The first two episodes were the best. PS. guys, it's not a BBC production, but an Irish RTE one
Apparently, according to the producer Amber is dead (murdered) and in water but not killed by any of the charcters in the series. It wasnt a whodunnit he added.
Radio interview with a pissed off Ryan Tubridy back in January:
I rewound the last 10 minutes, thinking I might have fallen asleep and missed the crucial bit.
Then checked the Sky menu to make sure it said 4/4!
Much of Amber seemed to have been inspired by the now world famous case of a younger missing child, so presumably the ending reflected the open-ended nature of that case.
But not a good idea imo.
I think they were trying to be a bit too clever for their own good with the ending. Most people expect a drama to have a proper ending, either a good one or a bad one.....an open-ended conclusion to the show is a bit "arty" and frustrating.
I think they were trying to be a bit too clever for their own good with the ending. Most people expect a drama to have a proper ending, either a good one or a bad one.....an open-ended conclusion to the show is a bit "arty" and frustrating.
For the Producer to say that Amber was murdered, and ended up in water, but not by any of the characters in the series, and presumably not in the water where the lamp was found, makes the whole thing even more bizarre imo.
So all the various story lines were red herrings? What was the point in following up on each character if they were not involved?
To me it smacks of throwing story lines together with no rhyme or reason to them – I really can’t see the artistry in that.
Possibly irrelevant to the conclusion though, like the rest of the story perhaps!
The more I think about it, the more I think the writers may have written Amber based on their own agenda over children disappearing.
That would seem to make some sense of the way the story ran.
In the last episode the father and mother console one another and tell each other that : "Other people can never understand what we are going through!" It was a very poignant line that sums up the series from an emotional perspective.
The story of Amber seems to be an attempt to convey such feelings, rather than telling a story with an ending. Almost as if someone wrote it as part of a process of wanting to grieve the loss of a child, but unable to do so because they are unable to find closure.
It reminded me of some novels I've read - lots of ideas/themes that ultimately end up going nowhere leaving the reader frustrated. Producers/editors need to get their acts together and think about the reader/viewer's point of view. Give us an ending we can appreciate!
Possibly irrelevant to the conclusion though, like the rest of the story perhaps!
The more I think about it, the more I think the writers may have written Amber based on their own agenda over children disappearing.
That would seem to make some sense of the way the story ran.
In the last episode the father and mother console one another and tell each other that : "Other people can never understand what we are going through!" It was a very poignant line that sums up the series from an emotional perspective.
The story of Amber seems to be an attempt to convey such feelings, rather than telling a story with an ending. Almost as if someone wrote it as part of a process of wanting to grieve the loss of a child, but unable to do so because they are unable to find closure.
Thats an interesting take - yes, perhaps its meant to be symbolic. There was another telling quote in the last episode when one of the parents (I believe?) said that the worst thing is the not knowing, if they had a body they'd at least know she was dead I suppose the viewer is made to feel 'robbed' (for want of a better term) in the same way as the parents in such cases are, when their still searching for answers(?).
It reminded me of some novels I've read - lots of ideas/themes that ultimately end up going nowhere leaving the reader frustrated. Producers/editors need to get their acts together and think about the reader/viewer's point of view. Give us an ending we can appreciate!
If the authors have lost a child, the story would make more sense to them than the viewer. Perhaps the characters and various story lines were inspired by what ran through their minds in the months following the loss of the child. The story was more about the parents than Amber herself.
The guy on the beach with the dog seemed to have little relevance to Amber's disappearance, other than he had briefly spoken to her once. His role in the story seemed to be more about the father clutching at straws and starting to lose it, than being a likely suspect.
But even if that was the case, seems odd that the authors have said that Amber was murdered, and yet they have left that key part of the story out.
Perhaps the author's hard drive crashed, and they pieced the story together as best they could in rush to meet a deadline? ;-)
I just posted the producers interview which TOLD us she was.....bar that....everyone would have been left wondering what her fate was, which I imagine is the majority of the people who watched it and didnt google for details on the programme
If a producer wants go make some point or two or three, its IMO taking liberties to dupe viewers in the way that they have...they should have just written a book or did a documentary Instead of wasting peoples time.
very disapointing ending what happened to her/who was she going to meet the day she left home/i can only assume the man in the white van abducted her and killed her/anyone agree?
very disapointing ending what happened to her/who was she going to meet the day she left home/i can only assume the man in the white van abducted her and killed her/anyone agree?
