Out There boldly eschews a TV staple – but is it for better or worse?

That's not to say we've seen this narrative before (even if there are some real parallels to Ozark in the show's final third) - in fact, for the most part Out There's ability to keep you on your toes is what makes it so engaging.

Instead, that's more a comment on its structure, and the decision to eschew an element of serialised storytelling which has begun to feel almost compulsory in the modern era - the cliffhanger.

Now, a few caveats - that's not to say cliffhangers haven't been around for a long, long time. Of course they have. They've been around since time immemorial, and were particularly popularised on TV by Dallas in the 1980s.

But, in recent years, there's no denying there's been a glut of them, and a switch towards serialisation thanks to the advent of prestige TV and streaming.

The binge-watch model practically lives and dies on cliffhangers to keep you watching, and with so much choice for entertainment, linear TV has had to follow suit, to make sure viewers continue to come back each week and tune in.

There are, of course, some caveats, and scripted shows that remains episodic. There are plenty of sitcoms that do so (although less and less with the advent of dramedies), and some series that by their nature feature mostly self-contained instalments, like most murder mystery shows and Doctor Who.

However, thrillers have particularly leant into long-form storytelling, where each episode leads into the next, and Out There is no different - it just aligns its peaks and troughs in the drama at odd, surprising points throughout the run.

That's also not to say that Out There doesn't dabble in cliffhangers at all. There are still little teases at the end of each episode, such as the police officer Crowther spotting Johnny with the bag in episode 1 and Johnny meeting Kenny in episode 2.

But the chances are, when the credits rolled on both of those episodes, you found their endings slightly abrupt and out of nowhere.

In actual fact, they weren't particularly abrupt. They were just a moment of jumping off from the story. It's just that our brains have been trained to expect the drama to ramp up at the end of an episode, to reach a crescendo and a leave a question which can be answered in the next episode.

That isn't the case with Out There. The height of the drama in the show's second episode, for instance, comes right in the middle, when Nathan found out about Johnny's involvement with drug trafficking, and flushed Rhys's stash, leading to a dramatic confrontation and a real turn in the show's narrative.

At that point, it became unclear where the show was going or how things would continue to get worse for our central duo.

This is a pattern which continues right through the series, with the heat of the drama coming at unexpected moments, and each episode ending with a light sting, rather than major development and a tantalising cliffhanger.

Even the show's final episode ends with conversation and a death reveal which is less jaw-dropping than chin-stroking. There's no major resolution, nor is there a substantial cliffhanger to leave audiences frantic right through until season 2 arrives.

In the age of overwhelming entertainment options and often long delays between seasons, it's a risky move.

Think Severance, another thriller which has just returned to the airwaves. That show's first season came out three years ago, and in most cases that would mean viewers would have lost interest. However, the one thing which has kept fans going all this time, hankering after more, is the cliffhanger.

In the run-up to season 2, viewers were scrabbling around for recap videos or to rewatch the entire season themselves, because they couldn't remember what actually happened in season 1.

The one thing they could remember, and the one thing which kept interest alive, was Mark's shout of "She's Alive!" before a cut to black - a tease of most delicious drama, and perhaps more crucially answers, to come.

Now, if Out There is to return, let's hope it does so at a quicker rate than that. Yet it's still curious that Ed Whitmore and the team behind Out There have chosen to pace the show as they have.

It's perhaps most notable in episode 3, when, right in the middle of the instalment, Johnny kills drug dealer Kenny, and has to call his father to say, "Dad... I think I've just killed someone."

Now, forget the fact that ITV confoundingly decided to spoil this moment in the show's trailer. I'll bet that when you watched that moment, were it not for the time, you were expecting a cut to black.

It's how we've been trained to experience dramas. Each episode contains some big moments, some twists and turns, but moments like that, the very biggest, are reserved for the end of each instalment.

Now, doing something different in a drama is not something that should be instantly dismissed - on the contrary, it can be quite refreshing, in an age when there's so much scripted TV, and much of it ends up feeling largely the same.

The question is, is this a gambit which works for Out There?

I would argue it does, but that it is something which takes time to adjust to, and I do worry that some viewers may not give the show that time.

Let's face it, time is always in short supply, and there are always other options for entertainment.

That's why it's been noted (by Stephen Merchant among others) that projects for streaming shows are usually only considered viable if they grab audiences immediately, with a big dramatic moment at the start of the film or season, let alone at the end of each episode.

No time is allowed for build-up, and certainly you're unlikely to find a made-for-streaming thriller show without a cliffhanger ending to each episode.

It therefore concerns me that even if viewers have enjoyed the first episode of Out There, they may be left feeling that not enough has happened, and that there hasn't been enough of a trail left to hook them back in for episode 2.

Hopefully, that's simply a case of me (and, admittedly, plenty of entertainment executives) not giving viewers their due, and underestimating their levels of engagement. After all, this show is on ITV rather than Netflix or Apple TV+, and expectations are different. The proof will be in the pudding when it comes to the show's success.

Whatever the case, from a dramatic standpoint and on an estimation purely of quality, I think it's a structural gamble that pays off.

Not only does it give the show a unique quality and its own sense of style and pace, marking a refreshing change from the status quo, but it also gives it an unpredictability which few series manage to achieve.

If an episode were to end on the moment of Nathan confronting Rhys, viewers may assume that the next instalment would centre on the suppliers coming to find Nathan, looking to get their product back and/or get vengeance.

Instead, by ending with Johnny at the train station, we're left unsure exactly where it's going, because more options are on the table.

The first guess could be correct, but equally we could be about to see Johnny roped into the system for good and become a dealer in his own right. In the end, neither is correct, as Out There is constantly looking to upend expectations.

Meanwhile, from a dramatic standpoint, if another episode ended with the moment when Johnny calls Nathan to tell him he's killed somebody, we wouldn't get the incredible moment immediately following that, impeccably acted by Clunes and Mark Lewis Jones, at least not in the way we did.

The methodical manner in which they jump into action to protect Johnny and work through their options is somewhere between heartwarming and chilling, and allowing this to play out in the same episode, letting it breathe and not allowing it to feel as though 'the motions we have to go through at the start of an episode before we get to the good stuff', is crucial.

It makes what could be a fairly fanciful and heightened moment in another thriller series instead feel real and grounded, as though this is a more traditional drama in which something terrible, shocking and completely unexpected has just happened.

As soon as Martin Clunes was cast in this role, and the blended plot was unveiled with inspiration from real-life issues, thriller elements and a rural farming backdrop, it should have been clear Out There would be making some bold choices.

In the end, we can add a structural decision to that list, and firmly say that, from a creative standpoint, it has paid off. The question is, will audiences will stick around to reap the rewards?

Out There is available to watch on ITVX.

Check out more of our Drama coverage or visit our TV Guide and Streaming Guide to find out what's on. For more from the biggest stars in TV, listen to The Radio Times Podcast.