Am I the only one who friggin hates Laura?
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — In Treatment
Zinnober — 15 years ago(July 06, 2010 10:31 PM)
It seems like so many people on these threads love her. I just don't get it. They clearly weren't actually in love with one another. Their "chemistry" was always transparently contrived and well just wrong. He's her therapist. It's just so wrong.
And Laura? How is she in any way appealing? I get that she's pretty. Sure. But she's such a petulant child. A sixteen year old girl pretending to be a 30 year old.
I can't be the only one.
http://eugenicsbeginswithyou.wordpress.com/ -
Zinnober — 15 years ago(July 08, 2010 10:38 AM)
Well that's limited. I'm a man, and I find her to be cloying and ridiculous.
But, of course, she has breasts so I have to like her.
http://eugenicsbeginswithyou.wordpress.com/ -
lordjames-1 — 15 years ago(July 08, 2010 11:37 AM)
Nope it's not her physical beauty that makes me say this. It's her intelligence, how in-touch she is with her emotions, and the interest and passion she eloquently expresses towards men.
At one point Paul asks Laura what she really knows about him. This is a really funny thing for him to do since she had already deduced and told Paul exactly what his life is like from the tiny crumbs he has given her throughout their year of therapy. In many ways Laura is a better therapist for Paul that Paul is for Laura. She is able to figure out a man who is extremely guarded.
I do not believe a human male could resist that kind of connection when it is offered genuinely. (especially a man who has lived without it for many years) I think acknowledging this kind of power would terrify women who do not wield it. (and that is why most women tend to dislike other strong women) -
lordjames-1 — 15 years ago(July 08, 2010 01:43 PM)
Interesting that you feel so strongly about that statement.
I completely disagree with your assessment of Laura. She is strength personified. She completes her therapy by coming to terms with and accepting herself. (flaws and all) That takes strength. -
Zinnober — 15 years ago(July 09, 2010 05:25 PM)
You mean Borderline Personality Disorder or Bi-Polar? Because if it's the former then yeah absolutely. Chick is toootally a borderline personality.
http://eugenicsbeginswithyou.wordpress.com/ -
Zinnober — 15 years ago(July 09, 2010 05:23 PM)
Did you even WATCH the show? She's anything but strong. She's broken. She filters every interaction with men through a sexual lens - this is not an act of bravery nor is it somehow empowering. It's the sign of someone who's terribly wounded.
Alex pointed it out after their first night together. It's all an orchestration - the sushi, the sex. All of it was a guise developed to dupe Alex and enrage Paul.
And this nonsense that she saw who he really was by sniffing the tiniest crumbs of his life. Please. She saw a man who wanted her like all men have probably wanted her. Because she knows how to make them want her. And once they do she has control.
I'm a straight, 29 year old man and I, for one, think she's a broken, borderline, nightmare. But that's just me.
http://eugenicsbeginswithyou.wordpress.com/ -
lordjames-1 — 15 years ago(July 14, 2010 10:33 AM)
I just finished watching season 1 for the second time. I stand by my assessment. Laura had issues. Everyone has issues. But, she was far more aware, and in control, of them than the average person.
I guess what you see as a weakness I see as a strength. -
denise1234 — 15 years ago(August 04, 2010 03:42 PM)
I think the creators of this show wanted to present someone who could credibly test the Paul character. Thus, they came up with the lovely, husky-whispering voiced, seemingly vulnerable, sensual-but-childlike and inviting Laura.
Lauras character definitely is NOT strong. She continues to 'test' her therapist (Paul) to ensure that she has a 'safe' place to truly start therapy. Her therapy really does not 'get off the ground' because Paul has lost objectivity. He tries to withstand her tests and at times mumbles out the 'right' words to her, but he is not actually 'treating' her because he is blinded by his own wants and needs. Instead of seeing the words that come out of her mouth as tests and symptoms, he instead falls in love with them (as he says in an episode with Gina). Gina pegged this early on in her treatment of Paul. Laura was a textbook case of this kind of behavior.
Why didn't Paul realize, or realize sooner, that Laura exhibited as a probable victim of childhood sexual abuse? Because he already was too emotionally involved to see what should have been obvious to any good therapist.
Laura would have had sex with him, maybe would have had a brief relationship with him, would have then destroyed him, and she would have gone on as the emotional wreck she was until she got real help.
Laura was crying out for safe, professional help, but Paul was not emotionally healthy enough to see that, and the longer he treated her while he was in this state, the worse for her. Paul was supposed to withstand everything she threw at him and remain professional. He failed her.
