I don't think that Laura was SUPPOSED to be likable...

I've noticed a lot of people here complaining that Laura is an unsympathetic and unlikable character. This is something I agree with....

...but I thought that was exactly the point. I don't think that I was SUPPPOSED to like her, and I'd be interested to know why people criticising the character for being unlikable thought that the writers expected us to like her.

I mean, people complain that she is needy, manipulative, selfish, promiscuous and generally speaking, quite neurotic... I can see all that - but I thought to myself, THAT'S THE POINT. If she didn't have issues then she wouldn't be in therapy in the first place, and these kind of emotional problems are NOT SUPPOSED to be endearing, they wouldn't be in real life, so I don't see any reason why they should be in a TV show.

It seems to me that the reason Laura comes across as unlikable is because that's exactly how she's designed to come across.

I've only watched Season 1, and I haven't seen the Israeli show this is based on... but to me it seems like not a single character in the show is designed to be totally sympathetic and likable - EVERYONE on this show is wrestling with their demons, and EVERYONE has some unlikable trait...

Sophie can be petulant, whiny and self-pitying... none of which are endearing traits, but are realistic for a character of her age and background.

Alex has crippling insecurities which he hides behind a brash and cocky macho facade... still, even knowing his bravado is just a facade, his arrogance can be annoying, and I think it's meant to be... although Paul clearly crosses a boundary by throwing coffee in the man's face and pushing him against a bookcase, I think the audience is meant to feel that Alex has pushed him to a certain extent, emotionally.

Paul himself repeatedly crosses ethical boundaries, gets too emotionally involved with his patients (not just Laura either, though that is the most extreme example) and is generally an ineffectual husband and father.... and yet even so, the way that Kate uses Paul's mistakes to justify her own is dishonest and mean-spirited.

Jake and Amy aren't designed to be likable either, their disingenuous approach to the therapeutic process was frequently as infuriating to me as it was to Paul.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that I think all of the unlikable traits these characters have are totally intentional on the part of the writers. I think the reason that these characters come across as unlikable is because the writers decided to be as realistic as possible in fleshing out these characters' emotional problems.

I've yet to meet anyone in real life who didn't have some unlikable trait that I find annoying. My friends have quirks in their personality that get on my nerves, so does the woman I've loved for the past 12 years - I'm sure that if you asked them about me, and they were completely honest, they'd say that I annoy them sometimes too.

So when people say "I find Laura unlikable", I just think to myself:
"But surely, that's THE POINT. You're not SUPPOSED to find her sympathetic. You really shouldn't find her problems endearing, that's not the way the show is written"

Or am I missing something here???

I think the main reason I do like this show is because it is so unflinchingly realistic in it's characterisation, and that the actors involved are willing to throw themselves into it, giving gutsy, "warts and all" performances.