MovieChat Forums > CHiPs (1977) Discussion > Ended on a low point...

Ended on a low point...

posted 10 years ago by darkavenger77
18 replies | jump to latest

I'm about halfway through the finale, and it's easy to see why this show ended. It made the normally wise Getraer look like a fool, and had enough teen drama for a spin-off. Perhaps that was the idea in bringing back most of the same kids.

I'm really looking forward to seeing Jon Baker & Season 1 when I watch the next episode I recorded.

EDIT
The last spoken line of the series was "I broke my nail!" 

Contrast that with the first spoken line of the pilot from Jon Baker: "LA 15, 7 Mary 3 and 4 still in pursuit, approaching 4 level."

I think that sums up the difference in content and quality perfectly.

RIP Ron Swanson. Writers created your awesomeness in S1 and killed it in S7

[–] basterd7 10 years ago

I left a similar comment on the Return of the Brat Patrol thread. The series ended with a whimper with that idiotic episode. The difference in quality between that tripe and today's "Dog Gone" was stark. I don't think the show quite found its stride until season 2, but this first season was some innovative television in the way it was shot. Plus the chemistry between Ponch and Jon is obvious and not forced like with the Nelson boys.

[–] jarrodmcdonald-1 10 years ago

Can't wait till we get back to the season 6 episodes again. Fun stuff. If all the seasons were on DVD, it's the only season I would buy.

Generally speaking, I don't mind Jon Baker, but I always got the sense Wilcox had an insecurity about Estrada's growing popularity and eventual control of the show. It gets in the way of their chemistry. By comparison, the tone is easier and a lot more mellow, with Ponch over the younger guys in the final season. Even when Tom Reilly is switched to more of a supporting role in the last three episodes, there is no ego. It's just guys (and a gal) doing a cop show. Plus the campier elements make the show a hoot to watch in season six.

Also, I feel like the supporting characters are more fully established and developed by the time we reach those later stories of CHiPs. Harlan is just great in the sixth season.

By the way, the Laura Brannigan episode is the highest rated one here on the IMDb. And two other episodes from the last season are still in the top ten, out of 137 episodes overall.

[–] basterd7 10 years ago

Guess we'll have to agree to disagree on the season 6 subject. I think Ponch and Jon's chemistry onscreen was undeniable, regardless of whether they liked each other in real life. The storytelling in these early seasons was far superior to season 6, which tended to rely on ridiculous gimmicks like exploding robots and aliens.

I think by season 6, all of the characters were just caricatures of themselves. Grossman as the roly-poly buffoon. Harlan as the sarcastic munchkin. And Estrada went from being kind of a bad ass in the early seasons to some prima donna glory hound.

I've never checked into the individual IMDB ratings of these episodes, but I can say without hesitation that the Branigan episode was just as bad as the other season 6 cheesefests.

After finally watching the final season, I know enough to never watch it again.

[–] darkavenger77 10 years ago

Having just watched S1 E2 Undertow, one scene that stuck out was how Jon treated the thief that had robbed a store. While he was initially mad (human nature after a pursuit), he calmed the guy and told him he'd call his kids for him. IMO, this line of duty incident was far better, more on-point for the show, and more believable than Poncherello's various S6 social work.

RIP Ron Swanson. Writers created your awesomeness in S1 and killed it in S7

[–] misd-86934 10 years ago

I liked season 6 because I thought Tom Reilly was gorgeous, but it was a shame that he had to do drugs and pretty much get ostracized by Erik Estrada and his role diminished. If that happened today, it would just be another actor doing drugs and the show would go on as normal. I am not condoning what Tom did, but I don't think they had to essentially do away with his character because of it.

[–] jarrodmcdonald-1 10 years ago

I agree. Even when Charlie Sheen was having trouble with drugs and his behavior was erratic, he did not immediately get fired from 'Two and a Half Men.' I think networks give these guys more time to clean up their lives now...there's too much money at stake and they need to keep producing new episodes...and there may be more tolerance about questionable behavior now than in the 80s.

I think this thread is over-dramatic and falsely titled. The last episode had some bright spots. The series did not end on a low point.

[–] darkavenger77 10 years ago

The thread was simply my opinion, no drama, just factual assessments based upon what I saw and heard. You seem to be the only one here that likes it, but I don't see the need to belittle your posts or call them false.

The fact the show did not see a 7th season is indicative that it just was not as good as it once was. If they knew it was the series finale they should have at least written in some closure for the characters.

