But the issue was whether it was "rare" - and I think it's pretty obvious that the common situation is that the driver leaves the scene and victim.
Like yourself, I don't take particular issue with it, given the general content of the programme is in of itself "rare".
but in every movie or tv show where someone accidentally kills someone in a road accident they always try and cover it up ( seems to me they do anyway )
I thought the ending was perfect, but the only other option for me was that he return to Paris to find the girl he had a one night stand with becasue they clearly had chemistry that he had not had in a long time.
Yeah it was.
you know I thought that blonde woman in the red dress next to him at the back of the wedding tent was Monique and that maybe they'd got together? but no, it seems he went back to obsessing again, poor Tony a truly tortured soul.
Cant wait for the next series though wonder who the cast will be. I think there's 0% of Baptise, after all hes retired, I think they just used his philosophical lines to hint that maybe this child will be recovered alive and sooner but it will be awkward to have them back again after so long an absence. Should be very interesting
but in every movie or tv show where someone accidentally kills someone in a road accident they always try and cover it up ( seems to me they do anyway )
You probably should ask yourself whether a TV show or film is realistic to life or heightened reality.
Out of interest, Google hit and runs in your vacinity and it will bring up lots of reports I'm sure. Now find one where the driver abducted the victim after knocking them down.
In the end the BBC still tried to portray a paedophile in a sympathetic light.
That is the real crime of this series, not the non ending of a ridiculous story.
Especially on a day that the swine Simon Harris who raped children in Kenya and England was convicted.
Hear hear. Totally sickens me that any organisation could try this. Disgusted, but not in the least bit surprised. I'm just waiting for the day the investigation into the cover up of paedophiles in Westminster gets going, but it looks like the 'powers that be' are stalling that for as long as they can.
you know I thought that blonde woman in the red dress next to him at the back of the wedding tent was Monique and that maybe they'd got together? but no, it seems he went back to obsessing again, poor Tony a truly tortured soul.
Cant wait for the next series though wonder who the cast will be. I think there's 0% of Baptise, after all hes retired, I think they just used his philosophical lines to hint that maybe this child will be recovered alive and sooner but it will be awkward to have them back again after so long an absence. Should be very interesting
How do you know that, the scene deliberately left doubt by having Tony in a beard that disguised his face, the writers did that on purpose to make you wonder if Ollie could have recognized him especially after 8 yrs. bit unrealistic really but all part of leaving doubt.
How do I know that?! erm by looking at his face!
lol im sorry, no disrespect and im not taking the p but Tony s facial hair hardly concealed his entire face. Are you saying that for you a mans facial hair renders his face entirely unreadable? he sure looked crazed to me with his scrunched face and wild eyes? he was frantic and desperate, his entire stance and body language showed that.
Though i do admit he was scruffy and looked like a hobo but not unrecognizable though
You probably should ask yourself whether a TV show or film is realistic to life or heightened reality.
Out of interest, Google hit and runs in your vacinity and it will bring up lots of reports I'm sure. Now find one where the driver abducted the victim after knocking them down.
Behave. These things are not black and white. Could you imagine having desires that you can't control and work desperately to overcome but fail? Living a horrible life, probably abused as a child? Your attitude is the kind that will stop paedo's from seeking help before they act on their desires.
Oh god, not another leftie trying to illicit sympathy for paedophiles. Maybe if you had any personal contact with them you might have a different opinion. It's the paedophiles that should be castigated, not a poster who expresses a perfectly reasonable opinion that he doesn't like their sympathetic portrayal by the BBC.
Hear hear. Totally sickens me that any organisation could try this. Disgusted, but not in the least bit surprised.
The story followed Bourg making efforts to overcome his 'addiction' and ultimately failing. If that illicited sympathy from you then I can understand how it could make you angry because it is an unusual emotion for an emotive subject.
I clearly open myself up to an absolute world of abuse here. But I will say it as much as anything for the debate (and if I have missed anything that he actually did then I absolutely apologise).
'The BBC still tried to pot ray a paedophile in a sympathetic light'.
What did Vincent Bourg do wrong?
What did Vincent Bourgh do wrong? Are you serious? He was obssessed by and viewed paedophile pictures and videos. In order for him to view these images, hundreds of innocent children had to be vilified and abused and tortured.
