A period piece, the ‘80s setting is an important tool; its technological limitations force ingenuity upon the protagonists while giving them a visceral connection to their work that strengthens and coincides with the emotional undercurrent. Jennings, art director, Robyn Paiba, and production designer, Joel Collins, have employed ‘80s-style effects, thus retaining believability while creating a-fanciful universe. Also, spot-lit minutiae – from crayon markings on a fishbowl to poorly timed beard trimming – accentuates the heightened awareness of childhood and, thus, ups the emotional resonance. Also, jJuxtaposing the neutral-to-dark palettes of Proudfoot’s puritan existence with the vibrancy of his imagination and, later, his film, highlights the importance of artistic expression.

Jennings is careful not to over-emphasize the period setting. Quintessential ‘80s touches, including an unobtrusive soundtrack – complete with the Cure and Gary Numan – Harriet Cawley’s subtle costume design, and flagrant cigarette smoking, temporally position the film without drowning it in nostalgia (ala The Wedding Singer).

As with its inspired use of setting, the film also multi-tasks with its supporting characters. French exchange student, Didier Revol (Jules Sitruk), is at once a zeitgeist-effusing, new-wave dynamo, a personification of artifice, a villain, a prima donna actor, and a mirror for Proudfoot’s puritan family (though, Didier’s is a cult of cool). However, it’s with his function as Hollywood archetype that the film slightly falters. He and his entourage (almost Entourage) eventually embody the trappings of success (i.e. candy binging, cola purging, and bouncer-guarded partying), and the heavy handed satirical device weakens and slows momentum.