More black marks to 'Tonight at Nine'

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33965, 4 October 1975, Page 5

More black marks to 'Tonight at Nine '

Surely “Tonight at Nine” on Thursday couldn’t really have been serious. But there was dear old lan Johnstone solemnly repeating what some chap from the Monetary and Economic Council had said about “relative poverty.”

We ended up with some diverting shots from the world of the down-and-outs, but nary a glance at the people we suspect are really feeling the pinch — large families and solo parents with dependent children. The articulate widow with the nice neat suburban property and the complaint about not being able to earn more than $2l a week might well have had a point, but hardly seemed to come anywhere near the term poverty — even “relative poverty.” Well-spoken Lindsay Perigo did not quite fit into the .rough and ready world of I the alcoholics and the destitutes. And we would ; swear he did not quite catch ■what the old bearded fellow had to say — not that we did either.’

There was an unexpected touch of humour when the garrulous little old nun, whose job it was to dish out the meals, forgot her task in the excitement of the moment, and was nudged by her colleague to keep at it. “Tonight at Nine” threw in a social worker and a sociologist and that was it. No attempt was made to scout around a State housing area, or to talk to the inhabitants of some of the run-down flats and houses shown.

So apart from the sociologist’s vague references to an under-privileged group having low skills and low

access to services, we did not end up much the wiser. Somehow “Tonight at Nine” failed to get down to the nitty-gritty. The piece which purported to be a look at the relations between East and West Germany was also disappointing. This needed much more than an interview with a representative of the East German Government and shots of Willy Brandt in his hey-day, with a few clips of Soviet tanks rolling into Czechoslovakia. One of the most interesting items was passed off in a sentence — “Mr Z” of the Security Intelligence Service was seen taking photographs of mourners at the funeral of the late Dr Sutch. There is no doubt of the importance of early-evening programmes in the twochannel set-up. Take Thursday evening, for example. Looking in “The Listener” was no help — viewing looked pretty dismal on both channels. After deciding TV2 could offer the best prospects, we I tuned in at 7.30 p.m. “Gunsmoke” was just too much i— it was goodbye TV2 from I then on. Mind you, M.A.S.H. was not much better — the zany 'lot seemed to be running out of steam. The only piece ’worth watching was the film

I of Frank’s wedding. Could . his wife have really been so t terrible? > # I “Haiwaii Five-O” hardly . seemed worth going to Haiwaii to produce and was all very ho-hum. i The best viewing of the .’evening was the thriller ! movie, “Ring Once for t Death.” In spite of having ||a theme that has been done ■ to death, Nyree Dawn Porter f|as the beautiful victim, and , Michael Jayston as the butler, provided compelling . I television. ,! The play made the most >’of the captive lady being >1 slowly poisoned and starved \to death with many I .agonising attempts to use J the telephone or attract I attention. I And Miss Porter certainly; ‘ reflected effectively the art’ Lof the make-up expert. It I was a good yarn ' well; ' executed, although the butjjer’s accomplice and girl-1 friend was very much a ! ’weak link. I I ... ••• 1! Just why any television! ? channel should consider buy■ling and screening “Father, J ) Dear Father” is difficult to! i! understand. Patrick Cargill will havel ■ Ito do better in his theatre ’ performances in New Zea-1 t land — most of the time in’ ;lhis television programme he 11 is just a bore. — K.C.