That was the very last concern at the end of the episode, it was clear we were meant to question the motive of the van driver (I reckon anyway) but she walked away from it and the guy in the van was shown unpacking I think? and getting back in the van to drive away I think, so I think that was the final sort of dead end aspect or whatever.
That was the very last concern at the end of the episode, it was clear we were meant to question the motive of the van driver (I reckon anyway) but she walked away from it and the guy in the van was shown unpacking I think? and getting back in the van to drive away I think, so I think that was the final sort of dead end aspect or whatever.
I think she drowned, personally.
No she didnt drown, she was murdered, read back
The producer has told us the facts in this but has kept all facts relating to it a mystery.....ie she is dead, someone killed her, but we are not to now who or why.....he says there are clues in the episodes as to what happened to her ie being dead in the water but no real clues as to who he perpetrator was...indeed he says it was no character in the series was responsible.....
Im rereading post 51 here and tending to agree it could have been inspired by that! case for several reasons though Im sure most vanishings off the face of the earth share similar storylines
When they showed the Day 1 flashbacks at the end of each episode, it quietly built up tension but didn't lead anywhere. The writers were playing with us.
For instance at the end of ep 3, Amber was on the tram and it appeared a male passenger was watching her. When it went back to that scene near the end of last nights episode I assumed he'd follow her off the tram but no.
The white van arriving on an empty road made me jump; when he got out and opened the back door I thought that she was about to be bundled in. Again, no. Then thought she was going to be struck by a car, may have been a hit and run and left in a ditch and never found. So the writers hinted numerous scenarios all the way thru without conclusion.
Can anyone explain why on realising her phone was missing she got off at the next stop, wouldn't you still carry on your journey? And where was she, it looked rural and she lived in the city. Many unanswered questions.
When they showed the Day 1 flashbacks at the end of each episode, it quietly built up tension but didn't lead anywhere. The writers were playing with us.
For instance at the end of ep 3, Amber was on the tram and it appeared a male passenger was watching her. When it went back to that scene near the end of last nights episode I assumed he'd follow her off the tram but no.
The white van arriving on an empty road made me jump; when he got out and opened the back door I thought that she was about to be bundled in. Again, no. Then thought she was going to be struck by a car, may have been a hit and run and left in a ditch and never found. So the writers hinted numerous scenarios all the way thru without conclusion.
Can anyone explain why on realising her phone was missing she got off at the next stop, wouldn't you still carry on your journey? And where was she, it looked rural and she lived in the city. Many unanswered questions.
Seemed to me she was definitely off to meet someone going down that country lane....the other loose end was the boy with the dyed red hair she was chatting to online and met up with that day and he said to her can you keep a secret.....and who was in the bar that night her dad went and found her friend there flirting with older men....her dad never seemed to check this guy out..though he found their chats online on her computer
It is silly for the producer to tell us what happened to Amber, as if being the producer entitles him to give a definitive answer.
Nothing happened to her. Amber was a fictional character in a TV series. Nothing happened to her apart from we saw on the screen. If the producer says that she was murdered by someone not featured in the series and the body disposed of in water, that is just his opinion, and unless it is based on a more careful analysis of what was shown in the programme then it is of no more value than anyone else's opinion.
If I say that really it was the father who killed Amber, or that the little brother did it, or that she was abducted by aliens, then that is just as wrong an opinion as that of the producer.
The story does not tell us what happened to her and therefore nothing happened to her, since she did not exist outside of the TV programme. Amber ceased to exist after walking down that lane on Day 1, she met nobody, nobody killed her and nobody disposed of her body - because the writer did not write her meeting anyone, did not create a character to kill her, and did not write a scene of the body being left in water. Nobody acted those scenes and nobody filmed them. Nobody in the series ever even referred to those actions indirectly. They did not happen. It was just another unsatisfactory work of fiction.
I came here to check see if I'd missed something 'obvious' about the last 5 minutes of the last episode of Amber, after having rewound it many times and checked on iplayer to see if my recorded had skipped something.
'pleased' to read it's not just me, everyone else was just as annoyed with the non-ending. If they'd ended it after episode 3 it wouldn't have made any less sense.
If you build up the story of a mystery, you gotta give the viewers a pay-off at the end with an explanation to logically tie up all the ends.
I'll be writing to demand back my 4 hours of life!
It is silly for the producer to tell us what happened to Amber, as if being the producer entitles him to give a definitive answer.
Nothing happened to her. Amber was a fictional character in a TV series. Nothing happened to her apart from we saw on the screen. If the producer says that she was murdered by someone not featured in the series and the body disposed of in water, that is just his opinion, and unless it is based on a more careful analysis of what was shown in the programme then it is of no more value than anyone else's opinion.
