I recently borrowed the entire series on DVD, and I saw this episode a few nights ago. I was curious what other viewers thought, so I checked the ratings and reviews on IMDb. I find myself disagreeing with the first review. It wasn't from lack of cleverness that the writers and producers chose this particular ending. They intended the ending they wrote, and they didn't want another ending.
I don't want to give away details, but Straker is shown to be a man on a mission. It's common these days to portray such men as having a streak of ruthlessness and being somewhat morally ambiguous. However, this series was made in the era of bold Star Trek and early Dr. Who, when leaders and action heroes on TV were usually portrayed in a more noble, mythic light. Straker, on the other hand, is a man who has felt the burden of protecting the world, and that is his top priority. He does what is necessary, regardless of the cost. Looked at in that way, the ending while disturbing, is meant to be disturbing. Remember, it's supposed to bother you. IMHO, this is actually one of the better episodes of the series.
I don't want to give away details, but Straker is shown to be a man on a mission. It's common these days to portray such men as having a streak of ruthlessness and being somewhat morally ambiguous. However, this series was made in the era of bold Star Trek and early Dr. Who, when leaders and action heroes on TV were usually portrayed in a more noble, mythic light. Straker, on the other hand, is a man who has felt the burden of protecting the world, and that is his top priority. He does what is necessary, regardless of the cost. Looked at in that way, the ending while disturbing, is meant to be disturbing. Remember, it's supposed to bother you. IMHO, this is actually one of the better episodes of the series.