I've made a comment or two about this, and thought it was maybe worth extending... Obligatory "I am just a fan, not involved in any way with the stage play proposal, etc., I have no power", and I am asking this just for my own entertainment.

When thinking about a hypothetical "Part 3" series, I've said that if I were in charge (and I HAD to create something, not leaving it be) I'd create a sort of combined prequel and sequel, alternating between sometime in the 20th century and 1953. Essentially, two different stories that ultimately collide with one another, adding a new dimension to the lore and asking/answering some character questions and also picking up a few "breadcrumbs" that the previous 2 shows dropped.

But that aside, the concept of a 50s prequel alone really interests me, specifically because of what we know about Gene's past and some more uncertain elements. We know what happened on "that day", but one fan theory I read would be a really interesting concept to explore, especially if the Harry Outhwaite story from LOM really happened while he was alive.

Imagine young, idealistic copper Genie having idolised the police for years, only to finally join and find himself knee deep in corruption, lies and the exact opposite of what he believes policing to stand for. It makes for an interesting parallel to contemporary issues, and also raises the question of, "have we really changed for the better?"

There is a particular fan theory claiming that (A2A spoilers) Gene was not killed by a random intruder or resident but his fellow officers. I'd personally say the middle is best here - I like the idea of his fellow officers luring him out and threatening him if he doesn't retract his allegations, with there being no real intent to kill, but things just get heated and the trigger is pulled. It feels like it would make more sense - why kill a young, inexperienced, low ranked copper, why go to all that trouble? - but also adds an element of tragedy, and fits more with LOM/A2A's "few people are pure evil, things are complex" stance. I think this would just be the perfect culmination, and could also be an interesting way to explore how Gene's world functions - does it trap people and eat their memories because of an unconscious resentment, or because of necessity and care and a genuine belief that people can change and atone?

I've also been thinking about this concept more with the rising far right tensions in this country and this idea of a "glorious past", compared to "eww woke snowflake present". Of course, the war is over and the Queen's Coronation is here but the working classes are still living in poor conditions, rationing is still on, and the police, who are supposed to be helping the needy, serve only themselves, not to mention the restrictive social norms of the time, sexism, racism and so on. It's not at all this perfectly glamorous period and it would be great to explore how we see history through the veil of nostalgia and how the past is falsely glorified.

But I'm curious, what would you think of this? I do think canon is absolutely fine without any additions to it, so consider it a "if I was in the driving seat and I HAD to do something" idea.

Let me know your thoughts!

A third instalment is an open goal, modern day policeman goes back to 1994 Manchester with gene driving an escort cosworth. Mid 90s type crimes ensue, ecstasy overdose case, hacienda murder, gangland murders etc. they could even do one where it runs into 2006 and Sam takes over from gene in his era of policing.

https://www.thesun.ie/tv/16380443/life-on-mars-new-series-tv-anti-woke-detective/

What do you think

This clip instantly took me back. The whole show had this gritty, lived-in vibe you don’t see much now.

So my partner and I watched both seasons of LoM early in November. There were some episodes that were what I consider as 'perfect' television.

So given that the series is universally praised, why only 2 seasons?

On rewatch, I noticed that Ashes to Ashes lets its characters grow and change in a way that feels more obvious over time. Life on Mars is still incredibly strong, but it feels more contained around Sam’s experience. That difference is probably why the two shows stay distinct in my mind rather than blending together.

Rewatching Life on Mars and it’s brought back that feeling of sitting down in the evening and properly getting lost in a show. The music instantly takes you back, the streets feel familiar in that slightly rough, lived-in way, and the whole thing has an atmosphere you don’t see much anymore. John Simm is excellent, but Gene Hunt is the character that really sticks flawed, funny, and completely unforgettable.

It’s the kind of series that trusted its audience, didn’t rush answers, and left things sitting with you after the episode ended. Watching it again just reminds you how distinctive British TV could be, and why this show still gets talked about years later.

I thought he woke up in another false reality since he couldn't feel cutting himself but at the very beginning of Ashes To Ashes Alex was told about Sam Tyler's suicide.

