BBC (ended 2007)
| willmac06 wrote: |
| The co-creator of Life on Mars has confirmed that Sam is dead, and that him returning to the 70's is the last few seconds of his life, and driving off into the distance is him driving off into the after-life... |
Seems redundant to post this but apparently there remains a few fans still confused with what is pretty obvious....Then again, they probably still think there are WMDs to be found somewhere in Iraq.
| willmac06 wrote: |
| Well of course people are still confused about what happened - it was really ambiguous. Just thought I'd post it to clear up lose ends for those who are still confused - that's not redundant! |
My point was that there are several threads on this, several articles on this on the web and interviews with the directors/writers themselves that explain the ending pretty clearly...It's hard to see where the ambiguity is.
| FCBarca wrote: |
My point was that there are several threads on this, several articles on this on the web and interviews with the directors/writers themselves that explain the ending pretty clearly...It's hard to see where the ambiguity is. |
Its only unambiguous once you've researched it! And here's as good a place as any to find a definitive answer. 
For my own part, I didn't equate the dreams of Sam's comatose mind with an eschatological experience - so, like a lot of people, I figured he'd survived the fall, and was back in a coma, in some ICU. So I was I glad of a 'one stop shop' that cleared it all up.
| suiycfui wrote: |
| Let's face it, folks. The show was a fantasy, not a documentary. You can put whatever meaning to the ending that you want. If you want Sam to be living a happy life in 1973, then that's what you get. If you want him dead, then you can have that, too. If the producers/creators/directors of the show wanted an absolutely definitive end, they should have filmed it that way. But they didn't, and being bright people they knew what they were doing. |
I agree! For me it was an alternate dimension and Sam is happy in 1973. It's what I want it to be. That's the fun of Entertainment!
| tben2004 wrote: |
| If you seen that new show. Can't remember what it called. You found out that sam is died from sucide and that he speat 5 years there. he died when the car he was in went in water. |
The new show is "Ashes to Ashes" and is o.k; I've only seen the first 3 episodes as it is just started on BBC Canada. You'll note though, that Sam's body was not found so does that mean something?
Lay your doubts to rest, people. Here's what really happened (warning: spoilers):
>>>
>>>
The whole thing was a simulation in his mind. Basically they were on the space ship going to Mars for something like 2 years. So while they were in some sort of stasis pod they had a simulation to keep them occupied. He chose to be a cop in 2008. Then they went through a meteorite storm (or something like that) which cause some kind of malfunction is equipment that caused him to go back to 1973 (or whatever year it was). All the people he worked with were the same as the people on the ship. Then it turns out Gene Hunt in 1973 is actually his father in real life and the purpose of the mars trip is a gene hunt. The thing he learns is that he wants to have relationship with the female cop (from what I gather) who is part of the space mission (possibly in charge) and that he wants to have a good relationship with his father.
| TheOldBill wrote: |
| Hmmm… It seems you have been watching Life on Mars (U.S.), where they did indeed come up with this contrived "reveal". None of that applies to the original show, the nature of which was explained by the writer-creators and has been further explored in Ashes to Ashes. |
| PowerSurgeX wrote: |
| I'll have to disagree. Since the original show didn't have what you referred to as a "reveal" the ending of the remake becomes canon ending for the original show as per the "principle of first mention". Furthermore the off-camera comments of the show producers can hardly be taken seriously. Not to mention "explored" isn't the same as "explained". |
You seem a bit confused, PowerSurgeX. There was a TV series called Life On Mars, which had nothing to do with space travel, and then there was Life On Mars USA, which was to do with space travel. Life On Mars was based in Manchester in the United Kingdom. Life On Mars USA was based in New York, USA and was based on the original show, using the character names and plots. For some reason, known only to the writers of the US show presumably, some characters' names did change though - Annie became Norris instead of Cartwright and, ironically, Ruth Tyler (Sam's mum) becomes Rose Tyler! DCI Gene Hunt has no daughter, whereas Lt. Gene Hunt does. I haven't seen enough of the US version of the show to determine what the central themes are. I'm sure its own themes, pertinent to New York and the USA specifically, are well handled though. However, they are different shows, based on similar concepts - neither is 'canon' to the other. 'Life On Mars' is a euphemism - a contrast between the good old, bad old days and the relative freedom, and the strict, claustrophobic, sterile, soulless and bureaucratic modern world.
When it comes down to it, it doesn't matter whether Sam's character lived or died (or went back into a coma or woke up as a spaceman) - the point was that he had chosen the fantasy past over the glum present day.
And for a time, we got to share that fantasy with him.. until the test card girl switched us off at the end!
