I’m not mad, I’ve
gone back in time.
I’ve wanted to
rewatch Life on Mars for ages, and thanks to iPlayer I’ve finally
managed it. Unbelievably, it’s already twelve years since the last episode
aired, and I’m pleased to report that I’ve thoroughly enjoyed it (again).
It’s still as
intriguing and compelling a show as it was in 2006/07 – although its celebrated
opening monologue (“Am I mad, in a coma, or back in time?”) is, with hindsight,
a bit of an oddity. Frankly, by the time I’d moved on to rewatching season two
I’d taken to heckling the TV every time the titles ran, because it’s made so abundantly
clear that it’s (b) in a coma, I’m surprised it was ever up for debate.
To be fair, halfway through the final episode the show tries to convince us that it is in fact (a) he’s mad, that Sam is actually from 1973 but suffering from amnesia, and that his 2006 is just a product of his imagination; but sadly the bluff doesn’t last more than about ten minutes and I can’t help but wonder if it might have been a more effective plot twist if it had featured in the penultimate episode, giving us a whole week to ponder if everything we thought we knew was wrong.
In some ways it
feels like no time has passed since the series originally aired… and yet, on
the other hand I find it very hard to imagine it even getting made today.
Gene Hunt was possibly controversial even in 2006, but despite his deliberately offensive old-fashioned attitudes towards sex and race and the occasional bit of gratuitous violence in the pursuit of his enquiries… Despite all that, the show always lands him on the side of the angels (albeit sometimes only just). Several times he styles Manchester as ‘his city’ and casts himself in the role of its sheriff, doing the dirty work so that ordinary people can sleep safely in their beds.
I don’t think today
we (although by ‘we’ I mean the militantly offended (often on Twitter)) would
be so accepting of the ambiguity, the grey morality of such a character. And
although Sam Tyler is clearly the hero of the piece, likely he would come in
for criticism too. Not because of his own attitudes, but because of the many occasions
when he lets Hunt ‘get away with it’. Sam never treats Annie as anything but an
equal, but he rarely if ever calls Gene out on his far more sexist and
dismissive behaviour towards her. That sort of ‘tacit acceptance’ would definitely
not sit well with the Twitterati.
Then there’s the
final episode which ends (spoiler warning) with Sam killing himself. The
production ascribes a nobility and a triumph to the act, beguiling us into all-but
cheering him on – but in strictly ‘factual’ terms this is an ending where a man,
clearly suffering from far more trauma than the medical experts assigned to him
have identified, takes his own life, in the deluded belief it will return him
to a better place where he can be with the (entirely fictional) woman he (believes
he) loves.
It also, in one
sense, vindicates Gene Hunt. Sam rejects modern policing (represented in a colourless
scene of dull people in suits discussing suspects’ rights) in favour of a time
where he can gun down a criminal during an unauthorised undercover operation,
without fear of disciplinary action of any sort.
Maybe it’s trying
to claim the world of imagination is as important as the daily reality? Or is
it the opposite, a cautionary tale warning us against the more alluring, more
seductive, more dangerous inner world?
It’s very hard to
be sure, and actually whether it was deliberate or not, the ambiguity, the grey
and murky morality, really appealed to me, in a way that I don’t recall being
aware of first time around. It’s been a very enjoyable rewatch, and (unless
you’re likely to be offended and take to Twitter) I’d definitely recommend
firing up the iPlayer. Just be prepared for what you might see, that’s all.
Take a look at the
lawman beating up the wrong guy…
Andrew Curnow's Ramblings 