"Mad Men" Thread

(Note: If there is another thread on this show, I apologize. I couldn't find one. If there is I'll repost in that particular topic.)

I thought it was okay, but do we need "yet another" show that has morally ambiguous characters?

The thing that really bugged me was the character of Peggy. She was the newest member of the steno-pool at the ad agency featured in the show.

The head secretary sort of acts like a mentor to Peggy and "tells her how things are." In fact, she sends her to the doctor to get birth control pills because she may have to participate in "dalliances" as a part of her job.

I realize the 1950s and 1960s were different than today, but talk about your overblown stereotypes. The show implies that receptionists, secretaries and the like readily accepted their "place" in society and weren't much better than cheap call girls.

Poor poor poor plotting.

The show also is enamored with showing "unfaithful" husbands (and husbands to be) on the show. It is as if the "stiff and stodgy" society of the late 50s was a "horrid burden" on the people living in those times -- so a man would "naturally" cheat on his gorgeous wife, two beautiful daughters and rebel against his beautiful white house in suburbia.

I dunno...it didn't resonate with me.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

Yes. Otherwise it's not much of a show is it? Might as well have a documentary on 60s hairstyles.

I liked it.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

On my Comcast system the show is also available in HD on their free On Demand service.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

Mad Men 102 is now up on Comcast On Demand.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

Another ep, another instance of the "men" being stereotypical sexist.

I'm not going to deny that the workplace has become more "politically correct" in the past 50 years, but the men in this show are simply over-the-top.

You have an instance where Peggy seemingly makes friends with one of the ad men, and then later on that guy makes sexual advances on her in his office.

I'm sorry, but must every guy be a "jackass" in the show?

Unlike most of you, I majored in advertising in college. That profession has always been more "progressive" than other professions. It was a profession where women (in many instances) were on more level footing with men way back when. And it still remains one of the few professions where women outnumber men.

This show should have been set in a law firm instead of an ad agency. Because I know lawyers (even today) who act like pompous, sexist creatures who are more interested in their power driven libido than in really practicing justice.

The show has an interesting concept, but they could have focused on a number of different things without making every male character "slime."

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

I think the point is that the men aren't being over-the-top. A lot of things have changed. Remember, 150 years ago plantation owners were whipping slaves. Mad Men is set almost 50 years ago. A lot has really changed since then.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

Apples and oranges.

We've all watched a bunch of retrospective dramas about the 70s and 80s that were in no way representative of the actual times. They pull out all of the "cliches" from that era and throw them in.

No one is denying that there weren't "sexist" men in the 1950s. There are "sexist" men today.

The problem is that "every" male character who works at the ad agency seems to be a pig. Even Don Draper -- who is apparently so disillusioned with his beautiful wife and suburbia that he must have an affair with a bohemian chick.

Every show (no matter how edgy) needs a moral compass. And right now, this show doesn't have one.

Perhaps that'll change as the episodes progress.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

I work in advertising and was looking forward to a show would portray an agency other than the TV-Movie fiction of the generic ad exec who also does the creative and makes big pitches etc etc.

From that standpoint, the second episode had a scene for the audience (the copywriter's tour for Peggy) to mention on a basic level, the main different function/groups of an agency. However, our main character is apparently a creative director, but they are showing him in account service functions like dealing with the clients (they maybe part of a presentation, but no way would they independently meet with a client without an account exec/manager).

I realize that to most, advertising is simply creating big ideas, but I hope that the show which touches on the real aspects, dives into that more, and less of the era's "isms." There's plenty of real drama and humor to make for a great show.

The various realities of that time, ad depth and perspective, but it is a bit much so far.

I can't speak for agencies at that time, I wasn't around, but I have been in the business for several years and as mentioned, women are now employed in all levels and roles of advertising. Even though this show takes place "then" and part of the drama, is the "then" aspect, I can't help but feel it's exaggerated. The show can portray things in more nuanced ways (like showing the woman smoking then cutting to her in a shot that shows that she is in fact, pregnent).

I am giving the show time to develop because it has good potential,. We'll see...

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

Not at all. What makes you say that?

Even the homosexual seems to be a pig: That's how things were. You have to act the role to be treated as one of the guys. Ask your parents!

I don't think that's really relevant.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

Why? As long as a show is well written and I'm invested in the characters I could give a rat's ass if it has a "moral compass" or not.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

I agree with essentially everything that Albert M posted....

