Director: Philip Barantini
Release date: 13 March 2025
OMG! Highly recommended. Adolescence, the latest Netflix British TV miniseries is a gripping 4-part drama about a community coming to grips after a brutal teenage crime is committed by a 13-year-old schoolboy. Superbly written, filmed, acted and produced, we binge-watched all four episodes in one sitting and were blown away by how artistically and technically well-made it was.
Critics’ reviews have been consistently and overwhelmingly favourable. The show has been declared “the closest thing to TV perfection in decades” (The Guardian), “an all-time technical masterpiece” (Forbes), “outstanding, unflinching TV” (Pajiba), “one of the best, most devastating shows of 2025” (Mashable), “a triumph of creative and technical artistry where the ‘gimmick’ at hand elevates it to one of the year’s finest” (Empire) and “harrowing, heartbreaking and a must-watch” (Rolling Stone).
It’s artistic and technical commitment to the one-shot filming technique over each of its four episodes is not original, but its exemplary and exceptional quality of output suggests that this series will be a significant reference point for the TV industry for years to come.
Four distinct angles to a crime
Each of the four episodes were crafted as separate one-shot scenes in the aftermath of the knife stabbing crime, where we see the consequences of the actions of a child killer as it comes to bear on different groups. His close-knit family is shocked at his arrest and then police having to investigate and uncover the truth, so that justice can prevail for both the victim and the accused.
For the juvenile subjects involved in the crime, the social environment of the school and the classmates of both killer and victim form the context of the crime. So there’s an episode in which the investigators visit the school to try and glean some insights to how and why we ended up with such a tragic outcome. Then in trying to understand the motivation for the crime, we see one episode entirely dedicated to a psychologist interviewing the boy. The final episode deals with the family and the massive fall out of realising that they have raised a monster capable of performing such a heinous act.
SPOILER ALERT
Don’t read the next section describing each episode in detail, if you haven’t seen the show yet! You may wish to skip directly to “One-shot filming technique” below.
Episode 1: The Arrest
The series opens head on with a harrowing police raid on the Miller household at dawn, after a murder had taken place the night before. The result is a confronting voyeuristic insight into the procedural machinations of an arrest following a brutal crime with particular attention paid to a juvenile being involved. We see the participation of an “appropriate adult” to ensure the accused who is a minor understands and receives suitable guidance from an accompanying adult during certain interactions with the law so that their rights are preserved. Legal counsel (either privately engaged by the accused or assigned immediately by the state as a matter of judicial fairness) also plays a significant role in the overall process.
It’s all stressful to watch but also somewhat reassuring to see that fairness prevails and the heavy hand of the law is applied proportionately and commensurate with the crime being dealt with.
All this happens in real time. Rather than it being a boring linear account of how the police go about arresting, then booking the suspect before conducting the first interview with him. We are presented with a riveting insight with excruciating detail into the traumatic yet routine of what takes place, thanks to a totally planned, superbly directed and choreographed immersive view into what the boy, his family, the police investigators and all the other minor characters have to go through within a short but intense and continuous period of time.
The parents and older sister are shocked at what’s happening to them; from the moment the 13-year-old boy wets his pyjamas in the bed from the sheer terror of what he’s apparently inflicted on himself and the family, all the while pleading that it’s a mistake and he hasn’t done anything wrong to them finally finding out later what has transpired to warrant such a swift and forceful raid on the household.
We are convinced the cute little boy is incapable of whatever he’s being accused of having committed. And the punch-in-the-gut reveal of the crime doesn’t come until the end of the police investigators’ interview with the boy, where he’s accompanied by his appropriate adult (who he’s nominated to be his father) and his legal counsel. At that interview, the police present evidence of Jamie’s social media (Instagram) interaction with the victim, then they produce clear video evidence showing he was in the company of his two mates Ryan and Tommy the previous night. More CCTV footage screened on a laptop then reveals that they had left him alone before he was seen following Katie before then stabbing her at a park near their school.
There is little, if no, ambiguity that the stabbing was done by Jamie. The lawyer and father are both dumbfounded at seeing the evidence, even while Jamie continues to insist it wasn’t him and all a mistake. Acknowledging the gravity and shock of this stunning reveal, the interviewers offer the boy and his father a moment alone, which the lawyer agrees to. This next scene is emotionally gut-wrenching as we see an anguished father asking what his son has done, even as the boy refuses to admit to the crime. Seeing Eddie Miller’s inner conflict of wanting to recoil from the monster he has raised, yet still wanting to support and comfort him in his moment of need was disturbingly powerful.
