Inappropriate

Inappropriate is a simple but sturdy work. From director Jonathan Blagrove, it depicts a conversation between two characters, as shorts of this kind often do. The central conceit is original and fascinating: as the ‘appropriate adult’, Oscar (Tim Plester), tries to converse with a young offender, Jordan (Francesco Piacentini-Smith), we come to understand the kindred sense of dissatisfaction and alienation shared by the two personages. This is a strong base-theme which, through realistic writing, is allowed to explore engaging ideas relating to trust – or a violation of trust – and abandonment. Formally confident and technically sound, this is a truly great piece of drama.

There’s a great deal of discussion to be had when it comes to the film’s visual construction. The cinematography is rather wonderful for the most part, with one of its best aspects being camera positioning. I’m talking beyond standard direction and blocking – both of which are strong already – and referring more to how the camera interacts with the physical space to really immerse the viewer. A shot early on sees the camera being raised upwards from some monitors, racking focus to the background, and capturing Oscar entering the building. There’s a satisfying flow to a shot arrangement such as this which shows off a nice bit of production-value. It does not, however, feel forced; the movement is motivated by the character, and – outside of technical curio – is relatively unnoticeable. There are many instances of shots like this in the movie, demonstrating admirable ambition as well as the achievement of multiple technical parts working in tandem, seemingly effortlessly.

Part of the crisp, professional sensibility achieved through the aesthetic is a result of the fantastic lighting. While there’s an informed approach to balance and diffusion, there’s also a natural use of darkness incorporated in the frame. This provides us with a thoroughly dynamic image. The lighting style, in turn, complements the colour grade; although the colouring itself could be considered a missed opportunity for an even richer look. The technique behind the grade – meaning the professional finish and visual consistency – is flawlessly done and looks better than most high-end TV dramas. However, you wonder whether the filmmakers could have thought of something more unusual than the classic, British cold-and-dim look. While this certainly represents the emotion conveyed in the scenarios depicted, there’s potential for a more filmy, textural look which feels just out of reach. This is a criticism of a creative decision – therefore something which is purely subjective, and not a criticism of technical know-how.

Audiences will enjoy the complexity of these two characters. There’s narrative layering at play, revealing different traits of their personas; their vulnerabilities and pressure points. They’re both flawed, yet there’s a tenderness to Oscar’s pain, and there’s an empathetic mischief to Jordan’s, even if this is really a defence mechanism. Other strengths left unmentioned include the audio which is perfect in that clean sort of way; the overall design which is location and character-appropriate; and the specific execution of the performances – both actors skilfully express so much through their defensive demeanours, their desperation. Inappropriate is a definite recommendation from this critic.