Adolescence

[heartsinvisiblefury]

What an amazing piece of television. Stephen Graham is exceptional. Highly recommend this - on Netflix.

I liked it, I thought it was well made - despite some stuff that was difficult to believe - like the school, secondary schools where I live are massively strict and kids would not be allowed to behave like that. The detective and his son thing was weird, too - but I guess it was to show that even he has issues with not understanding his own son, despite being a police officer.

I thought the psychiatrist episode was powerful. We basically see that the little boy that looks like a child is not a child - he is, basically, a larva of a misogynistic bloke that treats females like shit - we see what he is going to grow up into (or would have done if not for his crime, I think the ending sort of hints at him owning his crime and taking responsibility for it).

I think Jamie's family had a lot to do with what he grew up into - his mum is basically treated as a household appliance/ emotional support animal, his siter also seem very immature for her age. Very telling he wanted dad with him, not his mum - even though his mum seems much more "together".

Only half way through episode 3 but the school episode broke the spell for me.

There's no way that school staff would let the police officers roam about lanyardless without signing in or out. There's also no way the police would be left to just bob in to random classes to speak unrehearsed to the kids in that way.
There is also no way the adults would be that ignorant of Andrew Tate- we've all had training in this year's ago.

That Mrs fenugreek character was weird - the head teacher and/or DSL would be escorting the police round, not some random lady from the primary site.

The whole scene with that fighty girl sitting in the classroom with that woman in the orange dress was weird too. It just isn't the way anything is done in schools.

For me, the most powerful scenes in the whole thing are Erin Doherty being hovered over by the security guard in ep 3. We can all relate to that kind of presence.

'The whole scene with that fighty girl sitting in the classroom with that woman in the orange dress was weird too. It just isn't the way anything is done in schools.'

Think was just an opportunity to shoehorn Graham's wife into to the show, she often appears in the same productions.

Are we supposed to think that Jamie had never exhibited any extreme anger/temper behaviour at home or school in the past? Surely his behaviour with the psychologist couldn't have been the first time he totally lost it? I wondered whether, if he'd acted like that at home, his dad may have had suspicions about whether he'd killed the girl.

I don't mean he wasn't physically intimating rather his 'disturbing' outbursts were were very unconvincing. I bet many 13yrs olds have shouty strops. Maybe a different actor would've done better.
Thr psychologist needs a different job if his behaviour and the sandwich unnerved her.

Re the cctv etc

By the time Jamie had breakfast. His medical etc I'd assume a few hours passed
Before he finally got his interview.

I can't remember the time on interview though
Maybe there was time to get evidence over School reports wouldn't take long and as a crime of this scale the school are jumping through hoops. Dunno about the cctv stuff. I'd imagine it's a 24 hr service though.

I'm an admirer of Stephen Graham, but his Welsh accent in White House Farm was risible and detracted from the performance imo.

@Gloriia You have a completely unrealistic view of mental health professionals if you think that they wouldn’t be at all disturbed (at a personal level) by interacting with a child who killed another child. It’s human and normal for that to take a toll. She was professional with him, and I honestly find it quite strange that you think her disgust at the crime means she should find a different job.

It really seems like you just didn’t understand the show, tbh.

Disturbed yes, not to the point that she gasps and looks teary. People who do jobs like this get used to strops and aggressive displays.

It isn't about understanding the show, no one is right or wrong it is about having different opinions on it.

Surely you can agree that the last ep featuring a trip to b&q was an absolute boring waste of time with squabbles and tears because yes who wouldn't sob and squabble if their dc was in prison.

Just pretentious nonsense featuring too many close ups of Graham's face!

I agree the secondary school episode was a bit silly. The biggest takeaway for me was how Jamie changed when he was interacting with his dad and the male detective compared to the female psychologist. He was clearly very vulnerable inside but was projecting how he thought males should behave around girls and women. It is a really important issue and I think it was done very well. I would like to think it could be used to open up conversations with young boys who are at risk of being radicalised by the anti-feminist movement.

Of course it’s perfectly legitimate to have a different opinion and not like the show, but that’s not the same thing as fundamentally misunderstanding it and thinking that because a psychologist must have seen aggressive behaviour before, they will be unmoved by a child killer even when alone and decompressing initially after a hard session. That’s just a failure of empathy and inability to understand those who work in professions like that.

By no means am I saying anyone has to like the show or that disliking it is wrong. Not my point at all.

