What was the second gunman in the audience there for? There was the sniper on the rooftop who first shoots Francis Urquhart, and then shoots the gunman next to Urquart. What was the setup supposed to be? That the sniper wanted to kill the P.M., and then decided to kill the guy behind him with a gun? The end of this show was so much more sloppy than the other two IMO.
shareMy scenario is that Corder and Elizabeth knew the Greek father would try to assassinate FU, their sending him a copy of the document supports this. They also realized that the only way FU's legacy could be assured is if he was martyred - no embarassing lost election or forced resignation that way. So, as I see it, they let the father past security with his gun, allowed him to get close enough to FU that it would be plausible that the Greek had shot FU, and then killed them both, FU first and then the Greek, presumably to make sure it was done right (rather than let him actually do it).
What do you make of the Corder Elizabeth relationship? Much implied there I believe.
In all assasinations there's always that rumor of a second gunman or a lookout (look at all the Kennedy conspiracy rumors -- at some point it seems everybody in Dallas' Dealy Plaza was gunning for JFK). Just because there was a sniper doesn't mean he will be the hanged guilty party. One could imagine the death of Urquart still being placed on the Cyprus/Greek man's head in the subsequent "investigations." Bullets can be matched to wounds. Documents can be changed. Testimony can be altered ... etc.
Or at least I very well may think that ... others might not think it.
I have to agree with you about the ending. Andrew Davies made the most wonderful job of adapting the first two books, but the third one was far less good. And the ending in particular wasn't nearly as powerful as in the book.
If you saw the 'Drama Connections' programme on 'House of Cards', Diane Fletcher talked about the ending being Elizabeth's way of almost putting down an animal in pain (Francis) - a nice link, I suppose to Urquhart shooting his dog at the beginning. I think the sniper probably killed both Urquhart and Pasolides, with the blame falling on Pasolides. But it didn't really make sense, because there were others who knew about it - Pasolides' daughter and Tom Makepeace, for instance.
Thanks for all of the insight, it makes a little more sense now. Especially the allusion to shooting the sick dog as being like killing FU before his legacy is disgraced. Too bad though, I always thought FU would come out on top like Michael Corleone. At least he got those two hot chicks Maddie and whats her name.
share
Ian Richardson only agreed to do a third series if FU was dead by the end of it. And given that the final series wasn't as good as the first two, it was the correct decision - however sad it was for us viewers to be bereft of such a compelling character.
The women were Mattie and Sarah.
"Dadeeeeee"
shareI much prefer the ending in the book.
==Spoiler ahead==
Passolides actually does shoot FU while he is giving a speech and is promptly shot by Corder.
Its much better all round, FU becomes a hero by protecting his wife, Makepeace is defeated when it is revealed that he is having an affair with the gunman's daughter (in the book only ofcourse)
Cool, that's good to know. THat ending sounds better than the film version, I wonder why they just didnt go by the book. Oh well, it was damn good entertainment.
shareI always thought there should have been a fourth series actually, in which Urquhart came up against a Tony Blair type figure, but sadly they killed him off!
sharei just saw the third one, and i thought it was great. never read the books, but i did like this one better than "to play the king". i do seem to be in the minority here, though.
shareI actually enjoyed all of the series equally. I actually liked this ending as I always suspected Elizabeth was using Francis the same way he used people. Onc ehe no longer serves a purpose for her, he gets killed.
ThE MaStER wOuLd NoT ApPrOvE- Torgo
I was on the edge of my seat - the ending was something out of THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE - F.U.'s megalomania certainly did have to be dealt with - I'd had a feeling all along that Corder was Elizbeth's "toy" shall we say - it was obvious that she and Francis had a companionable marriage, but it was made clear that they slept in separate beds and that she permitted him his indulgences if they advanced their agendas - there were a couple of story threads here that didn't go anywhere (such as the obvious attraction between Makepeace and Maria Passolides). Nor did I know quite what to make of Nickolas Grace's Geoffrey Booza Pitt - very likely a "Mr. Round-Heels" - not surprising that all the ladies turned him down - they knew he wasn't their type.
"I don't use a pen: I write with a goose quill dipped in venom!"---W. Lydecker
I suspect one reason for not following the book (which was the best of the three books) was that the TV version would have needed another one or two episodes.
