A Young Doctor's Notebook & Other Stories

I was watching this mini series of only four episodes, each only twenty minutes long, and wondering. First, why am I watching this? Why am I enjoying it? It is the tale of an inexperienced doctor, fresh out of school forced to work in a small village. Set right after the first World War, or maybe even during it, in a region of Russia so remote that the war would not have counted anyway, it shows the barbaric medical practices of the time, the horrible transformation of a naive and idealistic doctor into a desensitized morphine addict.

But I did enjoy it. It is both comedy and terrible drama. The actors are perfect for their roles, the atmosphere is despondent and the Russian theme of the story gives an air of surreal to it all (even if for me personally, it is at least geographically closer than to an American audience). Even if about terrible things, the film is really quite quite good.

My second reason to wonder is how can a such a good show that is this dark and full of hopelessness even make the screen? Audiences will be shocked and disgusted by a period in human's history that they don't want to acknowledge and a character that is both very close to one's heart, but impossible to accept as similar to one.

I can only surmise that, just like the original short stories escaped the Russian censorship, the show also somehow managed to escape audience's democratic censorship of shows that are too real to watch. Quite hard to bear so much reality, in fact, but found myself immediately looking for clues for a next season. I doubt there will be one, but I would watch it if it were.

The history of the crew that got together to place on screen such an obscure collection of short stories is also fascinating. Do search for it, you will understand more about the background of the series and maybe even make you read the original material, why not?

First off, hats off to Daniel Radcliffe for trying to outgrow the Harry Potter image he will forever be associated with. He shows us that he is not just a cute boy wizard but a mature actor that can handle diverse roles. Jon Hamm also shows his acting muscle in a role which is much different from Mad Men.

I've never read Mikhail Bulgakov and so cannot comment on how accurate the series is to the short stories of the Russian writer but i can say this with certainty, the series has me hooked. I have seen the first season and it was all good. The found the dark humor oddly refreshing though shockingly gory at times.

Its not for everyone, but if you have the stomach for gore and comedy go see it, you will probably like it.

AZD

Based all on what I've seen of Series 1 only. What to say, eh? Writing this whilst I watch episode 4, again. That's my biggest endorsement of all. Each time watching adds to the depth of it all. And I want to watch it again. People will define this show by many non essential things, the accuracy to the texts its based off, the cast of English actors and of course that this series is defined by Daniel Radcliffe playing the main character. None of it matters for the show we get, as a stand alone, it stands high.

The premise, in 1934 Moscow the Older Doctor is recounting his years as Young Doctor who, fresh out of his doctorate, is sent to run a hospital in the middle of nowhere. From here we see the doctor grow from his naïve book smarts into the stark reality of his situation.

To start it's a comedy for sure, but it holds plenty of drama. Both come equally when needed and play off each other well, think a tragic comedy and you have the basic idea. The jokes range from the minor slapstick to the darkest laughter, and easily not for people who can't laugh at the tragedy that life holds. They're all there for a purpose, the laughter sets up and releases the tension creating a good pace throughout the episodes. The themes are extensive and deep, addiction, loneliness, life experiences, death, healthcare through doctors and patients, and of course medicine. And those are just the heavy themes, there are even themes of sexuality, nature vs artificiality, mentors, past mistakes and many more.

It's well written, it shows a lot and doesn't tell you everything. Characters are well defined, each play their part in the narrative and the dialogue is very well done. Both of the Doctors grow over the series, where from the begin they are totally different by the end. There's a great retrospective segment in the last episode, and by this time we're shown the vast differences between the two. The production is great, you feel like you're there, in the cold, in the operating room, the locations are alive in their own way. The cast act their roles well enough, some characters don't have the breadth of depth as they might, but this is the doctors story and not theirs of course.

I come away from A Young Doctor's Notebook thinking. How can I laugh at tragedy? These stories are based off the experience of the original author, Bulgakov, when he was a doctor himself and we can only imagine the horror of healthcare back then and how it relates to modern medicine. Nietzche says we humans laugh because we realise we are going to die. And here I am now, watching it again, realising that the best pain killer will always be laughter in the face of that horror.

Daniel Radcliffe stars as a young doctor, who in 1917, is sent to a remote village hospital in Russia, where he has to contend with eccentric staff, few supplies, and his own growing morphine addiction. Not to mention the various conversations he has with his older self (played by John Hamm).

In parts, the show is quite gruesome - it certainly made me wince! - but it also manages to be extremely funny - sometimes guiltily funny, as I found myself laughing at the inappropriateness of certain comments and situations.

Daniel Radcliffe surprised me by being very good as the younger doctor, while John Hamm is just super as his older, somewhat wiser self, who tries to stop his younger self from the mistakes he is about to make. The supporting cast are excellent, especially Adam Godley as the dull (to his colleagues, certainly not to the viewers) assistant.

What I really liked is the inversion of the popular 'doctor as hero' storyline. This doctor is most certainly not a hero - he can be uncaring about his patients, filching morphine for his own use rather than for those who really need it, he is a coward at times, and incredibly selfish. And of course, he is able to see himself being all of those things, but is powerless to stop himself.

It's well acted, well-written, will make you laugh and make you squirm - and it's definitely worth watching!

Having watched all the 4 episodes have to at this one was superbly made. The story itself is quite a simple one but wonderfully narrated , hence the most accolade should go to the author.Mostly dark humour but will be liked by most and hopefully will have a sense of humour to laugh about some medical topics. The editing is good too especially considering the number of episodes they were aiming for. The direction does justice to the story and the story and plots essence is never lost. Radcliffe is almost made for his role with the boyish looks and is very well supported by Jon Hamm. All the the supporting actors are very good and offer comic support just with their superb expressions.The half hour episodes make it quite easy to watch too . An easy watch but very entertaining.