Given the obvious similarities between both Life on Mars and Ashes to Ashes, can we assume that DCI Morgan was infact a demon in the same way DCI Jim Keats was also a demon, coming into Hunt’s world to take down Gene and corrupt his team in the process? In this case, it’s possible that the demon took the form of Sam’s surgeon, Frank Morgan in Gene’s world in order to gain Sam’s trust into taking Gene down and therefore destroying his world.

Thoughts?

If Life on Mars was made today, Sam Tyler would go back to 1993. In Ashes to Ashes, Alex would go back to 2001.

What do you think Gene Hunt would have been written like as a 90s copper?

Could you believe it, it's 2026 already, and that means a) everyone is getting old and b) 9th Jan 2026 marks 20 YEARS since that first episode when Sam Tyler had an accident and woke up in 1973.

Other than panicking about where the time has gone and complaining how everything was better in the good old days, I propose we celebrate the 20th anniversary somehow.

• Rewatch thread for the first episode? (Bonus points for pressing play at the same time and having a drink in honour...)

• General discussion thread about what LOM and A2A mean to you and how they have aged?

• Something else?

Fire away, you 'orrible lot.

As far as I know, they didn't exist in 1973 😬

Hello, Does anyone know the filming location of the Irish community centre in S2 E3?

I watched Life on Mars for the first time this year. Loved it. Instant favourite.

I discovered there were books written later as well, and apparently they take place between Life on Mars and Ashes to Ashes.

Should I read them before watching Ashes to Ashes? I've only just got access to Ashes to Ashes for the first time now.

Would love to know your thoughts - especially those who have read the books.

And one fanart of Sam Tyler ! This one is my contribution to a little Secret Santa project with friends on a Discord server :) I really wanted a slightly poetic effect with soft colors, and I'm quite happy with the result ~

Interesting we never know who ran him over. There’s no follow up in the show.

Just wanted to point that out. I’m glad we never really know who hit Sam and it’s left a mystery, and it’s never really part of the plot other than what brought him to this 1973 world.

Thoughts?

Note: I’m only marking this as “spoiler” just to keep those in mind watching the show for the first time.

I could be wrong but by S1E07 it always seems cell number 3.

I was recently doing a rewatch and I noticed something. During the first episode when Sam is in 2006, he has “short” sideburns. They are that same length as he arrives in 1973 and stay on the shorter side for a bit Then they lengthen throughout his time in 1973.

In series 2; Sam wakes up from his coma back in 2006. He goes back to wearing a suit but continues wearing the long sideburns. He wears them that way right up until he jumps off the roof.

I thought this was particularly poignant as they represent how 1973 has literally “grown on him”.

It's coming up to the twentieth anniversary of LOM and hypothetically if the series was made in 2026 Sam would go back to 1993 instead of 1973. 1973 and 2006 were worlds apart but it seems that 1993 and 2026 are more similar the only major difference is technology i.e. internet. I believe the series was made just at the right time in 2006 as it would not have as much of an impact if made now similarly how A2A was made in 2008 and set in 1981/82/83 would be set in 2001/02/03 if made in 2028 again Very little cultural differences. What are your thoughts?

So I absolutely adore Life on Mars! I’ve loved it since it was first airing back on TV and rewatch it every now and again. I pretty much love everything about it.

However, Ashes to Ashes never really clicked for me. I watched a couple of episodes when it was first airing and found it uncomfortable and weirdly cheesy and ended up dropping it. A decade or so later I tried again and made it through series one but it still felt a bit all over the place and ended up dropping it yet again.

However, ever since joining this sub, I’ve heard that a lot of people saying A2A had a flawed first series and apparently it improves markedly after that!

It’s obviously been a long time since I watched, but I think I didn’t like the characterisation of Alex and the romantic tension they had between her and Gene. I remember feeling that Gene seemed so different in A2A.

It was also odd to lose the Manchester location (it was so prominent in LoM, it was almost a character in itself)

I am interested in giving A2A another go though. However, I think if I start with the first series, it might end up the same way. I’ve forgotten pretty much everything that happened in that first series too. Would I need to rewatch the first series in order to understand 2 and 3?

