Tales of the Unexpected (TV Series) My Lady Love, My Dove (1980) User Reviews

My Lady, My Bore.....

[Sleepin_Dragon · 5/10 · 10 February 2016]

Pamela Beauchamp is a wealthy and bored housewife, brash and looking for excitement, she and husband Arthur invite a young couple for the weekend. The Snapes arrive to play Bridge for high stakes, Pamela, who has a naughty streak plans to bug the couple's room, to hear the couple making out, but a different surprise awaits them.

After the utter brilliance of the last few episodes My Lady, My Dove comes as a major disappointment, it's such a non event of a story, there's nothing really clever, nasty or exciting about it, even the wonderful Elaine Stritch could do very little to save it.

The performances of our two female actresses are the best thing about this episode, it's a poor story, but Elaine Stritch adds a bit of humour to it, and Lisa Eichorn (a great actress) also adds something to it.

Disappointing snapshot, no real middle or end, it's all just a little pointless really. 5/10

Rubbishy Tales of the Unexpected episode.

[poolandrews · 4/10 · 8 May 2007]

Tales of the Unexpected: My Lady Love, My Dove is set in America where Arthur Beauchamp (Shane Rimmer) lives with his rich domineering wife Pamela (Elaine Stritch), she makes him place a microphone in their guest bedroom so when two bridge playing friends Henry (Doug Lambert) & Sally Snape (Lisa Eichhorn) stay the night they can listen to every word they say. Pamela thinks it might be fun but what they hear takes them by surprise...

This Tales of the Unexpected story was episode 8 from season 2 that originally aired here in the UK during April 1980, the fourth of nine Tales of the Unexpected episodes to be directed by Herbert Wise this is one of the worst stories from season 2. This one was dramatised by Ronald Harwood & interestingly Roald Dahl isn't credited with the basic story which is probably why it's pretty much as bad as season 2 got, even during his introduction Dahl doesn't really refer to the story or it's origins. Anyway, this is a pretty poor effort that disappoints right the way through. Most Tales of the Unexpected episodes have a twist ending which is the only reason they exist really but My Lady Love, My Dove (a strange & meaningless title) just ends abruptly as if they had run out of time or just didn't know how to end it, there's no discernible twist here & I just don't understand the point of this story at all, I really don't. There's not even a reasonable explanation as to why the Beauchamp's would want to bug their guest's bedrooms other than it might be 'fun', yeah right because that's the sort of think we all think might be fun isn't it?

A very cold looking England & some poor studio bound sets never convince this was set in America & those accents are terrible, there's no excitement, no suspense, no tension & I am at a loss to see anything particularly good in this episode. The acting is pretty poor here although there's yet another familiar British cast.

My Lady Love, My Dove is pretty rubbish if I'm honest, I personally think it's an almost pointless & meaningless story that didn't do anything for me at all.

Elaine is BORED!!!

[mark.waltz · 5/10 · 27 December 2021]

Elaine Stritch can do no wrong, even with the weakest description and the most absent of plots, and her wealthy much married socialite here is so bored that she decides to have her husband (whom she takes care of financially) bug the guest room for their visiting friends, and they discovered that they had been cheating at bridge. Stritch could read federal tax code books and make it fascinating, but unfortunately, the story is trite and really has no conclusion. Frankly, who cares about bridge outside bridge players? Shane Rimmer, Lisa Eichhorn and Douglas Lambert are the unlucky three who must try to outmaneuver Stritchy in the art of scene stealing, but all they come up with is the Joker. Worth a one-time look for Stritch but not much more.

My Lady Love, My Dove

[Prismark10 · 1/10 · 29 August 2020]

Pamela Beauchamp (Elaine Stritch) is a wealthy woman who keeps her husband Arthur (Shane Rimmer.) A younger couple have been invited to play cards for money. Pamela thinks it is a good idea to bug their bedroom and listen in to their conversations.

This is an absolutely terrible adaptation. I had to remind myself that Ronald Harwood is an Oscar winning screenwriter.

It features a lot of talking, more talking, some card playing and then listening into a conversation in a bugged room. Then it ends.

There is no story and no twist. There was nothing to adapt really.

Poor

[evans-15475 · 2/10 · 28 December 2020]

This was certainly unexpected no action no mystery and no twist

It Has Elaine Stritch

[jdsnowbunny78 · 1/10 · 3 April 2021]

And Elaine Stritch is all it has...well, Lisa Eichorn is always a treat. But it feels like there is no real script or direction. I've come to expect more from Tales of the Unexpected and, I'm usually not disappointed. The ladies talents were wasted here.