One nice difference in the TV movies versus the books is Elizabeth features more prominently... she's really Lady Macbeth to FU.
If anything, folks should read The Final Cut novel. Sinister and thick with all the great stuff we know from Urquart. Also in the novel, Claire has a bit more of a roll at the end if I remember right. ;)
Yes, I have to agree that the third book was by far the best of the trilogy in many respects. And I thought the ending was much more powerful and emotional than in the TV version, which I didn't think made a lot of sense.
It's a shame because I thought it devalued what was an utterly memorable trilogy.
... and she even wears the Macbeth tartan.
____________________________
"An inglorious peace is better than a dishonourable war" ~ John Adams
I'm afraid a lot of the ending didn't really make sense. Corder also did say 'we'll be right behind you' - so perhaps the implication was - watch your back and don't sully FU's reputation now that he has gone or you'll suffer the same fate. It was all a bit sloppy and rushed - perhaps if Andrew Davies had read Michael Dobbs' version his own might have been better because I actually found the last part of the book quite moving whereas the script ending was a let down.
Which is not to take anything away from the fact that Andrew Davies' scripts, particularly for the first two series, were absolute masterpieces.
To be honest, I found the ending of the book a little unsatisfying, on grounds of both character and practicality.
A - I found it difficult to believe that Urquhart would ever willingly bow out in any way (though if he were going to, this way WAS best).
B - It relies on Urquhart *knowing* that Passolides *will* kill him. If Passolides had thought a little harder, or had just got there late, the whole plan would have been buggered.
Elizabeth arranging it rang a lot truer: and, with Corder's involvement, Passolides can be tracked so Corder's people DO know that he's there and has a gun. (If he wasn't, well, they could always get Urquhart some other way - an option not present in the novel.) Losing the speech also means losing the implausible reliance on Passolides striking just after it ends when he could have blown Urquhart away at any time.
As for the reliance on Makepeace keeping quiet, I doubt he'd ever have used the tape unless his hand was forced. The Cyprus document was another matter while Evangelos Passolides was alive, but with him and Urquhart both dead it no longer serves any purpose for Makepeace. If Urquhart's posthumous reputation got too inflated he might leak stuff unattributably, but now that the old monster's dead the last thing Makepeace wants is to be personally associated with any further attacks on him. To be honest, as well, much as I enjoy the series' cynicism, I was also quite glad that Davies let a goodish guy win for once.
Bear in mind, too, that Davies was a big influence on Dobbs. The first series was a considerable improvement on the book and the later books owe much to it.
____________________________
"An inglorious peace is better than a dishonourable war" ~ John Adams
I wanted a fourth episode to see what became of Claire Carlsen. After Urquhart became a martyr, she would no longer be "poison" as Makepeace termed it. As she was ambitious and smart, she would have seen through the drama at the statue.
"Two more swords and I'll be Queen of the Monkey People." Roseanne
The ending has a lot of holes it seems. If they wanted it to look like the Greek man shot FU, a sniper shot to the back doesn't seem like the best way to set that up. I sniper rifle round does not look the same as a pistol round. So right there the whole plot crumbles.
Then, that still leaves Maria and Makepeace who know dirt on FU and can make it public, which would sully his name. I also don't know why they sent the tape to Makepeace unless they wanted FU out of office and killed all along. In that case the end is less about protecting his legacy and more about getting rid of him. They still could have pulled off the assassination without Makepeace ever learning about the tape.
How the hell did that aid guy get a hold of the tape anyway?
"Cool will get ya dead." -Former NBA Power Forward, Karl Malone
Do you guys seriously not get it?
The tape was sent to Makepeace to ensure that he knows who 'his friends are', aka Corder, so that after FU dies he retains his position and influence in the PMO.
The document was sent to Pasolidis to ensure that he attempts to kill him.
The sniper was just a security man doing his job. He shot FU to ensure a job well done, and then shot Pasolidis as a response of the security service to the incident. The incident can later be covered up by wrong ballistic tests etc... (After all, Corder seems to be a MI5 type).
FU's wife Elizabeth's future is secured and she lives a life of wealth and influence. (After all, she is the late PM's wife)
I found the ending to be a bit rushed in execution, but the pieces definitely fall together. I had a personal satisfaction when i realized he will be killed, when Elizabeth met Corder in his chambers.
PS: Now i really want to read the book!
[deleted]
[deleted]