HBO didn’t have to greenlight a show like In Treatment. The format — a new half-hour episode every weeknight for nine weeks — was unusual. And the subject matter was limited, too, with each script typically confined to the dialogue exchanged in a psychotherapist’s office for the full 30 minutes. But the cable network took a chance on In Treatment, and it paid off with a consistently well-acted show that kept me tuning in loyally all through the first season. Going by the show’s ratings, I’m not sure just how many people were on board with me. But at least HBO can take solace in the fact that their gamble has yielded a very positive critical response, as well as a couple of Emmys, and now, a generous handful of Golden Globe nominations for the show (including Best Drama Series) as well as its actors. Gabriel Byrne and Blair Underwood (pictured) both deserve those nods for their superlative performances. So do Dianne Wiest and Melissa George, though I can’t decide who to root for since they share a category.
What the Golden Globe news really makes me hope is that HBO keeps taking calculated risks with In Treatment and beyond. By approving such an unorthodox series, HBO showed that it’s still interested in fundamentally changing the TV game. I was a little concerned to read this summer that season 2 of In Treatment might "tweak" the strip-series format, in Variety‘s words. Hopefully, some well-timed Golden Globe love will convince the network not to tweak it too much. But that’s a minor quibble from a fan. Anybody else already looking forward to hopping back onto Dr. Paul Weston’s couch next year?
More on In Treatment:
EW’s Golden Globes coverage
Mia Wasikowska made it onto EW’s list of Emmy Drama Snubs
The series got a B+ review in EW when it debuted
In Treatment is part of HBO’s big plans for ’09
Lisa Schwarzbaum looked at "The Benefits of Watching In Treatment"
Absolutely – but did the Globes really pass over Mia Wasikowska’s brilliant Sophie? Her performance was, in my mind, much more compelling than Melissa George’s, who was excellent but kind of predictable.
Honestly i’d be willing to bet that if ABC was airing IN TREATMENT it wouldn’t have been nominated just like if PUSHING DAISIES was on HBO it would have been nominated for BEST Comedy at the EMMYS instead of ENTOURAGE. I actually do think IN TREATMENT is a show worthy of a nomination, but HBO can put anything on and it will be nominated. HBO acts like they are the only people with any creativity and everyone who votes for awards always agrees with them. Their arrogance reminds of NBC’s 10 years ago. ABC this year has been punished for their creativity since all their creative risks didnt pay off ratings wise like CBS procedurals do.
“In Treatment” was brilliant. My only gripe…Mia Wasikowska should have been the one nominated!
I gotta check this show out.
http://backorforth.blogspot.com
Yesss!! I looved In Treatment and can’t wait for it to come back (even if I do have to wait until next fall). But I agree about Mia- she was robbed!
Wow Marc, bitter much. The fact is HBO does put out quality programming, something the networks have been lacking.
I’m predicting Dianne Wiest will win for her beautifully subtle work.
I’m predicting that Dianne Wiest will win for her beautifully subtle work.
I am still a little bitter about HBO’s handling of Deadwood and Rome. I think they were shows that both had another season left in them, and they were abandoned to start a series that was terrible (John from Cincinatti). Of all of my favorite shows from the last 5 years, most of them have been on HBO, so I really appreciate their original programing. I just don’t like it when they develop great shows and then let them wilt on the vine.
I am still a little bitter about HBO’s handling of Deadwood and Rome. I think they were shows that both had another season left in them, and they were abandoned to start a series that was terrible (John from Cincinatti). Of all of my favorite shows from the last 5 years, most of them have been on HBO, so I really appreciate their original programing. I just don’t like it when they develop great shows and then let them wilt on the vine.
Ack! A second snub of Mia Wasikowska? Have they not eyes and ears? She was absolutely real in the series – the viewer never saw a false move.
I liked “In Treatment” but I’m not sure I’d call it a “creative risk”. It was a M-F show (soaps have been doing that for years), about a therapist’s office (how many shows feature therapists? Exactly), featuring lots of wonderful actors talking about themes of life, which we all know and heard before. That being said, those actors were excellent, but HBO shouldn’t be patted on the back that much. They still canceled “The Comeback”, which was more of a risk than “Treatment”.
Watch The Dark Knight Full Movie Here!
http://missedashow.com/2008/12/batman-the-dark-knight-full-movie-watch-here/
Quantum of Solace Full Movie Here!
http://missedashow.com/2008/12/quantum-of-solace-full-movie-watch-here/
Mia wasn’t nominated because she didn’t take part in the HFPA conference for IT. If they don’t want you at the conference, chances of a nomination are not likely.
here’s to the Golden Globes, for being the only ones unaware of the fact that HBO is done: In Treatment is a bore, Entourage is a rerun, True Blood is irrelevant – shall i go on? okay, i will…the Sopranos last few seasons were completely overrated; John from Cincinnati, Mind of a Married Man, Tell Me You Love Me…yea, thumbs up to the Hollywood Foreign Press for giving HBO 22 more nominations. In Treatment more noms than Mad Men? that’s funnier than Entourage…
- cRAIG