"Let's have some real fun for a change."

[classicsoncall · 6/10 · 29 August 2021]

Taking Pamela Beauchamp's (Elaine Stritch) own advice in my summary line above, you might try another episode of this series. That's because the expected payoff of hearing her guest couple's romantic interlude turns into a session of developing an even more sophisticated bidding code to outwit their hosts. Even more bizarre is Pamela's response by hunkering down with husband Arthur (Shane Rimmer) to embark on a mission of coming up with one of their own. I agree with most of the other viewers on this board who found the story kind of pointless, even if it had an off handed kind of twist. But I didn't necessarily agree with Roald Dahl's opening remarks, almost all of which seemed to be off the mark. You can read it for yourself in the 'Quotes' section for this episode, one of the few times Dahl's statement could have used a bit of research.

Totally unexpected but not in the way one hoped

[nqure · 4/10 · 14 April 2021]

A bored married couple, with the rich wife dictating proceedings to a subservient husband, decide to play a naughty trick on a visiting younger couple, who they regard with contempt as a pair of bores.

Their attempt at voyeurism (bugging their guests bedroom) turns into something else which arouses their attention in another completely different way. They pass the evening playing a game of bridge together before Pamela & her husband imagine hearing another sort of game that is considerably more naughty.

And that's about it. The older couple realize their guests actually play bridge using a secret code so that they can communicate their hands to each other.

I echo what most of the other reviewers have posted. Elaine Stritch was outstanding in 'William & Mary', but is wasted here. Apart from one scene which lapses into farce as she tries to waylay her guests from catching Arthur in the very act of planting the bug.

From the outset, I imagined an episode where perhaps one couple pairs off to the surprise of the other, or once the bugging storyline became the lead, the older couple hearing some uncomfortable truths about themselves upon eavesdropping on their guests' conversation . 'The Eavesdropper' mines similar territory but is a far better episode with Dorothy Tutin. Acutely more psychological, it is a tale of a woman driven practically insane by a conversation she overhears in a bar that she thinks is about her husband.

This episode is far more slight and a disappointment by comparison. This was Stritch's second and final appearance in the series. No doubt, she probably informed her agent to tell Mr Dahl she was busy if he ever wanted her to star in a third. Busy washing her hair.

Tales of the Why Even Bother?

[brexitstageleft · 3/10 · 6 January 2022]

I've started watching them all, not in any real order, this is the 32nd episode I've seen so far and it's probably the worst of the lot. Alot of them are bad, but in a good way. This one is just a waste of ink and paper. No proper story, no twist, no drama. The type of guff you write on a beermat when you've been given two hours to come up with a plot at the last minute.

The only funny thing is watching the actors. They're actually acting! Presumably they read the script, but still acted like it was an Oscar-worthy movie, even though they must have realised how pointless the whole project was. A fantastic level of commitment that you just don't see anymore.

Elaine!

[craigcalman · 8/10 · 23 March 2021]

To enjoy Elaine Stritch chewing up the furniture AND the staircase is what makes this episode special for me. And I discovered talents I was unaware of before, including Shane Rinner and Douglas Lambert. And of course Lisa Eichhorn, who has such a special quality.

Is that it?

[xxkyczr · 2/10 · 7 June 2021]

It feels like this episode was cut off in the middle. Something is missing. Is this really all there is to this one?

Pointless!!

[mclarke-41185 · 1/10 · 13 October 2022]

Echoing the other reviews on here this is the worst episode so far and I'm watching them all in chronological order. Good actors wasted on a non story. Seems to cut off strangely at end with no twist. If anyone could enlighten me I would love to know what we're supposed to make of this shambles!! Even having to add more words to this as review is too short! But there's nothing else to say!! Be interested to know if Mr Dahl commented on this when he saw it! I have also been reading the stories to see how much they differ so maybe I'll check this one out if it's available to read. Luckily this is hopefully the worst of an otherwise mostly decent series.

?

[xmbqqbvmv · 1/10 · 10 September 2022]

What on earth was that?

I assumed there must be a part 2 but no! How did they allow such rubbish to be aired? I had to watch it again as I thought I must of missed something. Has to be the worst piece of television ever. I'd love to be able to those involved what they actually thought they were doing? Absolute tosh. I have seen every episode of this programme and while some are a bit iffy I generally like the show even though you can guess a lot of the endings but this was beyond comprehension, I just can't believe how stupid it was. There was no ending at all, were we supposed to draw up a conclusion in our own minds? Did the writer suddenly lose the plot? Was he drunk? It's so bad I'm going to keep it for posterity.