Masters of Sex

After the liberated decades of free-thinking drawing from the legacy of the sexual revolution of the 60s, in recent years the pendulum has swung to the other side. Under the pretext of fighting against sexism and sexual harassment of women, modern moralists are once again reaping the harvest, giving lessons in behavior and willingly shaming others. They construct new myths, and prejudices, and often display an eruption of incredible hypocrisy. In these times, it is refreshing to watch a series that tells the story of human sexuality with lightness, wit, and elegance, without obscenities and vulgarities, but also without melodrama, sentimentality, and pretense. Masters of Sex is a remarkably comprehensive series that can not only touch upon but also dissect all the functions and forms of human sexuality. It perceives sex as a part of the reproductive process, as a physiological act, but also as an important component of a partnership, as entertainment, and last but not least, as a suitable and worthy subject for scientific research. After the truly sexist and cynical Californication, Masters of Sex is a very refreshing, likable spectacle that is excellently cast and has a point. Overall impression: 90%. (18/03/2018)

After Mad Men, this was another excellent series set in the 1950s to 1970s in the most democratic country ever. The first season absolutely blew me away with its perfect atmosphere of obscurantism and hypocrisy. Unfortunately, later on it started to fade a bit, but the story was enjoyable even without it. I don't think things have changed that much since the fifties. We have the space program, the Internet, and whatnot, but for many men, the word clitoris still seems to be a foreign word. The series could be enlightening for many people, but I’m guessing that in the US it’s R-rated, or else it might cause some irrevocable damage. Given my moral depravity, I greatly enjoyed the whole series. I just found the second season weaker, but the seasons after that were great again. (21/05/2017)

Everything you wanted to know about sex (but were afraid to ask). Showtime was probably green with envy at AMC’s “prize and critical awards generator" Mad Men and therefore comes along with an identical concept done in the very same polished style. Just in a different environment, but otherwise it’s exactly the same. But this definitely does no harm, because it is certainly neither bad nor even just average. It’s too well written and too well acted to be able to say that about it. There is just one potential snag; the ins and outs of the career of the Masters/Johnson duo over several decades for sure is a sufficiently strong topic for a miniseries, but for a full-fledged series with a view to several seasons? We’ll see, we’ll see. In any case (so far) it’s been worth watching because you won’t find a cooler series on the screen, apart from maybe the above mentioned AMC or on BBC. (23/09/2013)

“My clitoris beats my vagina? That’s crazy!” Masters of Sex is a more edifying battle of the sexes than those offered by most of the screwball and re-marriage comedies that I can recall, but the men in it are less frustrated and the women are less repressed. The tension between people of different genders (and, in the second season, of different races) is the driving force of this predominantly conversational series, which gets its dynamics primarily from the relationship hierarchy at home and in the workplace (or, as the case may be, between these two sub-worlds), or rather from the characters’ efforts to defy social norms and rules (how a wife, mother, husband and lover should behave). The women have to humiliate themselves in front of men, the men in front of more powerful men, and the doctors are also patients and they treat themselves by treating others. The important thing is that, with respect to the period setting, the rules for men are radically different from those for women. Inequalities of a more general nature are demonstrated in the discordant relationship between Masters and Johnson, who can never really get along, as their heated arguments make the series engaging and keep the narrative moving. If they agreed on their work processes and the sexual technique that they want to use to make the evening more enjoyable, the series would have nothing to hold us in anticipation. It’s thus reminiscent of coitus interruptus – it’s enjoyable, but there’s still something missing. ___ With the exception of a few novel episodes (one takes place almost entirely over the course of a single night in a hotel room), the series adheres to a very standard dramaturgical structure with sexuality as the unifying theme (Freud would have been pleased). Episodes are built from larger plot blocks and there is generally no parallel cutting between the various events, which would liven up the pacing. Only after one situation has played out and been brought at least to a partial conclusion do we move on to the next. With the exception of occasional work with the depth of space and the placement of the characters within it, the basic stylistic device is the shot/counter-shot technique. This structure, which places emphasis on the comprehensibility and clarity of the message, causes Masters of Sex to seem somewhat sedate in comparison with more aggressive and narratively and stylistically more distinct series, but thanks to its excellent actors and dialogue, it can get away with such classicism. 80% (24/06/2015)