Return to: Home | Culture | Television

In Treatment

Rachel Cooke

Published 08 October 2009

Shot from the therapist’s couch, this drama has issues

Freudian slip-up

OK, cards on the table. In one sense, In Treatment (10pm, weekdays), which Sky Arts has bought from HBO following much acclaim and many awards, was never going to appeal to me. I am morbidly suspicious of therapy - where's the science bit? - and throughout my life have always found repression to be a vastly under-valued psychological tool. That and good old compartmentalisation. The inside of my brain looks not unlike the bottom of my wardrobe: basically, it's crammed with a load of old shoeboxes, some of which I'm willing to have a good rifle through now and then, and others that I would simply prefer to leave closed, thanks very much.

On the other hand, I am extremely nosy. I adore staring out of the window at my neighbours and wish that I owned a pair of night-vision goggles, the better to do so. Human motivation fascinates me: that's why I became a journalist. So, in another sense, a series that breaches the sacred privacy of the consulting room, which is what In Treatment purports to do, albeit with a load of actors rather than real patients, should be right up my street.

My scepticism was therefore duly wrapped in a blanket of warm anticipation - a pleasing tingle that was further heightened by seeing Gabriel Byrne play the part of Paul Weston, the therapist around whom the series revolves. I'm mad for Byrne, a man who still looks troublingly good in a plaid shirt, even as he enters his 60th year. Those eyes . . . Are they brown or are they violet? I'm not sure, but either way, if I could find a therapist who looked like him, I would be tempted to peer inside even the dustiest of my shoeboxes.

Then the titles rolled. Oh dear. This show - which is based, sometimes word for word, on an Israeli series of the same name - is a complete disaster and I am at a complete loss as to why it has had American critics so bedazzled. Yes, its format is moderately brave, at least by the standards of US television. The saga is doled out to us in daily half-hour episodes, each focusing on a different patient, or on one of Paul's sessions with his own therapist, Gina (Dianne Wiest). In other words, each show is basically a two-hander and as static and wordy as a piece of theatre. But just because something appears to be "demanding" doesn't mean that it is also, merely by extension, good. This isn't good. The dialogue is hammy and clichéd, and you can see every kink and fold of what passes for its plot coming from about eight miles away.

In the first episode, a patient called Laura, who was wearing a low-cut dress the same way a zebra crossing wears a Belisha beacon, droned on about a man she'd picked up in a bar the night before. When it came to the moment, she told Paul, she just couldn't have sex with him. Aha! I thought. What have we here? Has pert little Laura got the hots for her sexy therapist? Sure enough, ten minutes later, the good doctor was reading her a mini lecture on the subject of erotic transference.

In Treatment longs to be transgressive, so it has its characters describe sex in the most graphic (for American TV) terms. Yet the result is just mildly embarrassing, like seeing a mad old lady flash her knickers at you. It also thinks itself mighty clever and complex: you know, just like the self-deceiving human brain. So, the characters contradict themselves a lot and move in tedious verbal circles, nudged along by Paul and his predictable questions. When he told Gina he was worried that he was losing patience with his patients ("I wish everyone would just go away!"), I knew exactly how he felt. Listening to them - so remarkably dim and yet so amazingly full of themselves - is enough to drive you nuts.

But the real problem is that, in giving the patients the space to vent their dreary narcissism, the series entirely forgets its duty to its audience. Outside their expensively shampooed heads, nothing happens. The relief one felt when Paul left his Pottery Barn consulting room, even for a brief moment! Is he going to roll around with Laura on his oriental rug? I expect so. In about 30 episodes' time. But honestly, who cares? It would probably do them both a power of good.

Sky Arts 1

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

5 comments from readers

iamyuneek
08 October 2009 at 16:57

I'm in the US, and like you I was annoyed by the first episode, thinking why doesn't this slutty woman leave this poor "married "man alone, it was only later that I realized she had been seeing "Paul" for a year.

Please trust me, watch the other episodes especially "Sophie" (played by phenomenal actress Mia Wasikowska,) follow that one if nothing else, and then I defy you to come back here, and tell me again that you are not addicted and also totally Byrned up by the undeniable "mojo" that Gabriel Byrne projects through the television screen. :-). Have Mercy!

Alison
08 October 2009 at 21:15

You haven't given In Treatment enough of a chance. It appears you only watched the first week of episodes which was supposed to be so difficult for Paul that it sent him into therapy. The show is complex. You have to take some time to get to know the characters. I agree the Sophie storyline is strongest. The young actress who plays Sophie is so talented it's easy to forget she's acting. Watch the entire season and I believe you'll change your mind.

ThreadSistahLL
08 October 2009 at 21:30

While I appreciated that your biases were stated upfront, I urge you to get past them and watch this show in its entirety before winding up as the only person on the planet who would put "In Treatment" and "disaster" in the same sentence.

See the entire series, if for nothing else than watching Mr. Byrne, whose eyes are a sparkling sapphire blue, by the way. He never disappoints. There are riveting performances and unfolding storylines in store for you. This series asks more of its audience, i.e., consistent intelligent thought, absence of judgment, and empathy for these characters. Come back in two months after watching the entire program and try again. If Gabriel Byrne hasn't captured your mind by then, we'll be happy to keep him in the US as "the thinking woman's sex symbol."

ThreadSistahLL
08 October 2009 at 23:34

While I appreciated that you stated your biases, I urge you to get past them and see the entire series. More riveting performances and compelling storylines in store for viewers. This drama unfolds over time, and asks its audience to engage in consistent intelligent thought, refrain from judgment, and empathize with people in pain.

Mr. Byrne's brilliant portrayal is enough to satisfy viewers who appreciate the depths of his talents and the sparkle of his eyes which are sapphire blue, by the way. Come back after two months of watching this entire prgramme and try again. If Mr. Byrne hasn't captured your mind, then we're only too happy here in the US to keep him as "the thinking woman's sex symbol."

Bryning up
09 October 2009 at 02:13

IT is a terrific show. It is huge here in the USA, by mostly middle aged profesional women whom adore Gabriel Byrne and his superb acting abilites. The whole cast of actors were fantastic ! We are all hopeing a season 3 is in the works. I can relate to all of his patients in one way or another. Plus the fact GB is hot!!! 59 or not, the guy is gorgeous. He is also one of the best actors, period. He is also from what I have read about a really smart funny and all around good guy. The fact that he is Irish is a plus. God I think I'm in love with a man I don't even know. Now who needs the therapist?

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website

About the writer

Rachel Cooke

Rachel Cooke trained as a reporter on The Sunday Times. She is now a writer at The Observer. In the 2006 British Press Awards, she was named Interviewer of the Year.

Also by Rachel Cooke

Read More

Vote!

Will Baroness Ashton be an effective EU foreign minister?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 – 2009

Tracker