It’s garnered universally great reviews in the broadsheets / Kermode / etc and I’ve just binge watched all four episodes this afternoon. It really does deserve the praise.
I’m glad that my two boys are grown up – it’s a scary world out there on social media,
Forgot to mention it’s on Netflix
On Netflix. That is good news. Thanks for the tip, Chrisf.
Interesting piece in today’s Gruan for those who missued it
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2025/mar/21/adolescence-netflix-seven-things-you-didnt-know
I’ve also watched all four. It’s pretty close to faultless. All the actor’s performances are on point. It’s not a jolly watch, it’s not a piece of throwaway entertainment. It’s a piece of serious television with a serious intent. It’s early in the year but I doubt I’ll have seen anything better before the year’s end.
Agree on all counts. What is more amazing is that this is the first role for the actor that plays young Jamie.
I have a nephew who is a waiter in a posh London restaurant. He claims that Stephen Graham is the rudest, most obnoxious customer he’s served. But Graham’s presence is always a sign of good quality drama and I gather he was involved in the writing too., so i look forward to seeing this. Plus I really liked other recent so-called “one shot” productions like 1917 and Boiling Point (not so keen on The Bear).
That’s a shame. I am a big fan of Stephen Graham, have been ever since This Is Britain. I know he’s done some comedy but from what I’ve seen, he does that repressed rage thing really well. Boiling Point being an excellent case in point
Yep, I also binge-watched. Uncomfortable and harrowing viewing. I posted on Facebook that they might just as well hand over the BAFTAs now, to everyone concerned.
It’s powerful stuff, and the young actor playing Jamie is astonishing. The episode with him and the psychologist was very gripping, and I hope he had a lot of support behind the scenes. I expect portraying so many different emotions in a limited amount of time would have been a lot for an adult performer to deal with, let alone a child, and, apparently, all in one take.
I’ve never understood all the plaudits for Stephen Graham, who to me plays a similar role in almost everything he’s in: a man-of-the-people type who is more or less angry depending on the part. Yes, he does it very well indeed (especially in this show – see the whole police station sequence, and the end), but I’m not sure I’m ever completely surprised by his acting choices. I’d like to see him in an out-and-out comic part, or maybe a romance, just for a change.
Still, I couldn’t act if my life depended on it, so what do I know? Kudos to him for being so successful, and I expect he and his young co-star are going to pick up all the awards going once people have had time to take in Adolescence.
He is obviously very generous to his fellow actors. Have you seen him play Al Capone in Boardwalk Empire or Anthony Provenzaro in The Irishman? Not romantic but neither are they angry scousers.
He’s a fabuous actor with an incredibly expressive face and body.
That scene where the camera stays on his face while the police strip search his son offscreen is a masterclass in how to convey emotion using just your eyes and mouth.
I agree with all that, but, as happened with Bill Nighy and his odd facial jerks and blinks, there is so much of Graham’s tongue chewing grimaces and screwed up eyes on telly these days, as to know which faces he is going to use when. He is over exposed through his excellence, producers and directors knowing he ratings catnip. A bit like his idol, De Niro, to be fair, who had to play a shedload of Bad Granpa roles to be able then to claw back a position of not just being De Niro again. Nic Cage should be his warning, altho he too seems to be meeting critical acclaim of late, after a decade or two of dross, however remunerative.
For me, Bill Nighy is a one-trick pony who only ever plays one role – (gives BN trademark snort – Blll Nighy, donchaknow.
While a lot of the parts SG plays on UK TV are indeed very similar, he is capable of switching gears and convincingly playing completely different types of character (e.g. Al Capone in Boardwalk Empire)
Though I’ve not seen it he also did a comedy thing on Sky with the equally splendid Daniel Mays IIRC.
DeNiro lost it for me when he started churning out rubbish (90% of the films he’s churned out since repeating Travis Bickle’s famous routine in Rocky and Bullwinkle)
Bill Nighy may be somewhat lacking in range but he is a fine actor. Magnificent in Living
I agree about his limited range, and his performance in Living, but I thought the film itself was all a bit… meh. A little fuss about nothing, which was only saved by his presence.
He’s very good in the Worricker trilogy of films from a few years ago, playing a spy who’s been around the block a few times. Fewer Nighy-isms and a bit more serious.
Alas, he was no Slartibartfast.
We just watched Zero Day with DeNero which is pretty decent.
yeah I loved that too, daft but very watchable
@Retropath2 you can’t seriously compare Nighy with Graham. I can never take Nighy seriously such is the number of naff roles he has done.
I watched this in one session on Tuesday night and thought it was absolutely riveting.
Really top class acting and the camera work was nothing short of superb.
Binge-watched. Very excellent television! I’d give five stars all round for the performances, adults and kids. More than five stars if such a thing is possible, for the camerawork, which was dazzlingly stupendous throughout, including an extremely impressive switch to drone arial shot. It might be argued that the story suffered a bit in favour of the “one shot” gimmick. The camera wasn’t able to follow everything so some threads were obviously not pursued (the two friends, the knife, the playground fight etc) but I liked that questions were left unanswered.
It reminded me of a true crime case I followed closely five years ago (and wrote about in these very pages, as you’ll all no doubt recall, cos I thought it would make a good film). In that case, two American teenage boys on holiday in Rome, both apparently from very good, loving, financially comfortable homes in California’s Marin County, stupidly got involved in a drug deal (attempting to buy just €80 of cocaine) that went disastrously wrong and ended up with one of them killing a policeman. They got life (since reduced on appeal to 15 years for the killer and 11 years for his friend). Interviews with the parents showed them as understandably distraught and also very angry at the Italian police and courts (the case was far from clear-cut murder), but -most notably- completely, utterly, totally unaware of the dark side to their sons’ social media posts, which featured photos of guns, knives, wads of cash, drugs (cannabis, ecstasy and coke) and an abundance of “gangster type” talk. Also unaware that their sons thought it was normal to carry a knife!
I don’t think they were evil kids. I think they were stupid, reckless, immature and incapable of considering the consequences of their actions when swept up in the exuberance of being on holiday abroad together. Adolescents, basically. Modern teenagers, with their incriminating “plastic gangster” social media posts which unfortunately proved integral to the Italian court’s view of them.
Watching Adolescence I had the same impression. In both cases the parents’ unawareness of their children’s online activities, combined with their school’s ignorance/tolerance of it and good ol’ teenage peer pressure had much to answer for. The episode in the school was the most disturbing. Recently, in my small, safe, Italian town, there was a case of a school pupil stabbing another to death and another case of a schoolgirl committing suicide as a result of online bullying. Inner city schools must be a nightmare. In Adolescence the school staff are clearly way out of their depth; terrifyingly so.
BTW, in the unlikely event that anyone is interested in the above mentioned case, here’s an excellent summary, including interviews with the parents:
I found it particularly fascinating as I tried to imagine the psychological impact of going from “looking forward to going back home to mum and dad in California tomorrow after a two-night stay in Rome” to the unexpected reality of instead facing the prospect of years in one of Rome’s dirty, overcrowded prisons (and not speaking a word of Italian). At the age of 19. I can’t imagine how he coped. And was he just a normal kid, led into circumstances that quickly spiralled out of control by his pal (who just wanted a little coke)? A fairly normal, clueless teenager, like we all once were? Or was he really a violent thug, thief and extortionist who carried a knife to a drug deal in a foreign capital and had no qualms about using it? I thought the former, the Italian court and media and general public thought the latter. Perhaps I’m just as out of touch with what modern youth are up to as his parents and the parents in Adolescence?
I just binge watched it based on the recommendations here. Agree with most of the comments too. Yeah Stephen Graham plays a familiar role. I see he co-wrote it and has an executive producer credit, as does Brad Pitt of all people
Think that incredibly intense third episode is as good as any piece of TV I’ve ever seen.
I felt the series eventually hoisted itself on the self-imposed petard of the continuous shot, with the last episode dragging on and on and on, getting progressively sentimental. We could have got the gist in a few seconds here and there.
I’m yet to watch “Adolescence” so this isn’t aimed at it, except to say that I find that everything made for Netflix is simply way too long, including movies, but especially series, many of which should just be feature-length films, including my current bugbear, “Squid Game”, which should be a 2-hour movie, maximum…
Try ‘Zero Day’. An entertaining political thriller that they kept to six episodes, and all the better for it.
Yes we enjoyed it and RdN was excellent though the the end was limper than if have liked.
I’ve always preferred British TV crime drama to American. Grittier and far, far, far more believable. I find lauded American series like The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Better Call Saul, etc etc fairly entertaining, but they never grab me like Brit drama does. Happy Valley, The Capture, Somewhere Boy, Line of Duty, Blue Lights, Broadchurch, etc. etc. etc. are much more interesting to me and Adolescence is an excellent addition to that canon. Not because it’s thought provoking (although it is) and not because of its zeitgeist appeal, but because of the sheer quality of the production.