I think a lot of people missed the point of the ending because they were so wrapped up in finding the clues and chasing after every red herring. Each week peoples ideas grew more and more contrived and deluded - much like Tony’s in a sense. Tony could never accept the hard facts that were laid out to him, and neither could the viewer. In the end it was simple. It wasn’t an abduction, it was an accident, just ‘bad luck’ (To quote the mechanic)
The ending works with the show, because it was never truly about Oliver, it was a character study of Tony and Emily and how they dealt with the situation. How Emily tried to distance herself, tried to replace her feelings for Oliver with her new husbands son. How Tony never gave up, no matter how small the lead. Emily said it best - ‘You’re looking at shapes in the clouds and you’re trying to turn them into things. And every time you do this you drag me into it too’. Emily and Tony never had a chance to grieve because their pain was too raw, they never found acceptance. The finale gives them that closure, it lays out the facts. It lets you come to your own conclusion, despite the fact there are doubts. Emily and Tony never saw what George found in the basement, only the viewers were privy to that. All they have is Alain’s word of what happened to Oliver and the evidence found at the scene.
For Emily? That’s enough. She can live with this pain, she may never have a body but she can move on now, without feeling guilty for having fun when Oliver could still be missing. She can cope and grieve in her own time. Tony? Tony can never let go, he’ll always be haunted. The first thing he says to Baptiste after learning of Ollie’s death is ‘what about the traffickers? There must be something’ and the viewer feels for him because, we looked into that clue too. We spent months thinking they must be involved. Tony keeps chasing, he can’t grieve, he can’t move on. It's a nice little parallel to Bourg in that his father said to him on his deathbed, guilt is like a cancer. You can treat the symptoms but never the cause
The ending makes sense if you place yourself in each characters shoes. It doesn’t matter whether Ollie is alive or not, you’ll view the ending from the character you associate with the most. You can accept Ollie’s death (like Emily) or you drive yourself to madness thinking of the what if’s like Tony. Like Baptiste said, Emily learnt to live with her doubts all while keeping Ollie’s memory alive. Tony let it destroy him.
He was obssessed by and viewed paedophile pictures and videos. In order for him to view these images, hundreds of innocent children had to be vilified and abused and tortured.
Do you think the writers tried to absolve him of his crimes?
Oh god, not another leftie trying to illicit sympathy for paedophiles. Maybe if you had any personal contact with them you might have a different opinion. It's the paedophiles that should be castigated, not a poster who expresses a perfectly reasonable opinion that he doesn't like their sympathetic portrayal by the BBC.
In fairness they showed paedophiles in different lights. .One controlling who didn't feel like what he was doing was wrong because he loved..a violent set abducting and using children and only one in a sympathetic light that was trying to get help to stop him acting on his feelings. ..I didn't feel sympathy for any but could see the difference. .
Absolutely nothing. It was a bloody drink driving accident and a freaking fox was to blame.
NOW WHO IN HELL WORKED OUT THAT A FOX WAS TO BLAME.
Bring back hunting....:D
True! I couldn't help thinking, as I watched this, the bunny huggers will be out in force tomorrow complaining that a fox should not be blamed for the death of Ollie.
It's the paedophiles that should be castigated, not a poster who expresses a perfectly reasonable opinion that he doesn't like their sympathetic portrayal by the BBC.
Do you think drink drivers were shown in a sympathetic light, bearing in mind that Tony chose to keep his secret?
Exactly. He was trying to overcome his desires and when he couldn't he made sure he could never act on them. What is wrong with that?
But he DID act on them!!!! He viewed pornographic paedophile images and videos which cannot be made without torturing and abusing innocent children. THAT is why he was in prison. Okay he may have latterly decided he wanted to do something about his desires, but you cannot claim that he is an innocent. He IS a paedophile and children suffered because he was willing to pay to view these images. Stop trying to be an apologist for paedophiles.
....I just re-watched the trailer for the next series - its weird how they use the yellow colour again, for the girl's jumper, and then again on the VW van, and again for the sign on the fence and also for the sign over the road and then finally for the waving cat on the window sill (red and yellow)!!
...don't them waving cats have some kind of chinese meaning?!
...and the way the voice over says that someone was missing but then found again (sorry, can't remember exact words!) - doesn't that already give the game away, that whoever goes 'missing', gets found again?!
I think a lot of people missed the point of the ending because they were so wrapped up in finding the clues and chasing after every red herring. Each week peoples ideas grew more and more contrived and deluded - much like Tony’s in a sense. Tony could never accept the hard facts that were laid out to him, and neither could the viewer. In the end it was simple. It wasn’t an abduction, it was an accident, just ‘bad luck’ (To quote the mechanic)
The ending works with the show, because it was never truly about Oliver, it was a character study of Tony and Emily and how they dealt with the situation. How Emily tried to distance herself, tried to replace her feelings for Oliver with her new husbands son. How Tony never gave up, no matter how small the lead. Emily said it best - ‘You’re looking at shapes in the clouds and you’re trying to turn them into things. And every time you do this you drag me into it too’. Emily and Tony never had a chance to grieve because their pain was too raw, they never found acceptance. The finale gives them that closure, it lays out the facts. It lets you come to your own conclusion, despite the fact there are doubts. Emily and Tony never saw what George found in the basement, only the viewers were privy to that. All they have is Alain’s word of what happened to Oliver and the evidence found at the scene.