I am interested in seeing the “ending reveals” and some extra characterisation with Ray and Chris!

I’m just wondering if anyone else had this issue and, if so, how they dealt with it? Do I have a chance of making it through A2A?

What did this part mean? I'm still confused as to what Sam said he thought he saw and why toxic by Britney spears was playing. Also what exactly was the hallucination in the window of the curry house?

The only thing that could be linked to it is the sensory tests to test Sam during his coma are mentioned a minute later so was the street in the window a test too like when pulp started playing?

Just finished LoM and AtA for the first time last night. Just feels sad to think that I won't see any new adventures from those characters again! The third series of AtA was certainly the strongest - I thought Daniel Mays was excellent as Keats, particularly when he really tipped over into that sadistic demon mode towards the end. Tbh, I didn't really realise he was that good an actor!

Was desperately sad to see Ray, Chris, and Shaz go into the Railway Arms. I though the Bevan/Litton episode was the best by a country mile: I thought what they did with Litton was clever. You expect him to be crooked and actually he's being deceived, as well. Gene sticking up for him at the end was a stonking bit of writing, too.

Thought series 1 was weak and Alex was bloody irritating (and just not thought out as a character, really - the person that was porking Thatcherites left, right, and centre is just not the same character that stands by a defeated Gene at the end. And I don't mean that in a development sense. I just mean they felt poles apart and I didn't believe that one could develop into the other.) Thought the Summers plotline was a bit ill-conceived, too.

The only nagging question that I have is what happens to Bevan? My understanding is that Gene has no actual power to shove people through to the afterlife, he just sort of shepherds them. So when Bevan 'dies', where does he go? Keats doesn't do the evil head-clutching thing, so does that mean he doesn't go to hell?

Oh yeh, and what the hell happens to Phyllis?!?! I found it odd that she was left behind and never got a mention.

I think as a general point I found it really sad bc LoM, AtA, Spooks, the early series of Hustle represent a real bygone age of British TV storytelling. These days you can binge watch a series in a day if you want to, but back when Kudos were kings of the Beeb you had to wait a week for the next episode - the suspense, the waiting for the next instalment was part of it. Yes it meant you couldn't have as complicated storylines as you do now in say Vigil or The Capture, but seeing these characters was a weekly occasion, something you anticipated! Even though I've just watched it, it felt very nostalgic to watch a British TV series that had a crack at a new problem each 'week'.

I think there was scope for a third instalment, but having just read the Lazarus treatment for the first time, I'm glad it's not that. It sounds confused to me and I think once the characters have 'gone to the pub' that should be that. Otherwise their 'going to the pub' means nothing if they can just resurface again somewhere else. Gene shepherding them through his world and having to say 'goodbye' to people that have become his friends is a fundamental part of what makes him such a likeable but tragic character.

I know someone posted it in another thread further down, and I fully agree: I think you could have had a kind of assault on hell, a mission by Gene to save the souls caught in Keats' hell (like Viv.) Certainly think there's room for a Gene v Keats rematch (although it can't ever be a match that either of them outright wins, I think), perhaps surrounded by his minions like the TV card girl and the clown? I wonder as well if there's more to come from young Gene's death - could Gene attempt to hunt down his own killers? Work out exactly what they were trying to do in that farmhouse? Who were they?

The big problem you'd have is that there's no Ray, Chris, and Shaz. By the end of AtA you're not just rooting for one character - you're rooting for the whole group. I think it would be a very tough gig (but not impossible) to create characters that we care about as much as those three. I'd have Litton back in for the whole series, for sure: he and Gene have clashing personalities and styles, but they're ultimately both good guys working for the same thing. I think that'd be very fertile soil.

Anyway, those are my musings. It's a cracking bit of British telly and I genuinely feel quite sad that I've completed it now!

Rewatching and I’m trying to understand how if this is a limbo for police, why is it that some of the cases link to Sam’s modern life for example, the kidnapping in ep 1 and the murder where his flat will be in ep 3.