First the good : this is fine drama, lovingly crafted and acted. The pace is unhurried, the period atmosphere is convincing and evocative and there are a number of outstanding performances, especially by protagonists Douglas Henshall and Martin Compston, who show a fine chemistry. Compston's Peter Manuel is deeply, chillingly convincing : glib, cocksure, cunning, murderous and (who knows ?) perhaps not entirely sane and/or human.
Sadly there are also a number of missed opportunities. The series does not succeed in digging deep into Manuel's psyche : the viewer learns what he does, but not why he does it. (Still, this may be an unjust comment, as there is a chance that killers like Manuel may not have a recognizable inner life or may not understand their drives and obsessions themselves.) By the same token the series does not fully explore the constant enabling by Manuel's family, which provides excuses and alibi's like other families provide food or shelter. Are his family members terrified of him ? Do they benefit from his crimes ? Do they envy his daring ? Do they belong to some perverted clan which recognizes no law from God or man, save clan loyalty ? And if so, where does this perverted clan attitude come from, and how does it function ?
It might also have been a good idea to include Manuel's trial, which must have been both stunning and heart-rending. It would have been a good opportunity for examining a number of crucial questions such as : are our society and our legal apparatus really suited for dealing with killers like Manuel ? Where does one draw a line between sanity and insanity, between punishment and treatment ? (But again, this may be an unjust comment, since I have an almost boundless appetite for courtroom scenes and will gobble anything, including procedural discussions about venues or cross-examinations about stolen bikes. And of course it's entirely possible that the makers of the series wisely, and kindly, refrained from re-opening old wounds or stirring up forgotten quarrels.)
Sadly there are also a number of missed opportunities. The series does not succeed in digging deep into Manuel's psyche : the viewer learns what he does, but not why he does it. (Still, this may be an unjust comment, as there is a chance that killers like Manuel may not have a recognizable inner life or may not understand their drives and obsessions themselves.) By the same token the series does not fully explore the constant enabling by Manuel's family, which provides excuses and alibi's like other families provide food or shelter. Are his family members terrified of him ? Do they benefit from his crimes ? Do they envy his daring ? Do they belong to some perverted clan which recognizes no law from God or man, save clan loyalty ? And if so, where does this perverted clan attitude come from, and how does it function ?
It might also have been a good idea to include Manuel's trial, which must have been both stunning and heart-rending. It would have been a good opportunity for examining a number of crucial questions such as : are our society and our legal apparatus really suited for dealing with killers like Manuel ? Where does one draw a line between sanity and insanity, between punishment and treatment ? (But again, this may be an unjust comment, since I have an almost boundless appetite for courtroom scenes and will gobble anything, including procedural discussions about venues or cross-examinations about stolen bikes. And of course it's entirely possible that the makers of the series wisely, and kindly, refrained from re-opening old wounds or stirring up forgotten quarrels.)