For Emily? That’s enough. She can live with this pain, she may never have a body but she can move on now, without feeling guilty for having fun when Oliver could still be missing. She can cope and grieve in her own time. Tony? Tony can never let go, he’ll always be haunted. The first thing he says to Baptiste after learning of Ollie’s death is ‘what about the traffickers? There must be something’ and the viewer feels for him because, we looked into that clue too. We spent months thinking they must be involved. Tony keeps chasing, he can’t grieve, he can’t move on. It's a nice little parallel to Bourg in that his father said to him on his deathbed, guilt is like a cancer. You can treat the symptoms but never the cause
The ending makes sense if you place yourself in each characters shoes. It doesn’t matter whether Ollie is alive or not, you’ll view the ending from the character you associate with the most. You can accept Ollie’s death (like Emily) or you drive yourself to madness thinking of the what if’s like Tony. Like Baptiste said, Emily learnt to live with her doubts all while keeping Ollie’s memory alive. Tony let it destroy him.
FINAAAAALLLYY - someone who understands! thank you for this. This is exactly what the show and finale meant.
It;s unbelivable to still hear people banging on about cover ups/theories. Get with it. zzzzzz
Hit and runs are common events unfortunately, while there are many people missing the world over it is quite obviously not a common event in the same sense.
I am SO torn by this ending, on one hand (and even including Russia) the narrative is quite logical and makes sense. The case was solved, Ollies dead, Emily moved on and Tony can't to the point that it has wholly consumed his life. Even the fact it was a car wreck - not a peadophile ring, not child trafficking - is fine, we didn't see it coming and thats part of the point
On the other side I can't help but feel a little underwhelmed, mainly due to the lack of relevance of Malik and Bourg making the characters feel pointless
Malik - so all his threats, nastiness,pushing, single mindedness and fleshing of his back story was all to lead to the reveal that he has the coin
Bourg - I said 3 weeks ago his journey was at an end, but I came to think that his continued journey was culminating in him revealing something key. The fact we followed a fringe character who is of no consequence for so long only to see him die was hugely pointless. Essentially he was a paedophile, he had no involvement and was given a false alibi by Garett who also had no involvement. We literally did not need to see him in the present day, we didnt even get to see what he revealed to Malik
Final thought is that if a new case in series 2 we didn't need to see the child seemingly have a moment of recognition in the end, I prefer to think Tony is just desperate and off the rails, why plant a seed that he may be alive if they have no intention of revisiting it?
Overall, I enjoyed it and realise that many of the dead ends were red herrings designed to get us talking, and by god it worked, but I can't help but feel a lot of time and attention was wasted in hindsight and I do feel a fraction dis-satisfied with the outcome
But he DID act on them!!!! He viewed pornographic paedophile images and videos which cannot be made without torturing and abusing innocent children. THAT is why he was in prison. Okay he may have latterly decided he wanted to do something about his desires, but you cannot claim that he is an innocent. He IS a paedophile and children suffered because he was willing to pay to view these images. Stop trying to be an apologist for paedophiles.
These things are about supply and demand, as longs as there's a demand for child porn - vincent bourg viewing it - then there's a demand for supply and innocent children will suffer for others viewing pleasure. Whether or not he physically touches, hes a paedophile
Comments
but in every movie or tv show where someone accidentally kills someone in a road accident they always try and cover it up ( seems to me they do anyway )
.
Yeah it was.
you know I thought that blonde woman in the red dress next to him at the back of the wedding tent was Monique and that maybe they'd got together? but no, it seems he went back to obsessing again, poor Tony
Cant wait for the next series though
You probably should ask yourself whether a TV show or film is realistic to life or heightened reality.
Out of interest, Google hit and runs in your vacinity and it will bring up lots of reports I'm sure. Now find one where the driver abducted the victim after knocking them down.
Hear hear. Totally sickens me that any organisation could try this. Disgusted, but not in the least bit surprised. I'm just waiting for the day the investigation into the cover up of paedophiles in Westminster gets going, but it looks like the 'powers that be' are stalling that for as long as they can.
I thought so too .
anyone know if it was ?
.
How do I know that?! erm by looking at his face!
lol im sorry, no disrespect and im not taking the p but Tony s facial hair hardly concealed his entire face. Are you saying that for you a mans facial hair renders his face entirely unreadable? he sure looked crazed to me with his scrunched face and wild eyes? he was frantic and desperate, his entire stance and body language showed that.
