In Treatment

:

Season 4
  • Network: HBO
  • Series Premiere Date: Jan 28, 2008
Season #: 4, 3, 2, 1
Metascore
72

Generally favorable reviews - based on 22 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 22
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 22
  3. Negative: 0 out of 22
Watch Now

Where To Watch

Buy on

Critic Reviews

  1. i
    Reviewed by: Emily Baker
    Dec 3, 2021
    60
    All the talking can be a little tiresome for the viewer, too: the show is intense, and the endless conversation – without action – demands great attention. With weaker actors leading the tête-à-tête, I fear listening to these strangers’ problems might grow rather dull. Given the subject, In Treatment felt a little on the nose.
  2. The Guardian
    Reviewed by: Lucy Mangan
    Jul 19, 2021
    60
    If the whole show doesn’t add up to more than the sum of its parts, it is a lot of parts and Aduba holds them all together and makes them work. It’s worth booking your hours in again.
  3. TV Guide Magazine
    Reviewed by: Matt Roush
    May 21, 2021
    60
    I'd probably enjoy In Treatment more if it focused on a single case. (Anthony Ramos and Quintessa Swindell are very good as her younger clients, but their situations lack Colin's urgency) Brooke's own backstory and neuroses veer more toward soap opera. [24 May - 6 Jun 2021, p.9]
    All this critic's reviews
  5. Vanity Fair
    Reviewed by: Cassie da Costa
    May 26, 2021
    50
    The show’s fourth season doesn’t offer us a salve for this phenomenon [how central therapy has become to our culture]; it, too, is more interested in the performance of therapy than the science of it.

User Reviews

All reviews »
User Score
3.8

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 12 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 12
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 12
  3. Negative: 8 out of 12
  1. MarcMJM
    Jun 2, 2021
    0
    "Look at how they massacred my boy." - The Godfather, when watching season 4 of "In Treatment"

    I gave season 4 of "In Treatment" a chance    "Look at how they massacred my boy." - The Godfather, when watching season 4 of "In Treatment"

    I gave season 4 of "In Treatment" a chance with the hope that Uzo Aduba is a talented enough actress to replace Gabriel Byrne in the lead role. Unfortunately, this "reimagined" version of the far superior original series is everything I feared it would be -- and somehow worse than I expected!

    The main problem with the "In Treatment" Imposter is that the new therapist's conversations with her patients do not flow organically like they did in the original series. Seasons 1 through 3 worked so well because it never felt like I was watching a television series; I felt like I was IN the room with Paul and his patients. Moreover, Paul and his patients felt like real people with real problems and real flaws, not vehicles through which the writers used to advance their political agendas. This leads to my next complaint.

    The writers use identity politics as a guise for compelling, interesting, and relatable characters. What I mean by that is Brooke's patients are not written to feel like real people, but rather personifications of systemic problems such as white privilege, homophobia, and racism. Colin's entire character can be boiled down to: "all white men are power-hungry, racist, and misogynistic." Laila's character can be boiled down to: "all black women are the victims of an inherently racist society."

    One might argue that the original series experimented with identity politics. The patient, Jesse, from season 3 was vocal about the sexually irresponsible behaviors he engaged in with other men. But Jesse's sexual orientation was never the central focus of treatment. Instead, it was the dilemma that he faced between pursuing a relationship with his birth parents and distancing himself from his adoptive parents.

    There are also creative decisions that make the "In Treatment" Imposter feel disconnected from the original three seasons. Every fourth episode, Brooke complains about her relationship problems with a close friend, Rita, a character that nobody cares about. Far more interesting was Paul's sessions with his own therapists, Gina and Adele, who increased his awareness of his maladaptive behavioral patterns that interfered in his clinical practice and personal life.

    And what is up with the constant references to COVID, COVID, COVID? Why does this show have to go out of its way to remind us that we are in the midst of a global pandemic, when that is all we have been hearing about for the past year and a half? I thought TV shows were supposed to help us forget about the real world.

    Most egregious is that the "In Treatment" Imposter disrespects the legacy that the original series left behind. For reasons that I am sure will be explained later, Brooke ignores Paul Weston's phone calls and email correspondences. The only connection the "In Treatment" Imposter has to the first three seasons is a picture of Paul and Brooke, which implied that Paul was Brooke's mentor or close friend.

    If you are going to watch "In Treatment," only watch seasons 1 through 3 and pretend that season 4 does not exist. It is not worth your time due to its poor execution of therapy sessions; heavy emphasis on woke identity politics; baffling creative decisions; and lack of respect for the original series.    … Full Review »
  2. coastda
    Jun 1, 2021
    2
    Pretty awful.

    The original show (which had characters of all races, genders, and sexual orientation) was pretty good. But it ended over 10    Pretty awful.

    The original show (which had characters of all races, genders, and sexual orientation) was pretty good. But it ended over 10 years ago.

    This new iteration is so woke it's unwatchable. The patients are either so entitled and delusional they are really crazy or whether they are supposed to be clever and pained. The worst character is the daughter of a car dealer who wrecks Bentleys and has fantasies about killing mythical white racists.    … Full Review »
  3. Mystichydra
    Jun 18, 2021
    3
    Beyond disappointing. I'm frankly tired of the word and concept 'woke'. It's ubiquitous in todays society, and complaining about it (andBeyond disappointing. I'm frankly tired of the word and concept 'woke'. It's ubiquitous in todays society, and complaining about it (and catering to it) only propagates the unending cycle. There actually is such a thing as "too much awareness". For example, If you are aware of every sensation of every nerve ending while you cross a cross-walk, you are likely to have a relatively awkward walk, since you are hyperaware. If you are in "auto-mode", it is organic and fluid. There is not even a hint of organic fluidity in this very scripted show.

    Obviously, the first 3 seasons were scripted as well. But it had depth. You could get lost in the characters, and their psyches would surprise you. This new iteration has no such depth, and it makes up for it with patronization and pandering. I had my preferred characters in the Byrne originals, but I can honestly say I didn't palpably dislike any of them. This is inverted regarding this new edition, and I struggle to tolerate almost every figure throughout. Exploring therapy can often uncomfortable, but not for reasons of anti-charisma.

    So, what's good about it? Well, pretty much only Uzo Aduba. She's a damn fine actress, and she portrays the right amount of warmth and adamancy to be effective. Honestly, the restrictive parameters of her character only highlights her acting skills. The other cast has their moments, but are overshadowed by transparent and unengaging emotions, as well as outlandish theatricality.

    Also, the camera framing. These details are likely to go consciously unnoticed, but is a more important element than one may think. For example, during webcams sessions, framing those shots is harder than meets the eye.

    That's kind of all I can think of for the pros of this show. The best thing I can say about it, is that it is making me want to re-explore the first three seasons    … Full Review »
See all user reviews »