"Great Performances" The Good Doctor (TV Episode 1978) Poster

(TV Series)

(1978)

User Reviews

Review this title
2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
A Curiosity of the Late 1970s From Broadway to the Television Screen
theowinthrop30 December 2007
Warning: Spoilers
It is generally agreed that modern drama reactivated between 1870 and 1912 because of a small set of writers who were original in their approaches or that were willing to discuss taboo subjects. England turned around with William Gilbert (usually with his partner Arthur Sullivan), Arthur Pinero, Oscar Wilde, and George Bernard Shaw. France (still romantic) produced Edmond Rostand and Georges Feydeau. Sweden turned out August Strindberg, while Norway gave us Henryk Ibsen, and Russia gave us Anton Checkhov. After this set of writers the usual melodramatic pap was dropped from the stage.

Some of these writers worked in several fields of literature. Checkhov was established originally as a short story and novella writer of tales like THE LADY WITH THE LAPDOG. In the 1890s he started writing for the theater as well, first with short one act plays and then with the longer ones like THE CHERRY ORCHARD and THE THREE SISTERS that ensured his dramatic fame. There were some odd things about his ideas concerning these moody dramas - Checkhov apparently felt they should be played with the speed of his contemporary Feydeau's farces - in fact he thought of them as comedies. Well, many great writers fail to adequately judge their own work and it's good and bad points.

In 1976 Neil Simon decided to take several of the Checkhov short stories and put them together as a set of one act plays surrounding Checkhov's discussing with the audience his writings and where he got his ideas. The stage production starred Christopher Plummer, but here we had Richard Chamberlain. At this point in time Chamberlain was slowly breaking away from his image as television's "Dr. Kildare" and showing he meant to be a serious actor. Soon SHOGUN and other television and films demonstrated he could stretch his talents. So the television version of THE GOOD DOCTOR is significant in Chamberlain demonstrating a comic timing in several episodes and an ability to handle the works of a first rate dramatist (two if one also counts Simon).

The stories are a wild bag. In one (my favorite comic episode) Chamberlain meets a man (Bob Dishy) who is an expert at "drowning" for amusing the public. That is, he will drown (if paid for it) to give a crowd something to talk about. Although he scoffs at this at first, Chamberlain gradually takes a real interest and agrees to Dishy's price. Dishy only asks that Chamberlain remember when he gives the signal to get a lifeguard to rescue him. Unfortunately, Chamberlain is so amazed at the realism of Dishy's drowning that he forgets what the signal was.

Another episode (that Chamberlain introduces) deals with a dramatization of the story "THE SNEEZE". Dishy is a small time bureaucrat attending a fancy dinner given by the head of his department, a general played by Edward Asner. He hopes that he makes an impression on his boss for promotion reasons. He does - he suddenly gives loose to a monumental sneeze, covering his boss's head. The story follows as the idiot tries to make amends to his boss for his faux pas, and only succeeds in making a pest of himself.

Lee Grant and Marsha Mason also were in the one actors. Grant plays (in one story) a half-mad old crone who is trying to borrow money from a stuffy banker (Chamberlain) and manages to do so by terrifying the man. There was also a sweet story about a father arranging for his 15 year old son to have his first sexual encounter with a "knowledgeable" woman (Mason). Chamberlain, as the father, is all high expectations for this to go off, until he realizes that the boy will no longer be his son but a man once it occurs - and this makes him regret the decision.

I don't think it has ever been repeated on television since I saw it in 1978. It is in video format (as many television dramas that have survived are. If you can get it, while not as great as Checkhov's masterpieces for the stage, it is definitely worth while to watch.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed