Brian and Maggie

I love politics drama, but this one just didn't fire on any cylinder.

Firstly they start with the end - thus immediately popping the balloon of where this story was going.

They never really built the narrative of where the UK was, and where Thatcher was at the time. The supporting characters came in and out, but they never really told the story of what led to Thatcher's downfall. A few grumbles in a hallway, then you're meant to emotionally invest in the outcome.

I felt the writers were trying to find positive in Thatcher even if they found it hard. I may be wrong, but they just stuck on certain talking points like being able to succeed whatever your background. It kept coming up again and again like it was the only positive thing they could latch on to with a complicated character in UK history.

Even tension around the final interview is kind of zapped by the execution. With the by-the-numbers extras commenting on the broadcast, thus explaining to you what you are meant to be thinking rather than really letting the interview stand on its own legs.

Frost vs Nixon, this was not.

In terms of the actors I think the actress taking on Margaret did very well even if she did go a bit Esther Rantzen at times.

The actor playing Brian... well when he was in the interview scenes it snapped me back to the 80s when I was kid. I remember seeing him interview on TV even if I didn't 'get it' as I was quite young, but I immediately was back there. Outside of the interview scenes he could have been anyone.

This could have been a lot more overall. I think it was a tenuous basis for a show, and then they failed to really capitalise on what was on offer.

Not awful, but quite limp.

Having lived through these events and was at the time a fan of the political interviewer Brian Walden I was interested to see for myself Channel 4s drama. Directed by Stephen Frears with a screenplay by James Graham, the odd interest in the demise of Thatcher continues.

Walden didn't bring down Margaret Thatcher, the responsibility for that lies wholly with herself. He did however, hammer in one of the many nails into her coffin. The two part series is made all the more tasty because they had been friends and this is developed by Frears to give context to the events that led to the famous, fateful TV interview.

Steve Coogan and Harriet Walter play the leads and Coogan struggles with Walden's persona, looks and accent. At times he simply comes across as... Steve Coogan. There is little about Walden's time as a Labour MP despite the fact that early in his career he was seen as a potential cabinet minister or even leader. As the 1970s progressed he turned into a maverick before leaving to work as a TV interviewer.

Harriet Walter is the latest amongst several actresses to play Thatcher. Despite being older than the former Prime Minister was in1989 her performance might just be the finest so far. She gets the two big issues for all actresses playing the part right-that of Thatcher's public and private persona. This is the key to trying to understanding Margaret Thatcher. Most biographies and accounts point to this personality split. Was the Iron-Lady really a kitten when she was off-duty?

Well, Frears and Graham don't exactly put her into that box, but in the two part series best scene she invites Walden for a cosey drink in her private rooms in Downing Street. We see a very different Margaret, shoes off, lounging on a couch drinking whisky with big eyes for her favourite TV man across the coffee table. She and Walden get close, at least as friends as they build a kind of blood-brothers pact between each other.

Was this merely a professional relationship of politician and journalist, or was there something more? As time passes during Thatcher's tenure the relationship pans out as purely professional as we move towards 1989. Her fall was slow in coming, but inevitable. The 'interview' was well anticipated, as political interviews were at that time, Walden being the master interviewer up against the usually superb Thatcher. Walden goes straight for the jugular and doesn't let his prey off the ropes. I remember the shock this caused at the time; was this really Margaret Thatcher? She fights back but the fatal wound had been inflicted.

As they say, the rest is history. Perhaps the final word comes from the Prime Minister as she looks into the mirror, realising that the game was up...'Betrayal.'

The program is excellent, but there were more nuances in reality. There were many radical changes under Margaret Thatcher, but by the third term there was already hubris that had caused rumblings, especially over the "poll tax". The real interview was not an obvious defeat, and much longer. The programmes apparent claim that the interview was the start of Margaret Thatcher's downfall is therefore misleading. Plots were already happening because of Lawson's departure and later because of Howe's speech. The epilogue with Margaret Thatcher holding forth after her resignation, looked like a eulogy for her policies, that are now the political norm. Steve Coogan's ability to slip into an character is remarkable. Harriet Walter looked more like Nancy Reagan, but had the right voice and mannerisms. I would say it is a successful, thought-provoking programme.

Despite James Graham's strong track record in political drama, Brian and Maggie fails to deliver the punch it promises. While Steve Coogan's Brian Walden is an impressive mimicry, his character lacks depth, making his off-screen moments feel as stiff as his on-screen ones. Harriet Walter's Margaret Thatcher faces a similar struggle-her performance is hampered by artificial visual choices that create a layer of detachment rather than authenticity. The chemistry between the two leads never quite sparks, leaving their evolving dynamic feeling flat. Stephen Frears' direction only adds to the sluggishness, with long, drawn-out sequences that drain the tension from critical political exchanges.

Beyond its structural and performance issues, the drama also tiptoes around the deeper consequences of Thatcherism. The economic policies that defined her era-deregulation, slashed taxes for the rich, and an all-out assault on workers' rights-aren't meaningfully explored. Instead, the script reduces the political backdrop to broad ideological soundbites, avoiding the reality of how Thatcher's economic model widened the gap between rich and poor, leading to an oligarchic system where billionaires rule as they like because they just buy politicians for shilling on the quid of return. What could have been a searing critique of power and media influence instead becomes a safe, superficial reenactment, missing the chance to expose the lasting damage of an era that still shapes Britain today.

Harriet Walter doesn't try to mimic Thatcher's accent very closely, which leads to a more natural, less strangulated performance than those of Meryl Streep and Gillian Anderson. She looks too old, but is otherwise fairly convincing. As for Steve Coogan, I agree with another reviewer who says he often just seems to be playing himself. This is sadly true. Despite slight touches of the voice and diction, he doesn't capture Walden's manner as I remember it (and as we see it in those few seconds at the end.) Also I'd have liked more about the 1989 situation and less of the back story that took up episode 1.