Having been guided through a traumatic hour where you want to believe the innocent-looking boy couldn’t possibly have been responsible for such a brutal murder, we are suddenly dropped into a shattering reality that he must have done it.
Episode 2: The School
The visit by Detective Inspector (DI) Luke Bancombe and Detective Sargeant (DS) Misha Frank to the school occurs three days after the arrest of young Jamie Miller. Having already arrested and detained whom they are very sure—based on the evidence available—is the murderer, the next priority for the investigating team is to establish the motive for the crime and to try and find the murder weapon which had not been found at the scene of the crime.
The school attended by both the accused and victim is where they are hoping one or more of their classmates might come forward with additional information and insights into what transpired leading up to the murder. There is sombre tension in the air as we see the students process has just caused them to lose one of their own, in a violent act by another.
The pair of police investigators are escorted around by Mrs Fenumore (Jo Hartley) who is often embarrassed and apologetic for the children’s rudeness. They walk into the classroom of Jamie and Katie, only to be faced with antagonistic behaviour from the kids towards police authority, not helped by having DI Bancombe’s son in the class whom they tease and mock.
The murder victim’s best friend Jade (Fatima Bojang) is also interviewed, by the police and accompanied by her teacher Mrs Bailey (Hannah Walters, who happens to be Stephen Graham’s wife and another alumnus of his other acting projects such as Boiling Point, This is England). Jade is uncooperative and angry that her closest friend is now gone. She storms out of the interview, only to later (during the outdoor assembly because of the fire evacuation) act out by attacking Jamie’s friend Ryan in the open, whom she is sure was an accomplice to the murder.
Following the little outburst, police interview Jamie’s friend Ryan but he is uncooperative. His mate Tommy had already been interviewed at his home and advises Ryan to remain mum if he doesn’t want to be implicated in the crime. The boy refuses to say anything helpful and defiantly returns to class. In the meantime, the investigators have a quiet conversation between themselves about the wisdom of showing up like this and expecting results given the rawness of the situation.
Things take a different turn when Adam quietly approaches his father, DI Bancombe, asking for a private moment to talk. He offers an insight into the social media trail which the police appear to have completely misunderstood, where the comments by the victim Katie had clearly riled up Jamie. She had called the boy an “incel”, asking him to take the “red pill” and invoked the “80/20 rule” suggesting that he was unworthy of having a girlfriend. This would have humiliated him beyond rescue and offered a clear motive for him to retaliate.
The police investigators decide to question Ryan again, only for him to make a dash for it, with DI Bascombe having to give chase (cameraman following closely behind them). When cornered, he admits the knife used in the murder was supplied by him to Jamie. That’s enough to order his arrest as an accessory to the crime. DI Bascome leaves the boy in the hands of DI Frank to handle the arrest while he heads off to catch his son, essentially to thank him for the tip off and to spend some quality time with him.
The episode ends with the camera pulling away then sweeping over the field beside the school where we see the scene of the crime, now a floral shrine to the memory of murdered Katie. We then see Eddie Miller arrive in his van bringing flowers as a peace offering to the victim whose life was prematurely snuffed out by his only son.
Episode 3: The Boy
This event takes place several months later and focuses on a psychologist’s interaction with the accused at a secure training facility for adolescents where he has been held until the trial. Given the evidence and circumstances of the case, which involves social media intimidation and abuse around gender and power issues, the psychologist is engaged to assess the boy’s state of mind and uncover underlying motivations in attacking the girl he potentially liked who had subjected him to humiliation instead.
Psychologist Briony Ariston first interacts with a police officer in the media control room at the training facility when she asks to see footage of a brawling incident involving her subject Jamie. She then heads into the interview room to speak with Jamie, armed with his favourite hot chocolate with marshmallows. Although initially reluctant to speak up, he eventually opens up about his complex feelings towards Katie. He says he’s not attracted to her (because she’s flat-chested) yet he was interested in becoming her friend based on his social media interactions with her.
Suspicious of Briony trying to trick him into saying things he might regret, Jamie blows hot and cold, fishing for her personal assessment of him even before he can answer her questions. She, of course, refuses to divulge anything, constantly trying to steer things towards revealing his thoughts about himself, his father, girls in general and his friendship with Katie in particular. An outburst in which he flings the cup of hot chocolate across the room is cue for a short break when Briony returns to the media control room. Briony interacts with the police officer again, during which he offers her his unsolicited psychological observations, eventually admitting that unlike her he hates his job.
