Mad Men on AMC • Fifth Season Thread

I mean, for all that my problems with the show rest on criticisms that may come across as sociopolitical in nature, my biggest problem with the show is that it's boring and I hate all the characters and I don't understand why there is a tv show about them.

lol okay kinda don't get why you're posting on this thread then

insert "food here is terrible/and in such small portions" joke

what shouldn't she post here? there isn't a finite amount of thread space. it can accommodate ppl who are passionate about the show, ppl turned off by it, and every position in between.

Because it is a show that appeals to me a lot in theory but not in practice, which compels me to watch it but also be eternally frustrated.

Also, I think the show should have just started in 1950 rather than 1960. It wouldn't fix everything, but it would actually make the show less annoying on several fronts. x-posts

I just always find it odd when people expend a lot of intellectual energy engaging with a piece of work they profess to hate.

god this is obnoxious I should start my own thread

nah, i like long, thoughtful posts. wish there were more such stuff on ILX. fwiw, i agree with you that there's nothing terribly remarkable about mad men's approach to race and gender. it's just another show about mediocre white people living mediocre lives. but, see, i was never sold the idea that it might be any more than that. i never saw anything more than that in the show. i like it for what it is, with the understanding that it's really just the thousand thousandth variation on the same old thing.

so your last round criticism, while undeniable, still doesn't really "resonate" for me. yes, i wish american TV were better. i wish it were more curious, smart and brave, that it weren't so complacently focused on stories about middle class white people going through the same old relationshit. but that's a criticism of american television, not of mad men in particular.

the one thing i can't deny or wave away is your point about mary wells and braniff, especially as it plays into SCDP's acquisition of an airline client and peggy's struggles to be taken seriously by clients. the show's ignorance of or decision to elide people like wells is kind of shameful.

for ex. if the food tastes bad, I don't continue eating it and ordering more so that I can continue to complain about how bad it is to the people at the table next to me.

xp

Peggy is very good at her job from what I can see, she's just not good in front of frustrating clients (and it isn't her job to do so, Don just left her in the lurch).

I just always find it odd when people expend a lot of intellectual energy engaging with a piece of work they profess to hate.

― heavy is the head that eats the crayons (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, April 27, 2012 9:10 AM (14 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i don't. why shouldn't someone wrestle with something they don't like? and melissa i really like your posts here

Noticing some typos I made above. Should be "Matthew Weiner has made some gross comments about how the ad industry is "still" all white", not "ad agency". x-post

can't believe this show is about perspectives and people have interpretations of those perspectives

for ex. if the food tastes bad, I don't continue eating it and ordering more so that I can continue to complain about how bad it is to the people at the table next to me.

I think it's p. normal for people to keep up with zeitgeist-y things even if they dislike them, particularly if they feel the critical conversation is overlooking things they feel strongly about. substitute "the twilight saga" for "food" in your quote above and you've described 40% of my online interactions during 2009.

why shouldn't someone wrestle with something they don't like? and melissa i really like your posts here

donna otm

why shouldn't someone wrestle with something they don't like?

it's just not an inclination I share. I have more productive, enjoyable things to do with my time.

it's one thing to critically engage with say, a book or a film you don't like. 5 seasons of a TV show seems a bit much.

yes tbh i was frustrated by your earlier posts, Melissa, but the long one you just posted is definite food for thought, thanks.

like I can critically engage with a couple songs and figure out why I don't like a them. Listening to the act's entire catalog seems more like being a glutton for punishment.

xp

I just always find it odd when people expend a lot of intellectual energy engaging with a piece of work they profess to hate.

― heavy is the head that eats the crayons (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, April 27, 2012 11:10 AM (46 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i completely disagree w/ melissa but cmon this post is hilarious

(spoiler alert: it can't be, or else Friends and Girls are also really nuanced portraits of race in the 90s and 10s)

what? it cant because if it could, these two specific examples WOULD be? have you ever seen a whit stillman movie?

None of the women who worked general accounts were as mediocre at their job as Peggy appears to be

i never get the impression whatsoever that she's bad at her job? this feels like fiction

sadly otm

madmen tends to feel like it could be a truly great show that often settles for good with flashes of stupidity and excellence. The last episode was SO good though tbrr

i never get the impression whatsoever that she's bad at her job? this feels like fiction

Well, that's the thing though. Impression is all the show operates on when it comes to Peggy. She is often said to be good, but whenever we actually see her doing anything related to a pitch, her idea is poorly thought out or needs significant finessing by Don to actually be a pitch rather than toothless brainstorming ("you can't frame a phone call"). She is never shown to be a heavy hitter that can get the job done on her own, and when we do see her solo her ideas usually aren't great and she can't land a pitch. It was actively weird when Don tried to say that her ideas were ahead of their time at the end of season 3 when he was trying to get her to join the new agency, when she hadn't actually created anything on her own that entire season.

