‘CHiPs’ is falling

Press, 9 May 1981, Page 13

‘CHiPs’ is falling

r

Ken Strongman

“CHiPs.” I’m betting that even the children are going off it; that they are probably still watching but that it is beginning to pall. It is the same old helmets, sunglasses and flashing teeth up and down the highways of L.A.

Petty crimes, with possible danger that never eventuates. crashes, chemicals, unconscious people and constant sunshine.

Although they have what could be one of the most boring jobs in the world, the writers of "CHiPs” must be admired for managing to make five minutes into a full hour.

Three things help. They don’t have to think about the plot; it is much the same each week. So is the characterisation: Ponch and Jon have simply not developed. Even their relationship is much the same as ever, that is. too male.

They still seem to be trying too hard to convince each other that they really prefer women. Most of all though, the writers have hit on the idea of gradually replacing words with numbers. “We have an 11.85 on a 10.82, with a 103 up to his eyes in a 10.1. O.K. let’s give him a 10.20 on the R 3 and a 10.5 to the 54.” “Right, Mary 3.”

It could provide us all with

a second language without the bother of learning French. Is it their little joke to call Ponch “Mary 3,” one wonders? It certainly suits him.

After “CHiPs” is “Happy Days,” hopefully programmed in this way to promote comparison. This week The Fonz had the toothache and was just as scared of the dentist as any red-blooded reviewer. But he is creative about his fear; he won’t admit it.

Suffering from the Samson complex, he feels that dental treatment will sap his basic appeal. There could be something in it. And before he goes for treatment, he eats by putting his cheeseburger through a blender so that chewing is unnecessary. He attends the surgery with three large friends ready to throw the dentist out of the window at the first hint of pain. What it is to see a favourite fantasy played out.

Then, the treatment over, he checks on its effectiveness by kissing the receptionist. There’s another one. And at no time does he salivate.

Why does “Happy Days” work and “CHiPs” not? The main point is that “CHiPs” attempts to appear like reality and fails — the plots and the characters just seem insincere.

“Happy Days” on the other hand, makes' no assault on reality. It is pure, impossible, but directly appealing, fantasy.

In “CHiPs,” the characters are grown-up children, even the heroes having that mock serious look affected by children trying to appear mature. But The Fonz and his friends are adults playing as children, sometimes even working up to adolescence.

The Fonz himself is completely endearing, but so are Mr and Mrs C; they have all developed throughout the series. They are not rich people, the only glamour in their lives coming from their own personalities. “CHiPs,” though, couldn't exist without wealth and property, money and technology. It’s glamour is crass.

All of which means that “Happy Days” exudes a gentle warmth; the characters like one another and enjoy life. The “CHiPs” people pretend warmth. On the face of it they like one another, but one has the impression that if the chips were ever down, competition would prevail.