Laura was a very weak person, but was someone who had been very successful staying sick because of how young, beautiful and engaging she was. She was not in love with Paul. She was testing him. She needed him to rebuff these 'tests' and move on with her so that she could finally get the help she so badly needed.
To use a medical analogy: Lets say that instead Laura has a bleeding condition and she goes to a doctor to seek treatment for it. However, instead of believing that her bleeding is from hemophilia, which might be too frightening for her to admit, she instead insists that it comes from watching too many movies per day. She wants a real cure, but is too scared of the true diagnosis and treatment, so she does everything she can to convince the doctor that movie watching is causing her suffering; however, deep down inside, she hopes that the doctor will really help her. However, her doctor becomes biased, he goes along with, and reinforces, her self-diagnosis, and even prescribes that she watches fewer movies per day. Maybe he gets so involved that he instead takes her out to play soccer every week as a replacement for her watching too many movies. Soccer injuries can be very serious for a severe hemophiliac, especially one that is not getting other adequate treatment. And, all the while the patient and the doctor are engaging in this delusion, the patient is not getting the treatment she needs. The doctor is guilty of malpractice. A good doctor would diagnose and treat the real illness the best to his ability, and not let the patient guide his diagnosis or hoodwink him into thinking it was, or caused by, something else.
Paul was not being a good doctor and, in fact, was making Laura worse.
"I can't stand a naked light bulb, any more than..a rude remark or a vulgar action" Blanche DuBois -
Thespear — 15 years ago(August 24, 2010 05:46 PM)
I tend to agree with lordjames. Laura is not perfect, indeed she is a patient for good reason. Dr Weston himself is not perfect, though I think he tried hard to be a worthy doctor. Those who poo poo the Laura/Dr Weston relationship and say how unprofessional it was, appear to discount the possibility that these two imperfect people
might well
have actually been in love.
At any rate, the success of the 1st season was due, in large part, to the dynamic between the Dr and his attractive young patient. Added to his marital situation and her sexual insecurities, it made for very compelling drama, imo. Their conversations were smart and powerful and whether or not it was love or was professional, I think it made for some of the most riveting dialogue I have heard on tv.
The second season lacked a similar punch imo because they overplayed the Mr Prince Snr lawsuit idea thereby ruining a great character, and Mia could never
rival
Laura's intensity. She always felt like a distant second in my view, though to be fair to the actress playing Mia, the show could simply
not
go there again.
I hope they find a couple of characters between whom to anchor another similarly interesting and yes, titillating human relationship. That was the key to the success of season one and it will be the key to the success of any future seasons.
"The only 'coercion' I seek is that brought about by reason. " -
pubbly — 15 years ago(August 27, 2010 11:55 PM)
I agree with the other posters who say Paul and Laura were not in love.
For those who disagree, the link below also contains a professional evaluation of the Paul/Laura situation.
Emotionally speaking, it explains how both Laura and Paul remain "Wounded Children." They are both prone to "Acting Out" - in the same way as a 2 year old child does - whenever they throw a "Temper Tantrum:
http://www.jung-at-heart.com/jung_at_heart/hbos_in_treatment/in_treatm ent_week_2/
Paul's feelings about Laura are what we call
counter-transference
This phenomenon is one of
the chief occupational hazards
of psychotherapy
Paul, because he has not sufficiently dealt with the issues in his life his marriage, his father complex,
his need to be wanted and to feel he can care for and nurture a woman,
falls prey to this common hazard and
counter-transferentially believes he is in love
with Laura as she believes she is with him.
It is his fantasy
of her, that she would adore him and make him feel good as a man, which his wife does not, at least not now.
Laura and Paul become infected with the same fantasy, the same psychic virus.
The problem between Laura and Paul is not that Laura fell in love with Paul or that Paul developed feelings for her.
The problem is that Paul failed to be conscious of the issues in himself
that meshed so perfectly with Laura and her problems that he became blind and caught in a kind of possession so that what he felt became not a tool for helping Laura, but instead an occasion for
acting out.
Gina confronts Paul on his evasion, that he tells her he is there to talk about Laura but keeps mentioning Kate, his wife.
Paul is angry and defensive when he believes that Gina suspects him of acting out in the transference. He is prickly, argumentative, defensive.
He is actually quite like Alex was with him in his efforts to control the session and keep her away from any points of vulnerability.
fighting with Gina
is part of the reason he is back, that the
sparring
is important to him as a way of
defending against
what he calls her pet
theories, about his father and how he is replicating his father's pattern and still struggling against his own unresolved childhood issues.
