Mad Men

Spencer: Welcome back to Hamsterdamn Kate. I hope you enjoyed your brief repreive. Let's jump back into the fray post Sopranos with some Sopranos alumni - specifically Matthew Weiner and his new AMC show, Mad Men.

I have to say I was blown away by the first two episodes of this series, partially because I wasn't expecting much from AMC - I think the HBO's and Showtimes of the world have really pushed the other networks to make "edgier", more interesting content - from Mad Men to the FX shows, things are really moving in the right direction.

Some things I like about the show:
- the time period. Not only are they doing a great job with the details, but it's just fun - the constant smoking, the slicked back hair - I love it.
- the performances. Uniformly quite good and as with any good show, with few names and faces that you might recognize.

Some things I am uncertain about:
- the wife. the main character I find fascinating ("who's in there") but I found the second episode slower when they brought the wife in. Misogyny? Perhaps.
- I'm curious to see how they develop the main character - in a lot of ways he needs to be mysterious, empty - American Pyscho-ish without the killing to make the point of the show (something along the lines of "look how shallow and messed up things were back then but oh wait they aren't really that different now are they), but it's difficult to maintain a mystique around a character when he's the driving force of the show. It'll be interesting to see how the performance and character develop.

Your thoughts?

Kate: …and it’s great to be back.
Mad Men is very exciting! Since (as you know) I am not (or I guess I should say that “I have yet to become”) a John from Cincinnati fan, and Entourage is flailing I’ve been a little depressed about television ever since the Sopranos ended. Sometimes you need a new puppy to distract you from the death of your beloved dog.

Is Mad Men my new puppy? I’m not sure, but it has great potential.

Like you, I adore the time period- the 1950s were a fascinating time in terms of economics of the country and also socially. It was the calm before the 1960s storm. It was also the time of “what more could you need?” and when unhappiness was just ridiculous if you had a family and a husband who made a lot of money (in other words, I enjoy the wife’s storyline even if I find the character a little stiff).

Mad Men can go so many places with its story- they have the men in the office (is one of them gay? I see a “Far From Heaven” like story line a brewing) , the main character’s family, the main character’s ‘other woman” which introduces the beatnik movement, race relations, and Peggy’s storyline.

Which brings me to my main issue with Mad Men- Peggy. First of all she is hideous, and second of all I find her irritating. She is my only fear about the show right now- otherwise I love it.

S: Peggy is rather hideous and a bit irritating but I find her interesting. At first, I thought she was to be our heroine - a good girl to root for. We've seen that she's not that, and I was certainly surprised to see her open her door to the swarmy younger ad exec. Again, I'm not sure if the character is not all that well drawn, or if they are really doing something interesting with her - I'm curious to see where she goes.

I'd also like to mention the very Sopranos-esque use of music in the first two episodes, particularly with the slow retreat of the camera in episode 1. And I loved the end of episode 2, which I found a bit more surprising than what they probably thought was a "twist" ending to episode 1 - when did it stop being appropriate for men to check in on their wives therapy because that is so vastly inappropriate, it's almost funny!

K: Well that’s the great thing about Mad Men- just like the Sopranos it has an element of surprise that most shows do not have. It’s something more than the plot twisting and turning- it’s almost a withholding from the characters. There is an element of mystery about them that is so refreshing, rather than the typical pilot antics of: “This is Peggy. She is a goody goody who is afraid of her body”. Peggy makes no sense (birth control? Hitting on her boss? Dressing terribly?), and I know that if she will go in one direction I will hate her, and if she goes in another I will be at least interested in her. I don’t understand the Pete/Peggy thing but it seems so wrong that it could work really well.

But again, she is hideous. There is no need for that. It is so easy to make women from the 50s look beautiful with all the makeup and the synched waists… it’s a travesty.

I’m glad you brought up the husband talking to the psychiatrist thing- I assumed that he had one of his friends from the ad agency be her psychiatrist so that he COULD check up on her. I think the patient doctor privilege was in tact in the 1950s? Perhaps I’m wrong.

I really love their choice of music. They work with the time period while also giving almost an edgy feel.

S: That's a great point - when the characters do become clearer, perhaps we won't be so fascinated.

I think you might be wrong about the psychiatrist - I think the nature of the semi-twist ending was to remind us of how priveleges like those (for women) were pretty much overlooked. Maybe one of our phantom readers can enlighten us to how it was back then? :)