HBO previewed their new series "Tell Me You Love Me" -- anyone see it?

[Radio_Lady]

First episode should be available on demand. Second episode will be shown beginning tomorrow night (Sunday, September 16) -- check your local listings for your time zone and cable channel.

It's very erotic and portrays human sexuality far beyond what I've ever seen on American television. Full nudity and sex scenes are very accurately and delicately portrayed. Several couples are exploring their developing -- or imploding -- relationships at different times in each of their lives. Actress Jane Alexander plays a married sex therapist with white hair.

Anybody see it or plan to watch it? I was mesmerized by how naturally the pilot flowed along.

I'll be interested to see if this show stays on the air.

http://www.hbo.com/tellme/

[Missy Vixen]

1. I saw it last Sunday

I liked the couple in their forties and the therapist, but the other two couples were less than interesting to me. The sex is, as you said, the most explicit thing I've ever seen on television. I'm sure HBO was not happy with the fact that the show did not get high ratings after being endlessly advertised on the channel for the past three weeks.

IMHO, YMMV,
Julie

[Radio_Lady]

2. I see what you mean. Metacritic.com lists it with MIXED or AVERAGE REVIEWS.

Thanks, Julie.

[Patiod]

14. I kind of liked it - forund it intriguing

like you, I was more interested in the older couples, since we iz one....

[Radio_Lady]

3. Here's an interesting review by Tim Goodman in San Francisco --

Complete article available at: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/09/07/DDK0S0GN9.DTL

Tell Me You Love Me: Drama. 9 p.m. Sundays, HBO.

HBO's new series, "Tell Me You Love Me," is essentially known as the show about sex. Lots of sex. There's a whiff of controversy about it because the sex seems not only real and abundant and filmed in ways rarely seen on television, but also bold and unapologetic. None of it is overly titillating, which is precisely the point. Because "Tell Me You Love Me" is not about sex, it's about intimacy and the complicated, broken or lost connections between lovers.

It's also about therapy - the kind meant to bring the parties involved back together in some meaningful way. And it's not the fun kind of therapy where people have breakthroughs and revelations. It's much more real than that. Because the series strives - quite effectively - to get past gloss and down into the painful, unvarnished aspects of marriage and love and the meaning of partnership and intimacy, it gives up the one thing that makes watching television such a joy: the fun part.

"Tell Me You Love Me" is, in many ways, bold and important, a series for adults and the mature- minded, that touches nerves and exposed, complicated emotions. There should be some reward for that. Aggressive character studies, even ones that delve into areas most people don't like to talk about, have a kind of high-minded mission. The trouble is that they are often too real, too painful. There's no getting around this: "Tell Me You Love Me" is not only like eating your vegetables, it's like eating vegetables without grill marks or butter or, depending how many episodes you watch, heat.

(snip)

Ultimately, everyone ends up seeing Dr. May Foster (Jane Alexander), a couples therapist. She's wonderfully incisive and intuitive. She has a loving, sex-filled marriage of her own. Yes, Jane Alexander, in her late 60s - not to mention the former head of the National Endowment of the Arts - participates in her fair share of sex in "Tell Me You Love Me," with lots of passion and not much coverage.

That's the other thing about this series. It's real. It's raw. And it wants to explore sex and intimacy in ways that television hasn't in the past. If you can't handle Jane Alexander performing oral sex, this is probably not your show.

[Radio_Lady]

4. My husband started to watch it a few weeks ago and thought it was a sex show.

He turned it off after that first scene.

[Bullwinkle925]

5. Definitely soft porn . . .

I've seen the first 2 episodes. Really not sure how I feel about it.

[Radio_Lady]

7. Husband saw the full 1st show, then we watched the 2nd episode together.

What is the full definition of "soft" pornography? Is it always staged -- that is, the actors are involved in some kind of a limited "script" and they are not actually engaging in real sex? On that basis, what about the Better Sex videos from an unknown purveyor which someone sent to me -- would they be considered porn, or not?

Maybe I'm crazy, maybe the feelings the two shows brought up were painful, but there was a lot of "reality" in the situations they portrayed. The sex was delicately and beautifully photographed and edited -- although there were a few continuity errors I could quibble with, but I won't.

Additionally, I am so supercharged from coffee at dinner tonight -- and my thoughts -- that I can't sleep!!!

Heck, that's pretty involved, I'd say..............

[supernova]

6. Watched it last night

and ... I don't know yet.

I don't know the characters well enough to have some idea of their storylines or much empathy for them yet. I didn't see much intimacy last night IOW.

I did sorta connect with Jane Alexander and her husband. I did like the concept of the different stages of relationships. Sometimes it's wonderful; sometimes it's not.

I might have to watch it several times to make up my mind about it.

[Radio_Lady]

8. Those are my thoughts exactly.

I really liked Jane Alexander -- what a breakthrough role for an older woman!

[supernova]

11. Yes, it is!

A wonderful opportunity for Jane Alexander, someone I've admired my whole life.