I’d be interested to see if RdN can actually act though. I got the impression he lost that particular talent decades ago.
@Jaygee I agree with you entirely – the level of acting from a young boy who has never acted before was actually unbelievable.
Just finished it all, and it was absolutely superb, all of it. A very minor criticism would be that the last episode wasn’t quite in the same league as the others-it hammered home the “just a normal family” point over too much of the viewing time (yeah I think we get it…10 mins proving that would have sufficed) but their part of the story did need to be told.
Genuinely amazing acting performances all round but I thought the Psychologist was absolutely astonishingly portrayed.
I thought the last episode was the only time the show was hampered by the all-in-one-take business. The drive to the DIY/garden shop and the chat about a disco seemed interminable, but the time it took was obviously set by the actual, real-life distance between the locations of the house and the shop. In a “normal” shoot, I’m sure that journey would have been edited to be much shorter.
After the real drama of episode 3, the everyday chit-chat about a dance, a-Ha, etc., seemed quite humdrum and, well, dull, even if the intent was to show they were just like any other family.
That said, I can’t imagine how much planning had to go into the one-take choreography. The moment when the camera (us) followed the family into their van and then, supposedly, settled on the bonnet to watch them on their journey was absolutely seamless. Bravo to everybody who made it all work so smoothly.
While channel surfing last week, I caught SG (dad) and Owen Cooper (Jamie) discussing the filming process for Adolescence on the One Show.
Apparently the shooting schedule was 12 weeks with 3 week chunks allowed for each episode. Week one was given to “studying the text” (i.e. working out the script for us non-luvvies); week two was spent choreographing the action in each long take and week three was spent filming..
OC said that it took him 13 takes to shoot episode three – amazing maturity and discipline for a boy who had never acted before.
From the acclaim he’s receiving. JC looks set to follow Jodie Foster, Jamie Bell and Christian Bale in making the jump from child star to adult actor
Definitely, when they got back in the car to drive home in the last episode was the only point I thought “oh ffs, I don’t wanna just repeat that all over again!”. They could have found a better way to handle that bit.
I saw a bit of a YouTube vid that showed how they did the drone shot. Two guys holding the drone, cameraman goes up to them and they attach while walking along and then it flies off. The result was a very, very impressive touch, I thought.
I found this hard to bear when I realised that this would take place in the same, restricted moment with the same interior and characters for a whole episode. I only realised afterwards the connection to Boiling Point that we had previously started watching only to bail when it was clear it would be that one shot approach, which was kind of tedious and hard to tolerate. I began to twitch a little when they went through the fingerprinting finger by finger. The dialogue was mostly very good and once we got down to the real substance of events it picked up and was better. I did find myself watching the acting, i.e. being aware of it, instead of seeing the character. It felt like live theatre at times and sometimes the outbursts of anger and things said felt a bit unlikely. The psychologist raising her voice as the same time as the boy, talking over each other. Very much like modern drama but not how it would happen I thought.
The filming technique gave it a kind of weird intensity , dream-like but it does make you really feel you are there, pushed up against it. I think it helps not to dwell on the main event, effective to see it detached, more ordinary. Takes it away from the usual salacious visuals of the TV thriller. The last part was weaker I agree. Just too much of things being said that were predictable, uninteresting, but some of it was effective and powerful there too. Oddly I thought of the lyrics to She’s Leaving Home. There’s a lot to commend it, some of it less so. It didn’t shock me so much but it seems to be considered something that could lead to change by showing those who don’t realise what is really happening out there with these kids, so that’s got to be positive. Or at least spread awareness. The acclaim seems universal which you don’t often see.
Magnificent. Couldn’t watch more than one episode at a time; it was just too intense. I don’t feel the final episode was a falling off. I thought the depiction of a family trying to go about its normal life, having flashes of normal mundane funny conversations but always with a paper thin veneer barely covering agonising grief anger and bewilderment was just devastating. Technically brilliant, superbly performed and written and like so many of the great tv films and series of the past it dealt with a serious social issue without becoming worthy or preachy.
I sort of wish it had been BBC, ITV or Channel 4 and I guess it’s a sign of the times and the shift in money and power in tv that both this and the also excellent Toxic Town (also by Jack Thorne) were British series made In England with British talent but commissioned. and funded by Netflix. But so be it – the important thing is they got made.
I agree. Episode Four was the best of the lot. The contrast in tone between the two van journeys brought a lump to my throat.
The Mrs and I watched the final episode yesterday and thought it was excellent.