Briony returns to the interview room for part two of her conversation with Jamie and it gets even more intense. He turns on his interview, defensive about being judged for his lack of female friends and having his masculinity challenged. The power dynamic shifts back and forth, Briony becoming visibly shaken by the boy’s often threatening demeanour. The security escort has to step in to check on her as she puts on a brave front and continues.
When Jamie realises that he’s not going to get a preview of her assessment of him, he then wants to know if she likes him, displaying a level of insecurity and approval-seeking that suggests he does care very much what other’s think of him. Through the battle of egos, we see a certain lack of self-awareness and denialism about his actions. Briony struggles to establish if he knows what he has done was right or wrong. The session ends when she declares this will be her last meeting with him, causing another outburst. Jamie is taken away screaming and shouting while Briony literally shakes as she catches her breath and recovers from the session.
We don’t really need to see her report to know what her likely findings would be in terms of the boy’s state of mind and ability to have committed the crime.
This episode is reminiscent of episode 5 of Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story which is essentially just a dedicated one-shot filmed conversation between Erik and his lawyer Leslie. It is like watching a two-hander scene of a play during which intimate emotions are revealed, except that you’re there on stage and witnessing it up close through the excellent cinematography.
Episode 4: The Family
It is Jamie’s father’s birthday, and we see the family of Eddie, Manda and Lisa setting out to celebrate the occasion. The family has clearly been having a difficult time dealing with their worst nightmare, i.e. the shocking realisation that they have produced a monstrous killer.
The celebratory mood is rudely interrupted by discovery of graffiti in the form of the word “Nonse” sprayed across dad’s Miller plumbing van. Eddie loses his cool and gives chase to the pair of pranksters who cycle past while taunting him. Attempts to wash off the paint with soap and water fail and breakfast preparation is interrupted when Eddie insists on heading to the local hardware establishment to buy whatever can help remove the paint.
The three remaining Millers hop into the van and head to the store. Still in continuous one-shot mode, we witness their conversation in the front cab of the van captured through the camera now sitting in front of the windscreen as they travel. The conversation is kept uncomfortably light as the family try to keep up morale. It is, after all, a day for celebration. When they arrive at the store, Eddie heads to the paint section where he solicits technical advice on removing the graffiti. The geeky sales technician offers his two cents worth, pointing to products and instructions.
Unfortunately, the salesperson suddenly recognises Eddie as father of the child murderer when things head south. Eddie is triggered. He grabs a can of blue paint, intended to be a quick fix alternative to mask the graffiti instead of removing it. As he heads back to the van to meet wife and daughter, he spots the teenage pranksters again and decides to give chase to settle the score with them. He manages to catch one of them, delivering an angry blow, tossing his bicycle to the ground and then in an act of rage, opens the can of blue pain and flings it across the side of his truck. It’s not a pleasant sight.
Wife and daughter can only watch in silence as the store security guard demands he clean up the mess of pain he’s left on the car park floor. He ignores the guard and packs Manda and Lisa back into the van to head home. On the way home they receive a phone call from Jamie called from the remand facility to wish his father birthday wishes. They talk about the hand-drawn birthday card Jamie had sent. Jamie then informs them that he’s been thinking about it and decide it would be best for him to change his plea to guilty in the trial that was coming up. The parents and sister remain silent for the rest of the journey home.
When they get home Eddie and Manda have a quiet moment together when they reinforce their decision not to run from things and move to another city to hide where things won’t necessarily improve when their identity would inevitably catch up with them. They also ask each other if they have done their best as parents, admitting that they probably could have done better. It’s an emotional, heartfelt and uncontrived conversation. We empathise with Eddie when he visits his son’s bedroom, kisses the little stuffed bear sitting on the bed and apologises by proxy to his son for not having protected him from the cruel world.
The family decides to abandon a trip to the movies and a Chinese dinner, settling for an alternative takeaway order and a movie night in instead.
One-shot filming technique
One of the more notable films to employ a single shot or single take for the entire movie was the 2002 film Russian Art. We subsequently saw its use of the one-shot technique in films such as 1917 and Birdman. It is worth noting that the idea of experimenting with long uninterrupted takes has a long history of over 80 years, with Alfred Hitchcock being a pioneer. The 1948 film Rope was a famous early example of a film that extensively used long takes, with each of the takes being bound by the length of film stock available at the time.