RIP Ron Swanson. Writers created your awesomeness in S1 and killed it in S7

[–] jarrodmcdonald-1 10 years ago

I don't like your negative threads and the review you wrote for the final episode of season 5 was over the top in my opinion. Someone who is a true fan of the show is going to find something positive to say about all the episodes. All series have the occasional clunker. Lucille Ball cited two episodes of 'I Love Lucy' as clunkers. But even with the clunkers, some redeeming elements can be found. I think you are way too critical of the show. But they did not make it with your approval ratings in mind. They made it for a certain type of audience, during that particular time.

As for providing closure, most shows in the 60s, 70s and 80s did not have farewell episodes, even when they knew they would not be back for another season. In syndication, the idea was to have a continuous loop without an ending. It was rare when something like 'The Fugitive' or 'MASH' had a definite ending. It did not become customary for shows to have an identifiable ending until the 90s. So it is unfair to blast CHiPs for supposedly ending on a low point. Their goal was to turn out an episode that satisfied the requirement for weekly entertainment. The last episode entertains, so by that standard, it delivered. It's better to stop expecting CHiPs to provide something else it was not meant to provide. We have to be realistic.

[–] darkavenger77 10 years ago

Someone who is a true fan of the show is going to find something positive to say about all the episodes.

I disagree. What you are describing is considered a "fanboy" or someone "drinking the Kool-Aid" (actually Flavor Aid) that cannot ever say anything bad about their show, or must defend it when others point out obvious problems.

I've noted one of the later episode reviewers, desertman84, will usually do what you say in this regard- they rated S6's Tight Fit a 7/10 (even though the review had nothing positive and the end paragraph was all negative), but even they rated The Spaceman Made Me Do It at one star. They rated Rock Devil Rock a 10/10. Their review said in part "...probably one of the best episodes of CHiPs during the show's run and definitely in the 6th season." The other review of the episode was a 5/10. What's one man's meat is another's poison.

The Season 5 finale was terrible. Even desertman84 rated it as one star. The episode was over the top bad, so my review noted some of these over the top moments.

Just as they did not make the show for my approval, I do not write my comments or reviews for your approval. They are written based upon my experience and citing facts or material depicted. Again, I'll cite the fact the show did not have a 7th season as the best indicator of the failure of season 6.

The reason I'm so critical of this show is because I worked in law enforcement for over 20 years. Doctors are critical of medical procedures on shows, lawyers of legal shows, etc. As one example, if you know any defense lawyers, ask them about lawyers sitting silently in Law & Order interrogation rooms while their clients answer questions. L&O BTW was for the most part a great show, as evidenced by it running for so many years.

I don't expect CHiPs to be a documentary (even Real Stories of the Highway Patrol showed officers hamming for cameras, that's human nature), nor do I expect a great cop show such as the earlier Dragnet or later Robbery Homicide Division. I do expect attention to writing, relevant story lines, and believable characters. The earlier seasons had all of those. You can approach cop shows from several directions. Dragnet and Adam-12 are the serious "just the facts" method, and on the other end of the spectrum is something like Sledge Hammer!, which was an outright comedy parodying Dirty Harry. All were great shows IMO.

Sometimes cop shows cross these lines and they are still good. Hunter began in 1984 and ran for 7 seasons. It started as a semi-comedic takeoff on Harry, with him wearing casual clothes, breaking police policy, driving clunker police cars, and using a catch phrase ("Works for me"). Within a few seasons the lead character was a true coat and tie homicide detective with a late model police car that used a realistic LAPD radio identifier. As I recall, the show was honored by the LAPD after the 100th episode. Like CHiPs, when co-star Dee Dee/Stepfanie Kramer left, and the main character had revolving female partners the show's popularity began to drop as did ratings and like CHiPs it only lased one more season. Unlike the plural CHiPs, the singular Hunter was clearly to be a one-character show. Dee Dee turned out to be very popular so history repeated itself when she left.

If it makes you feel better, any S6 CHiPs episode was far better than any episode of The Glades, a semi-recent cop show. 

RIP Ron Swanson. Writers created your awesomeness in S1 and killed it in S7

[–] basterd7 10 years ago

The series did not end on a low point.

You are literally the one and only person I've ever heard of who has this view. Are you watching the season 1 episodes? The difference in quality in comparison to season 6 is startling. Season 1 had good action, great production values and, most importantly, excellent chemistry between Ponch and Jon. Season 6 had none of the above.

One other thing I've noticed -- even the famous Chips freeze frame end credit sequences are so much better in season 1.

[–] jarrodmcdonald-1 10 years ago

Your post confirms my thoughts. Usually people blast season 6 because they cannot get over the fact that Larry Wilcox is gone. Personally, while I liked Jon, I did not think he was all that great. This is really Ponch's show and in the last season, we get an unfettered view of that, with Jon gone.