I reckon the single shot per episode worked very well in maintaining the intensity, and they covered an awful lot abut the factors that led to the killing and the emotional fall out through brief indications of key events (and I’ll include the conversation during the drive home in the final episode), without getting into any long, turgid conversations. I think Jack Thorne’s writing was superb throughout.
Tracey Thorn was saying on BlueSky that undoubtedly it’s brilliant but she’s not watching it because she can’t face it. I’m with Trace. I don’t need to see it, thanks.
Stunning TV – no happy ending, no empty moralising or explanation just a camera pointed on one of the biggest problems facing todays society.
The acting was extraordinary as was the choreography of the one shot episodes.
It seems to be really staying in my mind, when nowadays I can barely remember much of any TV I watch in such detail.
I don’t know if it’s so memorable just because of the performances and/or writing and production (as excellent as they are), or if it’s just the depth of the thing. Everybody in front of the camera had their part to play, rather than the focus staying on the central family and the police. The creepy CCTV guy in the detention place, the nervous-and-eager-to-please teacher showing the coppers round the (truly horrifying) school, the conspiracy theorist/incel shop assistant at the DIY store … They all left their mark.
I read that there are plans for this to be shown in schools and similar places, to drive home the message about the culture and/or online dangers facing kids today. Although above I criticised Stephen Graham’s range, he and Jack Thorne (and everybody else involved) deserve every plaudit for creating something that maybe, just maybe, might go some way to making society just a little bit better. Other than Mr Bates vs the Post Office (although even that still hasn’t led to anybody being actually punished), that seems to be an increasingly rare thing where TV is concerned.
I think they’ll need to be very, very careful about showing it in schools without serious preparatory lessons beforehand. I think showing it without preparation will just freak some kids out without making much positive difference.
Maybe some special Parents Evening showings, in conjunction with the above and with teachers, administrators etc. present would be productive.
For the supporting cast, I’d add in the duty sergeant and the solicitor from the first episode – that short scene in the corridor where SGs character comes close to breaking down was very moving. The detectives were excellent as well.
From what I can see, the young actress who played the sister, Amelie Pease, has not acted before. This is her only credit on IMDB.
I haven’t seen it, and don’t fancy it, but I’m finding it slightly bizarre that the entire commentariat, including actual politicians, seem to be wanting to weigh in about what is, after all, a fiction, as if it were true. (I imagine someone will be along shortly to say “oh but in a very real sense it is…”)
My overall attitude to this kind of entertainment was summed up by a friend recently as, “Hey everyone, I’ve made a new TV mini series, you’re going to love it. Now, while it doesn’t make you feel happy or even as though you’ve learned something, it WILL make you feel angry, upset and unhappy. No it’s just a totally made up story. Yeah spend your free time watching it.”
It’s really quite jarring how many more column inches of hand wringing and concern this work of fiction has generated compared to, say, the actual death of Molly Russell.
Adolescence is very well made, but – per pencilsqueezer below – its main achievement has been to agitate and titillate the chattering classes, and in that sense it’s a throwback to the moral panic TV dramas that used to be relatively commonplace on domestic TV in the early 90s. I’ll be interested to see whether it stands the test of time, and particularly whether fiction can change what reality apparently cannot.
I think a lot of folk are over thinking this. It’s a commendable piece of television about a zeitgeisty phenomenon. Give it a few weeks and the chattering classes and everyone else along with them will have moved on to the next talking point and everyone can go back to fretting about all the other boogeyman that are sent to give us sleepless nights. Sadly there are an increasing number of those to choose from. Listen to music read edifying books and bolt your doors is my advice for what it’s worth.
Would be very surprised if this wasn’t either at or near the top of Best TV of 2025 come December, P.
Given social media’s negative – and worryingly pervasive – influence on young people, is only going to steadily worsen unless curbed, I don’t really think the issues Adolescence addresses can be dismissed as a “zeitgeisty phenomenon” that will be gone in a few weeks.
Yes, I can see how I came over as being somewhat flippant but that flippancy was aimed at the unfortunately trivialising nature of television rather than what is obviously a problematic societal problem. I’ve already stated very near the beginning of this thread that I don’t think I’ll see any television better than Adolescence this year and I hold to that opinion. Sadly I also hold to the opinion that complex issues such as the one that is at the heart of Adolescence are almost inevitably simplified by the medium. If it causes debate then all well and good but it will be elbowed to one side by the next “pressing issue” in short order and on we go onto the next problem with little or no real change being effected.
Understand where you are coming from, P.