It gives me a lot of hope that we are entering an age where we can see older women as fully functional beings, including being sexual. A common lament of older women has been that they've felt "invisible" to society, largely based on perceived loss of sexual appeal. As a 45 year old going on about 30 ( ;-) ), seeing JA is a real plus.

[Patiod]

15. Not to get off topic, but some OBGs contribute to that

I was interviewing OBGs about a potential new drug that was thought to increase female libido after menopause. This frightened a lot of male OBGs (I would NEVER NEVER NEVER go to a male OBG after that research).

One young guy, maybe 29-30 years old said "I don't understand why a woman over 45 would even want to HAVE sex." An older doctor said "I would never prescribe something like that - I don't need all my old women patients going out getting STDs" Fortunately, a female OBG in the group discussion ripped him a new one, since it wouldn't have been professional for me to do so.

Scary, isn't it?

Whereas, the female OBGs were MUCH more enthusiastic about the prospects of something to increase female libido post-menopause.

[supernova]

20. That's terrible

that young OBGs would actively discourage their older patients from having active sex lives. :wtf: I'm fairly young looking (I'm small, moon faced) so I haven't run into that yet. but you never know.

I'm with you on the female only Gyns. I haven't been to a male MD for that in about 10 years.

What do you do, may I ask?

[Patiod]

21. I work for the "evil" Big Pharma

interviewing docs before new drugs come out about their likelihood of using them, asking whether they understand the marketing materials and ads, asking why they use some existing drugs and not others, asking how they should be delivered (like inhaled insulin) or packaged. We also ask doctors about their needs, in order to help companies plan which drugs they should invest in, and which categories are less needed. In some cases we talk to patients to understand whether directions are clear, whether they are capable of using some of the delivery methods (some drugs involve mixing or other preparation), to see what kind of patient education material they need and don't need, and sometime we interview nurses, too.

It's a wonderful job.

[CBHagman]

24. Then why all the his and hers bathtubs in the Cialis ads?

I mean, someone has to be doing this, right?

[Missy Vixen]

25. Ohhh, Patiod, you are a goddess among women

I don't think I could have remained quiet after this:

>One young guy, maybe 29-30 years old said "I don't understand why a woman over 45 would even want to HAVE sex."<

I'm 47. Obviously, this means that nobody will ever, ever want to have sex with me again. If I was ever that lucky, I'd better goddamn not enjoy it, either. I'd better alert the DH. This just enrages me. We're nonentities because we're not young? This person is a practicing physician that works primarily with women?

This reminds me one more time why it's best to see a female doctor, especially an OB/GYN.

Julie

[Radio_Lady]

9. One thing's for sure... it's better than "John from Cincinnati"!

Thank goodness HBO pulled the plug on that white elephant!

[SarahB]

10. Interesting, fairly realistic

A very different dynamic than my relationships though. It bothers me to a degree how the women are portrayed initially so stereotypically: "the frigid mom", "insecure bride-to-be", "thinking more about procreating than her husband's feelings". I've been in all these places in my own life (engaged, trying to conceive, balancing marriage and children) and it's been a different experience for me. Interesting to see something more real though on TV instead of sensationalist crap. As for the "soft core" aspect, I don't know. I tend to think it just shows sex within a normal context of our lives. No problem with that. I think I'll keep watching.

[Nickster]

12. I don't know how to explain it, but when I saw the previews, I really thought it sounded way too

sad to be interesting. I may give it a shot based on your review, but I'm not holding out too much hope.

[MrScorpio]

22. I think you looking for "depressing"

Bad relationships can be a downer, even on HBO

[Nickster]

23. There ya go, depressing, that's probably the right word.

[MrScorpio]

13. I just posted an analysis of all the couples

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=6937099&mesg_id=6937099

Just to let you know, I'm not fixated on the sex scenes at all. I think that they're the least interesting parts of the show.

[Pale Blue Dot]

17. delete

dammit, I did it again. This is SarahBelle.

[SarahB]

18. Excellent analysis!

:thumbsup:

(I really have to remember to log him out when I'm on his computer! :dunce:)

[MrScorpio]

19. Thank you

This show is for people who try their best to know how to understand women.

Frankly, I find all the hype about sex in the show a distraction.

This show is more about relationships

[CBHagman]

16. I had the most empathy for David & Katie, May & Arthur.

David and Katie are 40-something couple who love each other but have reached an impasse in their marriage, and May and Arthur are the therapist and her husband.

With the youngest couple, I actually reached the point of saying, "Oh, geez, they're not going to do it again!" I guess anything on TV can be boring if presented often enough.

[Missy Vixen]

26. The young couple leaves me cold

Seriously. The train wreck's coming from a mile away, and I find the two of them shallow and uninteresting.

The infertile couple? That guy doesn't want kids, period. Watching her storm out of the therapist appointment during the episode last night was interesting.

I'm with the commenters over on www.televisionwithoutpity.com. This show should be called "White People and Their Problems".

Julie