Paul thought he could avoid being like his father by taking pride in how he was different, by being better than him. But these efforts usually fail, because the shadow lurks there and brings him to having to see how he is just like his father, his father who ran off with a patient,
not acting out with Laura is the only way to move through this, for him and for Laura.
Unfortunately, under the
"Illusion"
of this absurd
"Fantasy"
(that he's "In Love" with Laura), Dr. Paul isn't able to resist the temptation to "Act Out."
Thus also leading to his attempt to seduce Laura at the end of Season One.
When we first meet Laura, she's had sex in a bathroom stall with stranger that she meets in the Bar. Later on, she also screws Paul's patient Alex (still another stranger that she meets in the street - as she exits her therapy session).
What's the difference between this behavior, and that of Mia (who also screws two strange guys that she meets in a bar)?
Weren't both women (Laura and Mia) also "Acting Out" at the time of their sexual encounters?
Are there any Six Feet Under fans here?
Isn't this also the same kind of behavior that we witnessed in the case of The
Borderline Brenda Chenowith
character - who also used "Sex" as a form of escapism? Instead of popping pills, using or abusing drugs, doesn't using sex also become the source of addiction for a
BPD patient
?
Rachel Griffiths won a Golden Globe for her performance as Brenda in SFU.
Didn't the actor who portrayed Alex in IT also win an Emmy for his perfomance?
Melissa George didn't win an award. Did she?
Since the intro to the first episode of IT (Season 1/Episode 1) began with the performance of Laura, I almost didn't watch the show, because the character was too boring, too stereotypical, and a "Major Snoozefest."
On the other hand, Alex was a wonderful character to watch. His performance (like that of Rachel Griffiths) kept me glued to the screen.
Therefore, imo, it was also this performance (along with that of Paul and Gina) that leads to the success of the show's First Season.
The character of Paul's wife, and that of Sophie, were also much more interesting to watch than that of the "One Dimensional," Stereotypical, "High Heel" wearing Laura.
Didn't Mia also have a collection of attention seeking "High Heel" shoes?
While in Treatment with Gina, didn't Paul's wife also call attention to the fact that Laura was wearing her "High Heel" shoes at 10 am in the morning?
The dialogue between Paul and Laura was anything but riveting. It was all one could do to remain awake.
Alex, however, kept one awake (even without the help of the contents of his expensive coffee machine). -
pubbly — 15 years ago(August 29, 2010 03:22 PM)
Lets's review what the therapist said:
Laura and Paul become infected with the same fantasy, the same psychic virus.
Paul failed to be conscious of the issues in himself
he became
blind
and caught in a kind of
possession
an occasion for
acting out
Paul is angry and defensive when
Gina suspects him of acting out in the transference. He is prickly, argumentative, defensive.
He is actually quite
like Alex
was with him
in his efforts to control the session and keep her away from any points of vulnerability.
fighting with Gina
sparring
defending against what he calls her pet theories, about his father
how he is replicating his father's pattern
Paul thought he could avoid being like his father
But these efforts usually fail
because the shadow lurks there
he is just like his father, his father who ran off with a patient
Do you disagree with this?
If so, why?
What precisely is it you disagree with?
How can two sick people - who are under the same
"illusion" or "fantasy -
" who are
"infected with the same psychic virus"- have a healthy relationship?
Dr. Weston is
possessed
.
He's under the same spell or curse as his father was before him (a situation which also parallels/mirrors/reflects the relationship Alex had with his father).
Dr. Weston is also
blind
to the fact that he's caught up or trapped within this state of
possession.
When Gina confronts him - Dr. Weston also
"Acts Out."
He tries to deny he's possessed by the
"Shadow"
of his father, the monster that lurks there inside of his psyche.
Instead of dealing with his "sick psyche," or defeating this "Ghost" that hides within him and haunts him, Dr. Paul fights with Gina (as Alex also fought with Dr. Weston when Paul confronts Alex with the Ghost of his father).
The result is both Paul and Alex replicate the
"patterns of their fathers"
to become like their fathers.
Instead of facing these hidden demons that haunt them, they both remain possessed by them.
As long as the psyche of these three characters (Laura/Alex/Dr. Weston) remains "infected" with this "virus," won't they also continue to keep infecting others with it?
Laura "infects" Andrew.
Alex "infects" Laura.
Dr. Weston "infects" Tammy.
Sophie's father "infects" her.
The "infected" Dr. Weston also enjoys the book with the "disembodied breats" that was published by Sophie's father.
How could anyone - who isn't blind to the sick situation that they saw taking place between Laura and Dr. Paul - possibly like what they saw?
- have a healthy relationship?