Continuing from Boiling Point
Director Philip Barantini collaborates with actor Stephen Graham and his cinematographer Matthew Lewis for this series, having all three previously worked on firstly on the short film then movie and then follow-up miniseries also titled Boiling Point. They use the same one-shot filming approach to bring an immersive experience of their audiences which heightens a sense of realism, immediacy and intensity to a situation and story.
Whereas this film technique employed in the Boiling Point was relevant and appropriately focused on the time-sensitivity of a chef and his culinary team running a high-pressure kitchen in a reputable high-end restaurant, this approach has been suitably applied to a crime investigation situation.
The writers Jack Thorne and Stephan Graham (who also plays Eddie Miller, father of the accused) produced an incisive script tailored specifically to the filming approach. The idea was to find and sustain the angle and tension for the viewer to witness whatever was being presented to unfold a tragic story. Like fly-on-the wall voyeurs we follow the proceedings through the eye of the camera which pulls in an out of rooms, faces, vehicles, through corridors and even flying across fields to convey a realistic sense of human interaction and emotions.
You may not initially realise it at the start of the first episode that there’s just one continuous camera shot but soon this becomes apparent when you notice we’re getting into the police van with the boy and then follow him into the police station, then the police officers and family’s view of things as the elaborate arrest process unfolds.
Complexity of shooting Episode 2
Episodes 2 is particularly interesting and impressive when you realise it’s not just about a cameraman with a portable camera deftly capturing perfectly choreographed and rehearsed action in real time. While the scenes in the house and police station may involve a handful of people, the scenes at the school had hundreds of people moving around both inside and outside, all while the camera floats around observing intimate conversations amongst small group to a full-blown fire evacuation drill. Just the logistics of managing the movements of so many human elements in real time is nothing less than mind-blowing.
As the chase on foot in Episode 2 concludes with DI Bascombe leaving his deputy to manage the arrest of Ryan, he heads to the car park to talk to his son and then after that conversation ends we pan to Jade and some other students dispersing after school, only to see the camera lift upwards. I remember being gobsmacked at realising the camera was floating up into the sky then traversing a field before descending at the scene of the murder. We then see dad Eddie Miller arriving to place a bunch of flowers at the shrine to the deceased girl his son has allegedly killed.
I recall wondering out loud how the shot was being done; perhaps the cameraman hopping and lifted in a cherry picker. But then the camera continues to fly across the field. How is this being done… if not with a drone?
The behind-the-scenes material reveals that a drone mechanism with multiple propellers was swiftly attached to the camera at that point, allowing the camera to then lift off and fly independently to its next destination so the next and final sequence could continue uninterrupted, where presumably the cameraman intercepts the whole contraption to film the final poignant scene. Simply breathtaking!
View from camera flown via drone across carpark towards the crime site for final scene
Preparation & rehearsals
Each episode was allocated up to two weeks for rehearsal then filmed in the third week, with the opportunity for up to 10 continuous takes, i.e. one in the morning and another in the afternoon.
Complete dry run rehearsals ensured everything would be in place and muscle memory drilled so the acting and filming could proceed seamlessly. If you look at the production credits, there is no editor. Instead, what we had was a long action sequences with all the editing taking place well ahead of the filming, conceived intrinsically with the script.
The producers have revealed that Episode 1 was from Take 2, Episode 2 was from Take 13, Episode 3 from Take 11 and Episode 4 was only captured in Take 16. What an effort!
Stellar cast performances
Jamie Miller, the 13-year-old murderer is played by Owen Cooper who is now 15 years old and 14 at the time of filming. This is his first screen role, having come with limited youth community theatre background. His performances is a revelation, especially in the virtuosic Episode 3 which he shares with Erin Doherty as the psychologist who interviews him to prepare her assessment of his psychological state which would impact on the court’s sentencing. In the gripping scene we see the power of the conversation shift back and forth during the session. Enhanced by brilliant camerawork the nuance of this fascinating two-way interaction keeps us enthralled and on the edge.
Jamie’s father Eddie Miller is played by Stephen Graham (an impressive actor who’s been seen in TV series such as Time, Boiling Point, The Virtues and Line of Duty. Despite a few angry outbursts, he brings a stoicism, warmth and sensitivity to the role of devastated father of a killer. His close rapport and devotion to his wife Manda Miller, played strongly by Christine Tremarco, and daughter Lisa Miller, played by Amelie Pease, is believable. The family’s distress and anguish in dealing with their nightmare bookends the series; initially insisting on standing by their son/sibling (when they didn’t understand what he had done) and then again even after being convinced and not understanding why he did what he did. The maturity in the way they question their hand in the outcome and resolve to use it to continue in the best way possible is impressive. The emotional displays by all three parties in the final episode is nothing less than compelling.