And on my "moral compass" comment...

Every story needs a true protagonist. For example, "The Shield" is loaded with morally conflicted characters, but you still have Claudette Whims (played by the wonderful CCH Pounder) to act as a "moral compass" for the show.

I suppose one could argue that Peggy is the "Mad Men" innocent...a possible moral compass in this world of sexism, vice and ambivalence.

Unfortunately, the writers decided to have her jump in the sack with the guy who's now on his honeymoon in Niagara Falls. Perhaps that was because of her naivety, but that act just didn't seem to ring true for the character she is trying to portray.

It is also possible that Draper's wife could be considered as a protagonist in the overall story.

I'll give it some time to unfold. There's a lot of potential there.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

Draper's house reminds me of the house from "The Amityville Horror."

I find it a bit disconcerting that virtually every character, even in a bit part like the doctor examining Peggy, has to have a cigarette dangling from their mouths. I know they're establishing that smoking was prevalent in the work-space, but gee-whiz, its like they're shoving it down our throats.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

I just think it has become the "popular" thing to create shows that are considered "groundbreaking" because they have morally ambiguous characters.

In theory, I have no problem with that IF there is reasoning behind their actions.

I know the creators of "Mad Men" also worked on "The Sopranos."

The difference is that men who either choose, or are born into, organized crime already have compasses that are out of whack. That's going to happen when you worry about getting buried in cement shoes all your adult life.

1. Don Draper -- a seemingly likable character. But what is the "reasoning" behind his affair with the artist (who apparently sees other men in addition to Don)? If Draper's wife were a total wench who was demanding and ambivalent, I could understand. But Draper's wife is really quite a sweet woman who is very attractive.

And "disillusionment" just doesn't work as a motivation (in the narrative form) when you are dealing with a college educated gentleman who has a very creative job in a "non-boring" profession.

2. Peggy -- she is playing the "innocent naive" in the story. She is the "clean slate" in the story. She's an individual who hasn't been "corrupted" by this world (although, how you could get "corrupted" by working in an ad agency is beyond me...it isn't like it is organized crime or high stakes litigation). From a narrative perspective, it would have made more sense for her to "slap" Pete in the face when he came to her apartment.

But instead of acting "innocent" (she'd only been on the job for a day or two at that point), she acted very "worldly" and "non-innocent" when she let him in -- and (for me at least), it simply didn't "ring true" in the dramatic structure.

Every story needs a "moral compass." And by "moral compass" I don't mean some sort of "values oriented" individual.

What I mean is a character who is going to "light the way" for the other characters in the dramatic narrative. Even if the other characters choose not to follow that character, most great pieces of fiction feature one of those folks as a "moral compass."

Jack Bauer is the "moral compass" on "24" because he puts the needs of the country over his own needs. He has found a way to morally justify what he does in the name of thwarting terrorism in that goal.

What is the motivation of the characters in this show? Other than just being sexist men with heightened "libidos," what is their motivation for doing what they do and acting like they act?

In the "dramatic form" I don't buy the argument that says, "well, that's just how a lot of men acted back then."

Quite frankly, I think most of us know better than that.

We can understand when Vic Mackey hops into the sack with some other woman (on "The Shield") because Vic works in a twisted, crime-infested world where he does many unsavory things in the name of justice. The vice-filled arena he works in has partly corrupted him and set his moral compass spinning. That doesn't "justify" what he does, but it resonates in the overall narrative.

It has been proven that men who sexually harrass women do so because they desire power. The problem (in this instance) is that all of the men in the show have power, make good money, and get to work in a profession that was exciting and "new" in the 1950s.

I could understand if these men were disillusioned because they had to work in a profession that they hated, but these men seemingly love their careers and chose this profession. And unlike organized crime (or high-stakes legal or medical work), these men aren't in a profession where their lives (or others lives) are on the line everyday.

I heard the creator say that the world of advertising isn't much different than the world of organized crime.

I think that is a flawed point of view. Any viewer can easily discern the difference between the two -- and it doesn't help willful suspension of disbelief.

This is why most shows are cop shows or medical dramas -- those are both incredibly stressful worlds and make good backdrops for melodramatic stories.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

Indeed, although I wouldn't call either Claudette or Peggy a "moral compass". They are sympathetic characters. However, so is Vick, in his own way. Claudette isn't really essential to the story, because of that.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

Consider it a final completion of our journey away from where they only offerings were like the Fantasyland of Father Knows Best, to a place where we can also enjoy television programs that are actually realistic, or even super-realistic. The unnecessary boundaries are removed.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

okay, who has grown up in that era and can attest to its authenticity .

