More light but still no illumination

Press, 27 March 1981, Page 9

More light but still no illumination

pßeviewl

Doug McKenzie

Leonard Nimoy popped up again on Two on Wednesday carrying out an ‘Tn Search Of.” The subject this time was “UFO Australia.” The main treatment was, though, the well-remembered event along the Kaikoura coast with the night sighting of light from an Argosy in flight. It would have been fairer of Mr Nimoy to have called the episode “UFO New Zealand.” He spoke of Christchurch with two careful syllables, setting the scene for the flight between Christ Church and Wellington.

The general impression seemed to be that Mr Nimoy was lacking in authority; or, to put it another way, that he didn’t know what he was talking about. Yet, fair enough; no man can be . expected to be the expert on everything, or even about “legends, myths, puzzling occurrences, the real and unbelievable,” which is what TV New Zealand advertises as being his particular field.

. Granting, in order to save an argument, that TV New Zealand actuallly did know what Mr Nimoy’s subject was this week, how did Mr Nimoy handle it? Well, he was up to normal style — urbane, sincere, impartial, nose close to the ground and ears flat as well, very professional and plastic.

There was no harm in going over a UFO .episode once more. It is the sort of thing — like abortion and the Springbok tour — that no-one tires of arguing about .because everyone's mind is made up, any new facts are rejected as rank confusion, and nobody is listening any longer to what anyone else is saying.

Much good fun can therefore result from all this, especially since it must finally be left as a question mark for you, the viewer: this leaves viewers with an important sense of responsibility which warms them towards Mr Nimoy and makes them want to tune into him again next week as

a person of evident intelligence and perception. If the programmers suggested a touch of unawareness with “In Search Of’’ for just this week they have developed a more or less permanent and unreasonable conjunction of times with "Barney Miller’ overlapping "The Professionals." This is not . quite the disaster of all time that arose from the overlapping of “Upstairs and Downstairs” and “The Colditz Story’’ a few years ago, but it is not very good all the same.

It can hardly be thought that the audience for one cop show would not largely be the audience for another cop show, especially when each show is brilliant in quite different ways. Subject to any evidence towards clarification which might arise, this programming arrangement remains impenetrable.

It is a measure of the general respect that the viewer can have for Hal Linden that his appearance as a singing playboy the night before in “Monte Carlo

Show” could be overlooked. But he had better not do it too often. It is all the more meritorious that it was the Americans, of all people, who devised a cop show with no shoot-outs, no car chases, and no action hotter than pouring fresh coffee into a cup. This purely studio characterisation is Broadway rather than Hollywood and almost a

mystery on TV, and long mav it prosper. “The Professionals” is. built on sheer excitement;' and long may it prosper, too.l Thoroughly enjoyable pro-, grammes are not so plentiful; that TV can afford to place them at mutually exclusive J times. Why this conjunction; has come about can only be i put down to Super Season I hysteria. ......