Even if season 1 started with the Nelsons, it would still be a bit wobbly. They were trying to stabilize the formula. So those early episodes have hiccups in them just like the first few episodes of season 6 do, with new cast members adjusting to the production schedule and the demands of turning out a weekly show.

[–] basterd7 10 years ago

My post did not confirm your thoughts. While I did say the Estrada/Wilcox chemistry was one of the undeniable reasons for the show's success, it was merely one ingredient of the formula. These early seasons had an innovative, ambitious feel to them in the way they were filmed. Season 6 had a cheap look and feel to it, from the production values to the writing to the acting. I agree Estrada was the star of the show, but he needed these other characters to balance him out. Season 6 became the Erik Estrada show, which is a big reason viewers bailed in droves. The entire show became a vehicle for his ego. It wasn't about Chips anymore, it was about him.

[–] sjbradford 10 years ago

Don't pay any attention to Jarrod or that ridiculous person who thinks that Erik Estrada walks on water. The last season is horrible. Only fanboys or fangirls would think that it's good. Most people think it sucked, which is why it was cancelled at the end of the sixth season. Only morons think season 6 was any good. They should go and watch Mama's Family, their idea of a quality show.

[–] jarrodmcdonald-1 10 years ago

I think you misinterpreted what I said. I did not say it was the Erik Estrada Show. I said it was the Ponch Show. Even if they had fired Estrada and recast it, it would still have been the Ponch Show. He was the more dominant character. And he was the one more viewers turned in to see. If it was the other way around, Jon would have made it to season 6 and Ponch would have been written out or killed off. NBC saw Ponch as the main character, and Jon as supporting and Jon ultimately as replaceable.

As for the actors, I think Wilcox and his fans still feel the Jon Baker character was supposed to be the main focus. And I really think this is one of the major reasons Estrada does not do fan events now or publicity related to the reruns, because Estrada does not want to deal with that anymore. He's moved on.

Like I indicated earlier, I did enjoy the character of Jon. And I like the Nelson boys. But Ponch is the lead from beginning to end. A lot of shows have what's called 'break out characters' or 'audience favorites.' You know, the J.R. Ewings and the Urkels. On CHiPs, that was Ponch.

[–] basterd7 10 years ago

The one point we do agree on is that Estrada was the breakout star. And I don't think Wilcox should have been the "main focus." But he was a necessary part of the show because Jon was the perfect counterbalance to the swaggering Ponch. The Nelson brothers were more like Ponch's lackeys. And Wilcox was a far superior actor to Tom Reilly(I don't even consider Bruce Penhall an actor). But, the fact is that the last season really did become the Erik Estrada show. It's well known that he was pulling the strings on a lot of the story directions and even the casting. Word is he became so despised behind the scenes that he was blackballed by the industry.

But, getting back to the point of this thread. The show ended on a low point. Period. Season 6 was absolute trash. I don't see how this point can even be debated.

[–] robbgw 10 years ago

Season Six being horrible had very little to do with Jon being gone. If the stories were still good, the show could have continued being strong with the new cast. Examples from a similar time frame are multiple, including Charlie's Angels, MASH, and Three's Company.

No, the problem with Season Six is that the episodes are horrible. Off the top of my head, we have the one with an alien abduction, one with an orangatan (ala Every Which Way but Loose), one with a robot, one where they are suddenly patrolling the beach during Spring Break, and not one, but two episodes essentially a rehashing of the Bad News Bears. Or random scenes like Ponch jumping onto his bike to chase a thief, while wearing nothing but his helmet, shorts, and socks.

The stories were horrible. Some of them are great for a cheese induced laugh (I get a kick out of the Moloch episode), but come on. The show sucked, as evidenced in part by the fact that there is no Season Seven.

And yes, I realize even in the first 5 seasons there was a cheese factor from time to time. A lot of time spent on the off-duty hobbies of Ponch and Jon. But there was also good plots, nice action, and actual police work that didn't involve Ponch adopting a girl to help her avoid being abducted by ET.

[–] ladyjedi-94029 8 years ago

I think both were supposed to be equalleads,not just Estrada, but he eventually became more famous and recognized because of his over the top personality.

[–] ladyjedi-94029 8 years ago

It may look like Ponch's show but in reality was all smoke and mirrors because he couldn't keep the show alive for a 7th season when Jon left, and the proof is when it was canceled after just one season without Jon! And too many changes, with half the cast gone and all that for starters!