longer-term prospects it was going to soon need a revitalisation of its pupil characters so that the staff were not carrying the comic responsibility so much.

"Shadows of Fear" was an excellent but sadly largely overlooked series. This episode kicked-off its regular run after a strong initial episode (possibly a pilot) the previous summer and really sets the mood for the series as a whole. Unlike many suspense productions this wasn't set in country mansions or luxury apartments and the menace was not provided by psychopaths, serial killers or demons but instead from apparently ordinary people living in places very similar to those of the vast majority of viewers. This helps to give it a realistic edge over many of its better-known counterparts.

A bleak domestic picture is painted in this episode. Anne Brand (Sheila Hancock) is an exasperated, demoralised wife. The most obvious source of her frustration is her heavy-drinking, faithless husband (played by Ronald Hines) who has apparently ended an affair but she remains unconvinced. Her young son Michael has failed to return from school, something which his older sister Judy (Suzanne Togni) seems to know something about but isn't telling - but why?

Almost the whole episode is occupied by these three characters and all the scenes take place at night in the humble family home or on its doorstep (filmed in the studio rather than an exterior). This gives the setting a claustrophobia and intensity than isn't present on a more expansive production with many sets or outside filming. This could easily have been performed in the theatre. A dripping kitchen tap and a stagnant pool of washing-up help exemplify the humbleness of the setting and stand as a symbol or the deterioration of the household as a whole.

The title "Sugar and Spice" is certainly an ironic one. Judy is anything but nice and while she does crack an occasional smile it always seems to be at someone else's expense. Her moodiness is something that many parents of teenagers will be all too familiar with but it's clear that problems run deeper than that. Judy is devious, sometimes defiant and certainly manipulative. One can understand why her parents find her so difficult to deal with. However there are also a few moments when she shows a more vulnerable side - troubled and not just troubling. The viewer is left to speculate on how the family - especially Judy - has come to this and what she actually knows or is capable of doing.

Sheila Hancock and Ronald Hines give strong accounts as the parents with Sheila giving a particular fine performance as the dispirited wife and mother. However the most memorable acting display is by Suzanne Togni as Judy. Before this she was largely best-known for appearing in visual, slapstick-style comedy such as one of the team in "The Magnificent Six and a Half" children's films (precursors to "Here Come the Double Deckers") and Ronnie Barker's dialogue-free short film "Futtock's End". This role is far removed from such humour and she showed great potential as a dramatic actress here. However for whatever reason her screen career ended very shortly after this episode. This isn't so unusual for child / teenage actors but in this instance at least it seems unfortunate she wasn't seen in future productions.

"Shadows of Fear" also defied many of the suspense conventions in its endings and this is also seen here. It's a dark and troubling conclusion typical of a series that didn't try to have everything neatly wrapped-up and the viewer is left to ponder what would have happened to the characters afterwards. An excellent offering but the series had many in store.

After an impressive couple of episodes this was rather a return to the fairly lacklustre standard of the early outings of Series 4. It still has its moments but is very much in the shadow of the first three series.

After his arrival in episode 5 David Ffitchett-Brown in trying to freshen things up further by getting some new teaching aids including a new television and posters. Maybe this might address another problem of a couple of pupils who have been truanting and perhaps feel school has little to enthuse them. He finds them at the local billiards (snooker) hall and tries to get them back to Fenn Street.

The core difficulty of Series 4 so far is illustrated here - the pupils have rather gone missing from the action and the focus has become too much on the staff. The staff interactions are still entertaining but the strength of the earlier series was that there was a core of memorable pupils who could engage in their own right as well as through their scenes with the teachers. Pupils have been featured in Series 4 but with no consistent focus so they become rather anonymous, Their characters also largely lack comedic value and in this story the focus on student disaffection is perhaps too close to realism than suits a sitcom. It's interesting to see early appearances by Robin Asquith and Shirley Cheriton (later of Eastenders) but little else from them to command interest. Shirley Cheriton is though unusual in being a Fenn Street pupil who does look in her mid-teens rather than her mid-twenties!

The focus on "billiards" (the pupils are actually playing snooker but the game was less well-known then) is interesting. Most of the staff - most notably the Head - see billiard halls as places of bad influence, a stereotype / cliche that was quite common then. A few years later the game became very popular thanks to TV exposure and it lost that dubious reputation.

As usual Potter messes things up to the frustration of all the staff except the indulgent Head. There is a striking sequence in which they are criticising him and fail to notice that he has entered the staffroom and can hear their harsh (though accurate) words. How would Potter deal with this denunciation? "Please Sir!" was changing a lot but Potter's incompetence was a constant source of frustration for his colleagues - and humour for his viewers.

After a shaky start to Series 4 the fourth episode "A Rather Nasty Outbreak" had seen some return to form and that was continued in this impressive instalment.

The arrival of the aggressive and disrespectful Mr Dix lifted the previous episode and here he was joined by another new arrival - David Ffitchett-Brown. This, coupled with the welcome return of regular writers and series creators Esmonde and Larbey, are the key ingredients for success. Before his arrival the background of Ffitchett-Brown - a posh, former army officer - might have suggested a traditional, stiff-upper lip teacher but he proves to be very different. He arrives at Fenn Street in a Mercedes sports car accompanied by a glamorous girlfriend - "Jack". He has shaggy hair and is literally a colouful dresser. Clearly full of confidence, energy and good humour. He immediately has Potter gushing over him due to his army background.

The rather traditional and conventional Miss Ewell unsurprisingly has some doubts about Ffitchett-Brown's demeanour but the other staff (bar one) and certainly the students are impressed by him, the latter especially liking his humour and adventurous teaching methods. The one, predictable exception is Mr Dix - while both are ex-army Dix is an authoritarian bound to react badly to someone so liberated in his approach. When Ffitchett-Brown arrives the staff are already boiling over about Dix. They want the Head to get rid of him but the Head is too weak to take action. It therefore falls to the newcomer to try to put Dix in his place...

Ffitchett-Brown seems to arrive as the replacement for the much-loved character of Hedges (John Alderton). It would have been tempting to have just create a Hedges-like character to try to recreate the old magic but wisely the writers and producers decide to introduce a very different teacher and personality. Richard Warwick - later best-known for working with Derek Jarman in his arthouse-style movies - does an excellent job here in a very different early role.

Although Please Sir! Was generally an uncomplicated comedy it did have its moments of social comment and that is seen very well here. We see the contrast between the authoritarian, even bullying style of Dix and the liberal, progressive style of Ffitchett-Brown with the latter shown as far more likely to get positive, long-term results. This is well-illustrated when Ffitchett-Brown criticises Dix's hardline, even humiliating treatment of an overweight pupil. As the former points out, Dix may succeed in getting the boy to shed a few pounds but only at the expense of a long-term inferiority complex. Instead he recommends teaching tailored to the boy's ability which might help him progress without all the bad feeling. Many viewers - especially in that era - would have recognised teachers like Dix and be all too aware of the damage they can cause; they would have been much less likely to have experienced a teacher like the unconventional Ffitchett-Brown.

It was still early days and remained to be seen whether Ffitchett-Brown would continue to have such a great impact. It was also another episode which showed how the pupils had become rather sidelined and fairly anonymous. Despite those caveats a very encouraging and entertaining offering.