Watched a couple of the “Frost Vs” shows on Sky (one on the Beatles, one on Ali) a couple of weeks back. The vast gulf between the quality of questioning on prime time chat shows then and now is simply staggering.
Though we never got to see him at the time, Dick Cavett’s US shows were even better than peak Frostie I’m(ns)ho.
Are the chattering classes awful? Only I think I might be one of them.
if you clutch those pearls any tighter they’ll break, @Gary.
I thought it was one episode too long and there wasn’t enough made of the victim’s social media posts, just some, to me, vague stuff about the colour of hearts meaning different things. I would have thought that police would have been all over everyone’s social media, not to mention the circulation of topless pictures of a minor but I suppose the writers wanted to avoid accusations of victim shaming.
There wouldn’t be the same fuss if it wasn’t for that bloomin’ one shot business.
While extremely well done here, the one-shot thing now seems to be something of a right of passage for tyro directors
Reading this conversation is a bit like watching The Deer Hunter.
I watched the first episode, and it seems close to a masterpiece… but I don’t want to watch any more. I already know how screwed up the world is: when I was the same age, one of my classmates was murdered. Different circumstances, but watching the school scenes reminded me of the everyday horror of such things – police in the school, people talking about it, some people very upset, others going about their lives… they nailed it.
It doesn’t sound like there will be a bloopers reel for this one, then.
Well, there is this from Jo Hartley (Mrs. Fenumore) – some down time from the school scenes.
https://www.threads.net/@johartleyactor/post/DHjVl–C80v?xmt=AQGzRifXLPguPtK20sriMNsuAZnWQhKK1C2WkixpckvAHw
That’s nice to see.
I’m late to to this thread. I don’t know how I missed it.
For the last 25 years I’ve worked with young offenders and I’ve dealt with the likes of Jamie in my time – young people who have killed – before and after they have been sentenced.
I’ve only finished watching the programme in the last week and probably only watched it because so many people were saying I should. One of my colleagues suggested it was like watching one of those shows where Greg Wallace shouts at people in a factory about what they do day in, day out.
Since I started to write this it has occurred to me that it might be best not to say too much while under the influence and consider my comments in the light of day.
I’ll leave a few points now. Firstly, leaving aside the conceit of compressing the action into a one-hour timeline per episode, the police officer conducting the interview didn’t establish before the “tahdah!” of the CCTV showing the killing whether the young person had a knife, why he had a knife etc. Surely establishing this is the difference between manslaughter and murder.
As for the psychologist in episode three – are we to assume it’s her first week on the job? Her interview techniques and particularly her level of upset at the end suggests she has never done this before. She most likely would have had most if not all available “collateral” (information), before the interview so would have known he was guilty. Are we to assume she was weeping for the loss of innocence or that a 13 year old shouting at her would trigger her response? Either way, she’s in the wrong line of work. As for her gagging on the sandwich – to my mind this is indicative of a lack of professional detachment. It is very difficult to work in this line of work if you cannot park your personal response to the crimes committed and the professed motives for them. I found her the least credible aspect of the series.
I’ll revisit this over the weekend and present a more considered response.
@Bamber Interesting to read your POV from a professional in the field. After all the gushing praise the show has deservedly received, I do think other opinions are welcome.
One question that has been raised is the question of “incel” 13 year olds – isn’t that more a late teen thing? That kind of bothered me when I watched it.
I look forward to your further considered thoughts
Well @mousey I don’t think the incel thing is currently significant for the young persons I work with. Not least because very few of them are “cel”. The online life seems to have a connection to some of our sexual offenders in terms of immersion in pornography and accessing underage images. It’s also known that much of the dangerous activity of our youths involved in car crime is documented and shared online for the approval of their peers. There’s quite an established network and there’s kudos in being the baddest or maddest inevitably ending up with deaths and injury.
I found the character of Jamie to be largely believable and kids his age can see anything you or I can online. Recurring themes with our young persons are absent fathers, low academic ability and subsequent exclusion or absence, poly-drug use, delinquent peers, physical and sexual abuse, low self esteem, mental health issues (often undiagnosed) and family involvement in crime. It’s never the same story but some of these are usually factors.
I’ve been involved in a programme around victim empathy and this involves the young persons giving a narrative account of their crimes – always after they have been found guilty. The idea of it is to help them realise these things don’t “just happen”, and hopefully to learn from this. It can work well with even young persons who have taken lives starting to recognise the impact of their actions on themselves and others. It can be quite effective if the young person is ready and engages meaningfully.
The character Jamie is young and could be worked with in custody. There’s nearly always potential for improvement.