(For example, several people have commented and worded their comments in such a way as to suggest they think there is ambiguity about whether or not Jamie did it. But that’s clearly not the case. The show makes it absolutely, 100% clear that he did. So anyone whose comment implies there is ambiguity is at some level not “getting” what the show is doing.)

Go watch Top Boy if you want to see a bleak drama about knife crime, gangs and drugs. .

The point about them thinking she bullied him is that they weren’t actually understanding what was going on at first. Surely one of the most powerful aspects of this drama is that this hasn’t been done before? A 13yo from a seemingly completely normal family, had committed the most terrible of crimes against female.

I thought the same about episode 2 (it makes state schools look how private school parents incorrectly imagine them to be!!) but pressed on and did really enjoy episode 3 and 4.

The lad who plays the lead role has not come from a theatre school and this was his first acting experience he apparently goes to a comprehensive and lives on a council estate as Stephen Graham said in an interview so maybe that’s why his performance didn’t seem as polished as a more experienced young actor. It seems that just as the dad was quick to rage the son was too but I did wonder if the psychologist suspected the boy was a psychopath did any one else think the same?.

I loved it and despite all the inconsistencies it really made me reflect on what it must be like to interact professionally with a child who has committed a terrible crime.

It’s hard to imagine Police and Counsellors ever really getting used to it. It must be just awful registering a child at Police station and knowing what lies ahead of them and what it means for their future,

The precursor to psychopathy in children is often what’s known as “callous and unemotional traits” (CU). To me, it didn’t seem that they were trying to portray him as CU, because I thought he seemed very emotional and reactive in both episode one and three. I felt like his shame about perceived under performance (not being as “clever” as his sister, even though actually he seemed to be doing fine academically; the football stories, etc) and his fear were supposed to be taken as genuine, and it didn’t seem to me that we were meant to read these as attempts to manipulate. CU children feel less fear and shame than would be normal.

It’s definitely still a possible interpretation, though. One thing she would have been looking for would be CU traits.

This is what tipped me over the edge. I hadn't cried at all until that point and then I just sobbed for around 20 minutes and went and hugged my children in their beds.

It calls into question the impact of generations of men too - raised by fathers who did not really interact with them. Stephen had not been raised in a positive way. He tried to do better but still admitted wanting his son to be good at football. There are many young boys now raised without fathers in their lives never mind a positive one. This doesn't bode well for the future. I thought that the transition from child Jamie to abusive Jamie in episode 3 was too sudden and a bit unrealistic but thankfully I have never witnessed this. It's a mess all round - young girls who adopt a sexual persona early in life, internet availability of porn and radical ideas , social media which promotes the girls who get it all out as the ones who get ahead, tripe like Love Island - it all contributes to a big big mess. There's accountability on both sexes - meanwhile you have Mum in this trying to make it better for everyone else.

Having CCTV footage of him doing it probably helped.

I thought he definitely came across as manipulative and wanting to control the situation. He seemed to have more narcissistic traits than psychopathic traits though. His false vulnerability and fury when the psychologist failed to contradict him, and his rage when he was unable to stay in control of the situation or he felt his pride was wounded.

I’m about 40 mins in and I don’t understand why neither of the parents have asked any questions! Surely the first thing you’d say is, who’s he supposed to have killed? When? Where?!

(haven’t read the thread yet so aware this may be explained at some point!)

The last episode made clear that he did act like that at home and the mother wondered whether they should have tried to shut this behaviour down. But then she reasons that the dad is like this…….
I don’t think the parents at all understood the impact of the dad’s behaviour on the family and particularly the son.

He was a ‘good’ dad but everyone seemed to need to please him in case he went off on one - and the mother asking the daughter if her boyfriend ‘looked after her’ She was just perpetuating the next generation of this kind of behaviour but it was subtle

@MrsSunshine2b As I said, definitely open to interpretation and I don’t think it’s “wrong” to see him as having callous and unemotional traits, if that’s what you perceive! I agree that there are clearly efforts at manipulation in episode three.

I was thinking more about episode one. Did the fear in that episode seem real to you? I am not even talking so much about wetting himself, which might just be a shock reaction, but more so the apparent fear throughout the episode. I thought we were meant to believe he was genuinely afraid, not persistently manipulating everyone through episode one. Whereas a child with CU, in my opinion, would be less likely to show as much fear as that. But again, that’s just my interpretation of what they showed us, and I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer on points like this.

@NoStyleLeft I think the parents are in deep, deep shock. Of course the rational thing would be to ask questions, but they are not functioning on all cylinders, as it were.