If I say that really it was the father who killed Amber, or that the little brother did it, or that she was abducted by aliens, then that is just as wrong an opinion as that of the producer.
The story does not tell us what happened to her and therefore nothing happened to her, since she did not exist outside of the TV programme. Amber ceased to exist after walking down that lane on Day 1, she met nobody, nobody killed her and nobody disposed of her body - because the writer did not write her meeting anyone, did not create a character to kill her, and did not write a scene of the body being left in water. Nobody acted those scenes and nobody filmed them. Nobody in the series ever even referred to those actions indirectly. They did not happen. It was just another unsatisfactory work of fiction.
It's a good point. If the producer has a clear idea what happened to Amber, then he should have included it in the drama. It's not satisfactory for him to make up his own conclusion to the story and then not include it in the actual programme.
I came here to check see if I'd missed something 'obvious' about the last 5 minutes of the last episode of Amber, after having rewound it many times and checked on iplayer to see if my recorded had skipped something.
'pleased' to read it's not just me, everyone else was just as annoyed with the non-ending. If they'd ended it after episode 3 it wouldn't have made any less sense.
If you build up the story of a mystery, you gotta give the viewers a pay-off at the end with an explanation to logically tie up all the ends.
I'll be writing to demand back my 4 hours of life!
Yeah, I did try hard to warn people before hand but short of an out and out spoiler best I could do was
It shouldn't be for the producer to tell me what happens on a radio show. It should be told in the actual show. Must admit, 4 hours wasted, and actually really enjoyed the first episode!
I think they were trying to be a bit too clever for their own good with the ending. Most people expect a drama to have a proper ending, either a good one or a bad one.....an open-ended conclusion to the show is a bit "arty" and frustrating.
I couldn't agree more,Eurostar. I have just caught up with the last episode, that I had recorded, and I thought for some reason it had not all recorded so went to catch up tv only to find the same ending or should that be non ending.>:(
I'm sorry I wasted my time on this!
I couldn't agree more,Eurostar. I have just caught up with the last episode, that I had recorded, and I thought for some reason it had not all recorded so went to catch up tv only to find the same ending or should that be non ending.>:(
I'm sorry I wasted my time on this!
I remember the Irish press were hopping mad when it ended, saying "what the hell was that ending all about? Is that it?" I don't know what the producers were thinking but an ending that leaves everyone seriously cheesed off is not a good idea for a drama series
Comments
Apparently, according to the producer Amber is dead (murdered) and in water but not killed by any of the charcters in the series. It wasnt a whodunnit he added.
Radio interview with a pissed off Ryan Tubridy
https://vodhls.rasset.ie/manifest/audio/2014/0123/20140123_rte2fm-tubridy-amber_c20511584_20511626_261_.m3u8
(from about 4.30 minutes)
Too many loose ends for my liking, too many potential suspects and a bit all over the place in general. It's a series I would not recommend to anyone.
Presumably drowning ties in somewhere with the mermaid thing?
Very deep! :-)
I think they were trying to be a bit too clever for their own good with the ending. Most people expect a drama to have a proper ending, either a good one or a bad one.....an open-ended conclusion to the show is a bit "arty" and frustrating.
For the Producer to say that Amber was murdered, and ended up in water, but not by any of the characters in the series, and presumably not in the water where the lamp was found, makes the whole thing even more bizarre imo.
So all the various story lines were red herrings? What was the point in following up on each character if they were not involved?
To me it smacks of throwing story lines together with no rhyme or reason to them – I really can’t see the artistry in that.
But then what do viewers know?
It'll probably end up winning an award!
I hadn't even thought of that. Maybe she was reincarnated into a Mermaid
What the Scandics will make of this example of Celtic Noir only time will tell.
Story of the mermaid here...
https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110617165113AADiqXk
Possibly irrelevant to the conclusion though, like the rest of the story perhaps!
The more I think about it, the more I think the writers may have written Amber based on their own agenda over children disappearing.
That would seem to make some sense of the way the story ran.
In the last episode the father and mother console one another and tell each other that : "Other people can never understand what we are going through!" It was a very poignant line that sums up the series from an emotional perspective.
The story of Amber seems to be an attempt to convey such feelings, rather than telling a story with an ending. Almost as if someone wrote it as part of a process of wanting to grieve the loss of a child, but unable to do so because they are unable to find closure.