I don't think the show necessarily means to portray her as bad at her job, but she's pretty much never been shown as being good at her job, and that's a pretty significant failure on the part of the show. When we hear about her, she's great. But when they bother to show her working, it's only when she's fucking up or collaborating with Don and not really contributing much. I honestly can't think of a time when Peggy has been shown as hitting anything out of the park or really impressing anyone.

wrong again

Peggy (w/Ken) breaking the firm's "losing streak" last season

I'm sure there's others

Aside from Don winning the Clio (which Peggy played a part in), when was the last time he really 'knocked it out of the park'? I think the focus has shifted, as though we're meant to take for granted that both Don and Peggy are competent at their jobs, it's just how they're selling it that differs. Peggy's gambit last week seemed absurd and suicidal, but Don has taken similar approaches and they worked.

wanna say there was something to do with Ponds re: Peggy but can't remember

also yeah this show hardly focuses on "the work" per se (the agency spent most of last season scranbling just to GET work at all)

Peggy's gambit last week seemed absurd and suicidal, but Don has taken similar approaches and they worked

this was totally intentional tho. Peggy was very deliberately aping Don's diction, mannerisms and speech patterns - but it backfired for the reason some other (female) character previously noted, "no one likes a woman who acts like a man"

I agree. I don't think it was down to being bad at her job.

with shakey and gubke here. there's every indication in the show that peggy really is remarkably good at her job. it's just that the show says this more than shows it. similar to pete's apparent excellence when we mostly just see him being a weaselly little dork. the problem is that the show doesn't devote much time to the day-to-day advertising work that sustains the company, not that peggy is poor at her job or a fundamentally unbelievable creation.

the only thing they really show is that she works insane hours.

the problem is that the show doesn't devote much time to the day-to-day advertising work

this isn't a problem. a show that did would be mind-numbingly boring.

cuz then every episode really WOULD end with someone selling beans or whatever

i still don't get the "there's no way a person with Peggy's story ever existed" jab from yesterday. like, what aspect are we talking about here? her promotion/career arc - or private life?

remembered something else - it was Peggy's idea that was used for the ad that won the Clio

xp

i mean problem relative to how we understand the characters' relationships w their jobs. dramatically, it's obviously a good call.

Well, that's the thing though. Impression is all the show operates on when it comes to Peggy. She is often said to be good, but whenever we actually see her doing anything related to a pitch, her idea is poorly thought out or needs significant finessing by Don to actually be a pitch rather than toothless brainstorming ("you can't frame a phone call"). She is never shown to be a heavy hitter that can get the job done on her own, and when we do see her solo her ideas usually aren't great and she can't land a pitch. It was actively weird when Don tried to say that her ideas were ahead of their time at the end of season 3 when he was trying to get her to join the new agency, when she hadn't actually created anything on her own that entire season.

I don't think the show necessarily means to portray her as bad at her job, but she's pretty much never been shown as being good at her job, and that's a pretty significant failure on the part of the show. When we hear about her, she's great. But when they bother to show her working, it's only when she's fucking up or collaborating with Don and not really contributing much. I honestly can't think of a time when Peggy has been shown as hitting anything out of the park or really impressing anyone.

― Melissa W, Friday, April 27, 2012 1:07 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

in addition to what everyone else said, she's like 15 years younger than don! of course she's not as experienced or successful as him -- the dynamic (which is shifting) is that he's good at his job & she's a rising talent, and i think they convey that dynamic effectively

On the bright side, SCDP isn't just riffing on the Volkswagon ad like a lot of their lesser competition seems to

I think this raises the interesting question of the show's relationship to Don's supposed "genius"--is it agnostic on that front? (I'm thinking in particular of that amazing ep where Don says that kids are already nostalgic for the childhood they are in the middle of and not so much the "love was created by men like me in order to sell nylons.")

well he sure has been shown to be fucking up quite a bit over the last season and a half

this isn't a problem. a show that did would be mind-numbingly boring.

Disagree with Shakey, agree with contendo. The excitement that was captured on S1E1 ("Lucky Strike: it's toasted") has never been equalled. The show had the opportunity to be a Sherlock Holmes / Law & Order style 'weekly puzzle', but has dissolved into the flimsy race/gender commentary (well said, btw, Melissa) and character-based melodrama. I still like the show, sure, but never as much as I did in the very beginning.

The show had the opportunity to be a Sherlock Holmes / Law & Order style 'weekly puzzle'

you think TV needs more of this why now

i like both, but L&O is about 100x the show that MM is

you are insane

@ Shakey, you know what I mean, don't be like that. The (successful) ad presentations, as rare as they've become, are the best part of the show imo.

I'm not sure I know what you mean at all...? I hate formulaic procedural dramas, especially legal/cop ones (for all kinds of reasons), the idea that Mad Men would be better off being some kind of topical puzzle show strikes me as bizarre.

I'm not really interested in ad presentations themselves. they're only interesting on Mad Men because of what they reflect about the characters involved.

I feel like the real strength of MM is that it avoids either a "weekly puzzle," a "social commentary" approach, or a history-based Forrest Gump style boomer narcissism. the show seems totally unwilling to congratulate its viewers for their progressiveness (imo).

Instead, I think the most compelling thing about the show are the little burst of absolute weirdness (Roger barfing is my fav example, it almost seems surreal the way its staged and shot.)

Maybe the show should be about an accounting firm. x-post

agree with ryan. it's an amalgam of all those things but it routinely frustrates their respective conventions. and the weird stuff - roger barfing, the lawnmower crippling, the LSD trip, dream sequences and flashbacks - are part of a lineage that comes from Twin Peaks via the Sopranos.