Investigator DI Bascombe played by Ashley Walters (previously seen in Top Boy, Bullet Boy and Missing You) is impressive. Supported and well complemented by his female sidekick and DS Misha Frank, played by Faye Marsay, we see a man trying to do his job well, while also trying to cope with strained his relationship with his son. It all comes to a head in a distressing case that cuts close to the bone. His son, Adam Bascombe, is played effectively by Amari Bacchus who is known for Bros for Life and Words on a Page.
State assigned legal counsel for the murder accused, Paul Barlow is played by Mark Stanley. Known for his roles in Run, Sulphur and White, Dark River and Game of Thrones, he delivers an understated but impactful portrayal of a calm and even-handed legal advisor to a minor and his family.
Jamie’s close mates Ryan (played by Kaine Davis) and Tommy (played by Lewis Pemberton) have small but weighty roles which they discharge well. Murder victim Katie’s best friend Jade (played by Fatima Bojang) has two key scenes. She leaves a strong impression with her brief but powerful portrayal of a teenage girl left all alone when her best friend is brutally killed by someone she was taunting.
Incels, toxic masculinity
This show ultimately takes aim at the “manosphere” and levels of toxic masculinity driven on social media by reckless influencers; one of the more prominent ones being Andrew Tate.
The term “incel” is a portmanteau of “involuntary celibate.” In its most basic form, incel describes someone, usually a male, who is frustrated by their lack of sexual experiences. The Anti-Defamation League, which works to address hate and extremism, defines incels as “heterosexual men who blame women and society for their lack of romantic success.” The term was coined by a woman, Alana, who is known only by her first name. She first popularised the term in the 1990s, through a personal website called Alana’s Involuntary Celibacy Project. The term “incel” became a part of the language she used with her followers as they discussed feelings of shyness and social awkwardness. However, as the term spread, it began to take on different meanings.
Incel forums, organised by and for self-identified incels, have been studied by public policy researchers because of the misogynistic rhetoric and high-profile violence some members of the incel community embrace. The “red pill”, one of the terms referred to in the social media interactions of the case is a metaphor is taken from the 1999 movie The Matrix. Keanu Reeves’ character Neo must choose between taking a blue pill, which will keep him in a state of peaceful ignorance, or the red pill, which will awaken him to an uncomfortable but enlightening reality. So, someone “redpilled” would have accepted their reality. The 80/20 rule regarding dating referred to in the series is about the idea that 80% of women want to date 20% of men, implying that the rest are likely to remain unappealing enough to be undatable and therefore relegated to being incels.
Canadian psychologist, author, media commentator and cultural polemicist Jordan Peterson has weighed in on the incel movement. His stance is complex and often mischaracterized with some labelling him an “incel hero”. In typically ambiguous and duplicitous fashion, he’s been both critical of incels (referring them as useless men) as well as showing empathy for the struggles of lonely and socially isolated men, which includes some who identify as incels, arguing that these men often don’t know how to make themselves attractive to women and face societal ridicule. Public perceptions of Peterson’s status as an incel hero reached its peak when film director Olivia Wilde revealed during her Don’t Worry Darling film press tour that the villainous character Frank played by actor Chris Pine in the film was based on Peterson. She called Peterson “this pseudo-intellectual hero to the incel community.”
While the story is a fictional one, the writers have confirmed that it the real-life emergence of knife crime in the UK and a case of a boy stabbing a girl was a reference point which forms a strong and plausible basis for the scenario that drives the story.
Who is responsible when an adolescent boy isn’t mature or discerning enough to face the pressures of not just the bullying school yard but the social media environment beyond it? What is being offered to allow the boy to cope with the cruel humiliation of emasculation while his hormones rage, being called an incel by a girl whom he likes but doesn’t know how to make himself likeable, and then then egged on to carry out a retaliatory act by his equally immature peers?
While both Andrew Tate and Jordan Peterson have gained popularity among young men, their approaches to personal growth and success are markedly different, and both have been criticised for their controversial stances towards masculinity and reclaiming male authority.
Toxic masculinity in Australian schools
Closer to home, how relevant are these gender-based issues in the Australian school context? Research conducted by Monash University in early 2024 unveiled concerning insights into the resurgence of male supremacy and the advancement of toxic masculinity in Australian schools. The research findings suggested a disturbing pattern of sustained sexual harassment, sexism and misogyny perpetrated by boys, signalling a worrying shift in gender dynamics within school environments. Monash University subsequently devised a two-year project, funded by Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety (ANROWS), aimed at establishing school-based early intervention programs to identify and tackle the harms of online misogyny and gender-based violence in schools.
