Just discussing this in the pub tonight, amazed to find all the comments here, all with very clear 30 year old memories of this fabulous show. For me, it was the first time I came to understand subtext. In one scene an actor in a script conference argues eloquently and with passion for his character to survive a significant and potentially fatal plot twist. It becomes clear that if he loses his role on the show he and his family will fall into destitution... his arguments for his character's life are actually for his own. A powerful thing to grasp when you're 16, and a skillful piece of writing.
By the end, Peter Ingram is faced with a dilemma: does he have the conviction and bravery of his fictional imaginings? He can write a hero, can he be one? The moral ambiguity of the then current IRA letter-bombing campaign is addressed in a way not be seen again until Battlestar Galactica used it's 'SF' cloak to address the suicide bombers in Iraq. By making it speculative fiction, Mackie is able to deal with issues that are frankly too sensitive to discuss directly.
I would love to see this on DVD one day.
By the end, Peter Ingram is faced with a dilemma: does he have the conviction and bravery of his fictional imaginings? He can write a hero, can he be one? The moral ambiguity of the then current IRA letter-bombing campaign is addressed in a way not be seen again until Battlestar Galactica used it's 'SF' cloak to address the suicide bombers in Iraq. By making it speculative fiction, Mackie is able to deal with issues that are frankly too sensitive to discuss directly.
I would love to see this on DVD one day.