Though i do admit he was scruffy and looked like a hobo but not unrecognizable though
but if they get away with it we wouldn't know .
Oh god, not another leftie trying to illicit sympathy for paedophiles. Maybe if you had any personal contact with them you might have a different opinion. It's the paedophiles that should be castigated, not a poster who expresses a perfectly reasonable opinion that he doesn't like their sympathetic portrayal by the BBC.
The story followed Bourg making efforts to overcome his 'addiction' and ultimately failing. If that illicited sympathy from you then I can understand how it could make you angry because it is an unusual emotion for an emotive subject.
What did Vincent Bourgh do wrong? Are you serious? He was obssessed by and viewed paedophile pictures and videos. In order for him to view these images, hundreds of innocent children had to be vilified and abused and tortured.
I think we are getting a bit silly now.
I think a lot of people missed the point of the ending because they were so wrapped up in finding the clues and chasing after every red herring. Each week peoples ideas grew more and more contrived and deluded - much like Tony’s in a sense. Tony could never accept the hard facts that were laid out to him, and neither could the viewer. In the end it was simple. It wasn’t an abduction, it was an accident, just ‘bad luck’ (To quote the mechanic)
The ending works with the show, because it was never truly about Oliver, it was a character study of Tony and Emily and how they dealt with the situation. How Emily tried to distance herself, tried to replace her feelings for Oliver with her new husbands son. How Tony never gave up, no matter how small the lead. Emily said it best - ‘You’re looking at shapes in the clouds and you’re trying to turn them into things. And every time you do this you drag me into it too’. Emily and Tony never had a chance to grieve because their pain was too raw, they never found acceptance. The finale gives them that closure, it lays out the facts. It lets you come to your own conclusion, despite the fact there are doubts. Emily and Tony never saw what George found in the basement, only the viewers were privy to that. All they have is Alain’s word of what happened to Oliver and the evidence found at the scene.
For Emily? That’s enough. She can live with this pain, she may never have a body but she can move on now, without feeling guilty for having fun when Oliver could still be missing. She can cope and grieve in her own time. Tony? Tony can never let go, he’ll always be haunted. The first thing he says to Baptiste after learning of Ollie’s death is ‘what about the traffickers? There must be something’ and the viewer feels for him because, we looked into that clue too. We spent months thinking they must be involved. Tony keeps chasing, he can’t grieve, he can’t move on. It's a nice little parallel to Bourg in that his father said to him on his deathbed, guilt is like a cancer. You can treat the symptoms but never the cause
The ending makes sense if you place yourself in each characters shoes. It doesn’t matter whether Ollie is alive or not, you’ll view the ending from the character you associate with the most. You can accept Ollie’s death (like Emily) or you drive yourself to madness thinking of the what if’s like Tony. Like Baptiste said, Emily learnt to live with her doubts all while keeping Ollie’s memory alive. Tony let it destroy him.
Do you think the writers tried to absolve him of his crimes?
In fairness they showed paedophiles in different lights. .One controlling who didn't feel like what he was doing was wrong because he loved..a violent set abducting and using children and only one in a sympathetic light that was trying to get help to stop him acting on his feelings. ..I didn't feel sympathy for any but could see the difference. .
True! I couldn't help thinking, as I watched this, the bunny huggers will be out in force tomorrow complaining that a fox should not be blamed for the death of Ollie.
Do you think drink drivers were shown in a sympathetic light, bearing in mind that Tony chose to keep his secret?
they don't find everyone who goes missing
But he DID act on them!!!! He viewed pornographic paedophile images and videos which cannot be made without torturing and abusing innocent children. THAT is why he was in prison. Okay he may have latterly decided he wanted to do something about his desires, but you cannot claim that he is an innocent. He IS a paedophile and children suffered because he was willing to pay to view these images. Stop trying to be an apologist for paedophiles.
...don't them waving cats have some kind of chinese meaning?!
...and the way the voice over says that someone was missing but then found again (sorry, can't remember exact words!) - doesn't that already give the game away, that whoever goes 'missing', gets found again?!
FINAAAAALLLYY - someone who understands! thank you for this. This is exactly what the show and finale meant.
It;s unbelivable to still hear people banging on about cover ups/theories. Get with it. zzzzzz
Hit and runs are common events unfortunately, while there are many people missing the world over it is quite obviously not a common event in the same sense.
I'm not sure anyone here, nor the writers, claimed he was "innocent" I'm not sure how you would come to that conclusion?
Very well summed up.
These things are about supply and demand, as longs as there's a demand for child porn - vincent bourg viewing it - then there's a demand for supply and innocent children will suffer for others viewing pleasure. Whether or not he physically touches, hes a paedophile