Inside No. 9<\/em> so often demonstrates. His signature style is his tendency to leave things open ended – something the team at MindFckd absolutely revel in.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\u201cIt\u2019s a big part of what people remember. I\u2019ve always enjoyed it as a reader or as a viewer, and we wanted to give that same feeling to people watching the show.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cSo much TV and media now, people do double-screening. You watch it with one eye and another eye is somewhere else.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt\u2019s very easy to dip out of something if you think you don\u2019t really have to give it your full attention.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Inside No. 9<\/em> thrives on psychological intrigue and plays with audience expectations, often making episodes entirely unpredictable. But Pemberton is mindful that this approach can shape the viewer\u2019s experience. <\/p>\n\n\n\n\u201cAs soon as you expect a twist, it can be a little bit reductive in that you\u2019re only thinking about that, you\u2019re not thinking about the story. But when you get something that works really well as a twist, it makes you want to go back and reconsume that piece of media.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It\u2019s not just the endings of Inside No. 9<\/em> episodes that make it so captivating, it\u2019s the storylines themselves – rich with psychological horror, laced with themes of urban legends and sprinkled with eerie coincidences. <\/p>\n\n\n\nEssentially, imagine if your favourite spooky bedtime story grew up, put on a button-down shirt, and became a clever, darkly amusing version of itself. It is now a Steve Pemberton extravaganza.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWe\u2019ve been lucky enough to have a blank canvas for each single episode, and so we don\u2019t have a prescriptive way of doing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWe don\u2019t have a format or formula that we stick to, so we just feel it organically what the story should be.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Many Inside No. 9<\/em> fans favour Pemberton\u2019s technique of pulling the rug from under your feet, again and again, and the free rein that comes with writing the show allows for complete creative freedom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\u201cTo one extent, we think the audience will be ahead of us and therefore have to subvert that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWe take it on a case by case basis really, otherwise it just becomes too reductive that people are only thinking about the endings. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIf you can make yourself surprised, then that\u2019s a good sign it will then hopefully make the audience surprised as well.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But creating such an unpredictable show comes with its challenges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Time constraints when filming the episode \u2018Diddle Diddle Dumpling\u2019 forced Pemberton and Shearsmith to cut the ending, sparking a massive online debate between viewers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt ended with this note of ambiguity, and people were jumping to all sorts of different conclusions. Purely because these episodes have to be 30 minutes, we\u2019d shaved the ending off, meaning it was ambiguous not because we tried to be, but because we had to be.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cSo yeah, it\u2019s really fun having the carte blanche with Inside No. 9<\/em> to do different things every week.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\u201cI think it\u2019s unique to scheduled broadcast television as opposed to streaming, where you can put on a programme when you want and what you want.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Pemberton takes his creative freedom even further by blurring the lines between fiction and reality, and admits to creating audaciously good real-time tricks on viewers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The episode \u2018Deadline\u2019 deceived viewers watching live into believing that the show had gone wrong due to technical issues. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The stunt was a success. People quickly took to social media to discuss what was happening, seemingly integrating the audience into the cunning world of the show.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt really worked. I believe about a fifth of the viewers turned off because we went so far with it. We made it so believable and realistic, and it\u2019s a big risk for a TV show to want to lose viewers in that way.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cPeople were watching the show after Inside No. 9<\/em> to see if we\u2019d had something up our sleeves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\u201cIt really thrilled me. The narrative was not just what we wrote, it was what was happening with the viewers.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, Inside No. 9<\/em>\u2019s taste for mischief didn\u2019t stop there.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn 2023, a fictional episode named \u2018Hold On Tight\u2019 was advertised, with a fake trailer and promotional photographs. The episode was never filmed – nor intended to be – making for a cheeky hoax that left fans reeling for answers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/lh7-rt.googleusercontent.com\/docsz\/AD_4nXdwj9Vekpup53KA4YFzJq4qW6srijgW4q6kFzSHaeX6t4vzJYy8cjWgh_Xpl_-sOi4l_Tz5Ex_B2ObNHcsIqhKr0rngn_sObEoN-Iy-JsX0DWq8Mux5GjNnp2ykTZZ3Ka0BtEq26Bm05S7edH1sFA?key=Ebfwq4Gk-_VgIM7mxWcmDQ\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n