In Jess Hills Quarterly Essay titled Losing It: Can we stop violence against women and children? (published in March 2025) she investigates Australia’s National Plan to End Violence Against Women and Children to find out what’s working and what’s not. While teachers say this generation is the most switched on ever, this observation comes alongside stories of increasing ‘performative toxicity’ among boys, with teachers describing something different: the escalating culture of misogyny in Australian classrooms.
Conclusions
It isn’t often you catch yourself thinking while watching each episode how brilliant the planning and execution was, to have produced such high-quality acting, audience engagement and the way it drew you in and yet came across as even-handed, believable and thought-provoking.
As non-parents, we came away after watching the TV series feeling a strong empathy for the parents and family of young Jamie. We appreciate how difficult it must be to raise a child in today’s challenging context of social media, where bullying, manipulation and taunting of impressionable youths is rampant. And all this in an ever-changing, unsupervised or regulated environment that is often beyond the grasp of their own parents and teachers.
The creators of this show don’t offer you solutions or answers. But they certainly ask all the right questions. Rather than the landing on the cop out position that these things happen and it’s not anyone’s fault in particular, we see the family bravely accepting that while they did what they could to raise a loved and good boy, there is more they could have done. And while each of them cannot take full responsibility for the outcome, they must humbly learn move on, while living with the consequences of their new circumstances.
We hope the series wins the directorial, production and acting awards it so deserves.
Production trailer
Behind the scenes
Desaur Studios – filming the one-shot episodes
Stream Wars/ Netflix – Best of Behind the Scenes
Critics' reviews
- Roger Ebert - not without hope, not without compassion
- The Guardian - closest thing to TV perfection
- Forbes - an all time technical masterpiece
- Pajiba - outstanding unflinching television
- Mashable - one of the best, most devastating shows of 2025
- IGN - an intense, riveting drama
- Empire - triumph of creative and technical artistry
- Variety - a gutting account of murder, misogyny and teen fragility
- Rolling Stone - harrowing, heartbreaking and a must-see
- The Hollywood Reporter - Netflix’s taut one-shot legal thriller is more than its gimmick
- The Sunday Times - the TV drama that every parent should watch
- BBC - flawless TV
- The Conversation - technical masterpiece that exposes the darkest corners of incel culture and male rage
- IndieWire - real-time crime drama impressively subverts expectations
Cast interviews
RadioTimes – cast and creatives talk about emotional scenes, parenting and male rage
BAFTA – filming one-take episodes
Still Watching Netflix – Owen Cooper and Erin Doherty break down the Therapy episode
Production material
- The Direct – Cast: Every actor and character
- People – Ending & Plot explained (Spoiler warning)
- Elle - Is 'Adolescence' Based On A True Story? The Haunting Real Life Events That Inspired The Drama Critics Love
- Grazia – Where was Adolescence filmed
- Tudum by Netflix – Everything to know about one-shot crime drama Adolescence
- Radio Times – Where was Adolescence filmed
- South China Morning Post -Netflix crime drama Adolescence starring Stephen Graham, Ashley Walters is a one-take wonder
- The New Statesman - Jack Thorne's Adolesence is how crime drama should be done
Dad has a introspective moment in his son’s bedroom. “I’m sorry, son. I should have done better”. Sob!
Material on incels & toxic masculinity
- CNN – Incel explained
- The Sunday Times – Kyle Clifford watched Andrew Tate videos before rape and murders
- LinkedIn - The No-Nonsense Approach vs. The Productive Path: A Comparison of Andrew Tate and Jordan Peterson
- The Guardian – ‘Teachers are describing something different’: the escalating culture of misogyny in Australian classrooms
- Quarterly Essay – Losing it by Jess Hill
- Monash University – New project will help teachers tackle toxic masculinity in schools
- Monash University – Research exposes alarming impact of manfluencer culture in Australian Schools
Final song (outro)
The song Through the eyes of a child, played at the end of final Episode 4, sung here by original artist Aurora. In the show it is sung by the actress Emilia Holliday who plays the slain teenager Katie. Director Barantini says they got her to record the song as she’s part of the whole series and is always there, even after she’s been killed.
World is covered by our trails
Scars we cover up with paint
Watch them preach in sour lies
I would rather see this world through the eyes of a child
Through the eyes of a child