Thats an interesting take - yes, perhaps its meant to be symbolic. There was another telling quote in the last episode when one of the parents (I believe?) said that the worst thing is the not knowing, if they had a body they'd at least know she was dead
If the authors have lost a child, the story would make more sense to them than the viewer. Perhaps the characters and various story lines were inspired by what ran through their minds in the months following the loss of the child. The story was more about the parents than Amber herself.
The guy on the beach with the dog seemed to have little relevance to Amber's disappearance, other than he had briefly spoken to her once. His role in the story seemed to be more about the father clutching at straws and starting to lose it, than being a likely suspect.
But even if that was the case, seems odd that the authors have said that Amber was murdered, and yet they have left that key part of the story out.
Perhaps the author's hard drive crashed, and they pieced the story together as best they could in rush to meet a deadline? ;-)
?? What does that mean?
I just posted the producers interview which TOLD us she was.....bar that....everyone would have been left wondering what her fate was, which I imagine is the majority of the people who watched it and didnt google for details on the programme
If a producer wants go make some point or two or three, its IMO taking liberties to dupe viewers in the way that they have...they should have just written a book or did a documentary Instead of wasting peoples time.
That was the very last concern at the end of the episode, it was clear we were meant to question the motive of the van driver (I reckon anyway) but she walked away from it and the guy in the van was shown unpacking I think? and getting back in the van to drive away I think, so I think that was the final sort of dead end aspect or whatever.
I think she drowned, personally.
I expected White Van Man to abduct her, maybe he did, but I wish I hadn't wasted time thinking it'd have a proper ending.
No she didnt drown, she was murdered, read back
The producer has told us the facts in this but has kept all facts relating to it a mystery.....ie she is dead, someone killed her, but we are not to now who or why.....he says there are clues in the episodes as to what happened to her ie being dead in the water but no real clues as to who he perpetrator was...indeed he says it was no character in the series was responsible.....
Im rereading post 51 here and tending to agree it could have been inspired by that! case for several reasons though Im sure most vanishings off the face of the earth share similar storylines
For instance at the end of ep 3, Amber was on the tram and it appeared a male passenger was watching her. When it went back to that scene near the end of last nights episode I assumed he'd follow her off the tram but no.
The white van arriving on an empty road made me jump; when he got out and opened the back door I thought that she was about to be bundled in. Again, no. Then thought she was going to be struck by a car, may have been a hit and run and left in a ditch and never found. So the writers hinted numerous scenarios all the way thru without conclusion.
Can anyone explain why on realising her phone was missing she got off at the next stop, wouldn't you still carry on your journey? And where was she, it looked rural and she lived in the city. Many unanswered questions.
Seemed to me she was definitely off to meet someone going down that country lane....the other loose end was the boy with the dyed red hair she was chatting to online and met up with that day and he said to her can you keep a secret.....and who was in the bar that night her dad went and found her friend there flirting with older men....her dad never seemed to check this guy out..though he found their chats online on her computer
Oh well.....
Nothing happened to her. Amber was a fictional character in a TV series. Nothing happened to her apart from we saw on the screen. If the producer says that she was murdered by someone not featured in the series and the body disposed of in water, that is just his opinion, and unless it is based on a more careful analysis of what was shown in the programme then it is of no more value than anyone else's opinion.
If I say that really it was the father who killed Amber, or that the little brother did it, or that she was abducted by aliens, then that is just as wrong an opinion as that of the producer.
The story does not tell us what happened to her and therefore nothing happened to her, since she did not exist outside of the TV programme. Amber ceased to exist after walking down that lane on Day 1, she met nobody, nobody killed her and nobody disposed of her body - because the writer did not write her meeting anyone, did not create a character to kill her, and did not write a scene of the body being left in water. Nobody acted those scenes and nobody filmed them. Nobody in the series ever even referred to those actions indirectly. They did not happen. It was just another unsatisfactory work of fiction.
'pleased' to read it's not just me, everyone else was just as annoyed with the non-ending. If they'd ended it after episode 3 it wouldn't have made any less sense.
If you build up the story of a mystery, you gotta give the viewers a pay-off at the end with an explanation to logically tie up all the ends.
I'll be writing to demand back my 4 hours of life!
It's a good point. If the producer has a clear idea what happened to Amber, then he should have included it in the drama. It's not satisfactory for him to make up his own conclusion to the story and then not include it in the actual programme.
Yeah, I did try hard to warn people before hand but short of an out and out spoiler best I could do was
I'm sorry I wasted my time on this!
I remember the Irish press were hopping mad when it ended, saying "what the hell was that ending all about? Is that it?" I don't know what the producers were thinking but an ending that leaves everyone seriously cheesed off is not a good idea for a drama series