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

Well I was a kid in those days, but I’m not sure anyone will be able to answer that. It’s a big country; the reality of their world in chic New York City certainly won’t be the same as it was in South Dakota, to pull one out of the hat.

That said, I think Jonny P is spot on. Draper’s character is wearing thin. He appears to “have it all,” so what’s his problem? What was the deal with that birthday party anyway? We’re not being shown any rhyme or reason for his restless brooding.

I’m willing to give it another episode or two, but it’s looking more and more like the show’s primary mission is to belittle the social mores of a bygone era – as if Hollywood’s are anything to write home about.

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt

Edited by Wayne A. Pflughaupt - 8/5/2009 at 10:15 am GMT

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

This last episode was maddening. Don ran away and left behind a younger brother to start a new life. We know Don to have the idyllic life for the time period, but now his past is trying to catch up to him, and his cover-up of the truth seems to be paralleling the ad campaigns he prepares for his clients, but getting there is not as compelling as I had hoped for this show.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

There seems to be no rhyme or reason to Don's actions or behavior. The writers think it is a good idea to keep Don in a shroud of mystery - personally, I think it is not helping to build the character; it is helping to distance him from the viewer. Its almost like watching a family member (this is stretching it, since the show is only 5 episodes long, but bear with me) that you see on holidays with strange issues, but have no idea what makes him tick.

With Pete, however, you get a well-rounded picture of the character. They're really fleshing him out for the viewer, and the actor himself is making great use of it. I hope that Pete becomes the focus of the show, while Don becomes sort of a sidekick. Might as well, since Pete is getting the royal treatment from the writers.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

i've finished ep3 now. it's been pretty consistently good. good use of music, very nice shots, very filmic. the dialogue is really sharp and good.

for those that grewup in those times. did their speech patterns really sound like that?

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

My Comcast ON Demand doesn't have it in HD today-any of the episodes. Anybody know what's up?
Update-checked an hour later and all the HD episodes were there. The latest was the first I watched that didn't have any dropouts on the soundtrack.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

i believe amc is no HD yet... is it?

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

My Comcast had all the HD versions in AMC HD OnDemand up to last week. A few days later they had gone missing. Then yesterday they were back but only up through episode 4 (episode 5 was missing). Since Ep6 aired Thursday I'm hoping the HD version will show up before too long.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

I've got 101 through 106 in HD On Demand right now, with 101 expiring 8/30.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

Be thankful, i can't find ANY episodes whatsoever on TWC here in Raleigh.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

have you played it to make sure it's HD? does amc even broadcast in HD?

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

not to go off-topic, but how come AMC has "Mad Men" On Demand under "Entertainment," yet A&E doesn't have "The Two Coreys" on their On Demand channel?

Back on-topic: I usually wait to catch "Mad Men" On Demand in order to avoid watching commercials. Neat trick.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

We've watched all six episodes so far in HD -- it is definitely HD and actually very good HD at that. The HD program is only available On Demand here in Burlington.

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

hrm... very interesting =).

Re: "Mad Men" Thread

Move over, J.R. Ewing - here comes Peter Campbell

show update:

Peter Campbell is calculating, manipulative, a womanizer, and always looking to see a way to advance himself, no matter the cost for other people.

He works in an Ad agency, set in 1960. His father denys him everything in favor of his brother, and his mother is too weak to stand up for him. He's out to prove to everybody that he is capable of more than what he's doing at the moment. Speaking of "at this moment," he has currently stolen a package meant for his boss, who was recently named a Partner to the ad agency. The package is from his boss's estranged brother, who happens to have the real last name of Campbell's boss. Campbell's boss, Donald Draper, fired Campbell unsuccessfully for trying to upstage him in front of a client. Draper failed because the owner of the agency feels that Campbell's family would cause them trouble (they're wealthy and well-to-do with strong political connections). So Campbell is spared, but resentful of Draper.

The package Campbell has stolen was, as I said, sent from Draper's brother, who had committed suicide after sending it off in the mail. The package probably contains personal information about Draper's former identity, which Draper changed shortly after World War II - either to avoid more military service, or to escape from his jewish roots. With this information now in Campbell's hands, he will likely blackmail Donald Draper.