What's new

Mad Men: S3E1 (spoilers possible)

So, after a long wait, Mad Men returned to AMC tonight. Thoughts?

1) Is there anything in Dick Whitman's past that isn't horrible/awful/ beyond belief? His flashbacks are the things nightmares are made of.

2) I'm not sure how believable the British male secretary and his boss' relationship is. Something about that just doesn't ring true. Post WWII most British bosses had a woman doing the typing. And junior employees of British firms (usually called "clerks" - pronounced "clarks") wouldn't dream about suggesting going down to the pub with their boss, let alone complaining about the absence of "good pubs" in Manhattan. Maybe I'm missing something.

3) Virtually no Roger Sterling in tonight's episode, which is something of a letdown. The Stolichyna was an interesting touch, especially as Stoli wasn't legally available in the US in 1963.

4) Even in 1963, I think most decent sized companies had HR professionals to handle terminations in a way that didn't end up in loud, semi-violent scenes.

5) Speaking of which, I guess we can assume that Duck Phillips is ancient history? (Implied at the end of last season - but never explicitly dealt with.)

6) Was that Phyliss Diller having lunch with Trudy? And if the Met. (or whatever charity) was looking for donations, where do Pete and Trudy plan on coming up with the money? I assumed Pete's mother was almost broke, and I can't see her parents coughing up cash for them to give away.

7) Salvatore has to be the perfect business travel companion for Don. Not likely to compete for female attention, and very likely to keep his mouth closed about what happens on the road.

8) London Fog: There is truth in the story about London fog being caused by industrial pollution. In fact, due to low-grade post WWII coal, London had suffered a deadly "Great Smog" in 1952, in which almost 8000 people are estimated to have died. This prompted various clean-air legislation between 1956 and 1968, essentially banning coal fireplaces and replacing them with first paraffin stoves, and ultimately gas central heating. By 1960 smoke levels in London had dropped by half. Today the "London Fog" is indeed a thing of the past - but I don't think a British executive would necessarily have made such a definitive declaration in 1963.

Thank heavens I've got something to watch for the next three months.
 
As in the way gorgeous young women (the airline hostess, the woman in Los Angeles) come on to Don? Yeah.

Even the most successful Lotharios have to put a little more effort into it than Don does. But hey, its just a story.
 
Great analysis RazorDingo, thanks for that, a great read. Very insightful, well thought out and informative.

You got me thinking about what my gut was telling me as I watched the season opener after much anticipation.

I am sensing they have changed the writers for this season.
Its still too early to tell and by no means am I hitting the panic button, but if this is the case, this will be the kiss of death for the show

Speaking of which, how about that kiss laid on Salvatore? Talk about character development :biggrin:
I always got a kick of Saturday Night Live's Bill Hader's impression of him
But I digress.

I am guessing after paying Jon Hamm a well deserved salary increase, the head of accounts had to move some beans from the writing departments budget. That may very well apply to the research department as well , which might explain RazorDingos astute observation of the Stoli sighting before it was ever produced. MadMen has always lauded itself on its accurate historical presentations on the show.
As popular & successful as MadMen is as a great TV production and well needed breath of fresh air in the TV landscape, unfortunatley it is aired on a network that probably doesnt draw alot of ratings and perhaps may very well be suffering from a case of life imitating art ... no advertising dollars to support a budget for a show of its caliber.

Thankfully its early & this remains to be seen.
 
Last edited:
I was kind of disappointed with the season premiere. Something just seemed "missing". I also found Sal's romantic liaison at the hotel jarringly graphic for the series. This isn't Tales of The City or Queer as Folk and apparently I'm not the only one that felt it was out of place.

What's with Don's hair? It's way too flat. No mention of Duck? How did Don have flashbacks of his birth? Sloppy way to frame some backstory. Sterling's overdubbed "Don't touch the Stoli" seemed to come out of nowhere, and was quite anachronistic for the time.

Bunchoffives recently posted an article concerning the accuracy of some of the minor things in Mad Men. Seems they're not quite as spot-on as they would have you think. The first thing I found wrong when starting the series was the use of mid seventies era IBM Selectrics in the office. (I'm a typewriter nerd, so I spotted that one easily.) Another thing was in a second season episode, there is a stack of new Lucky Strike cartons sitting on the table. I guess Don jumped 45 years into the future and bought some Luckies at an outrageously inflated price.
 
I'm still annoyed CTV decided not to carry Mad Men Season Three here in Canada and watching it on my laptop is not the same.
 
Good grief, it is a television show, not a documentary.

Yes, but the Mad Men producers pride themselves on absolute historical accuracy, making prop decisions based on the month something came out (let alone the year). Listen to the commentary if you have the DVDs - in season one, Sally was supposed to be playing with an Etch a Sketch but that product wasn't released until later in the supposed year of the episode so they gave her a Raggedy Ann doll instead.

Now they know people are watching and parsing this stuff. Last season Don shaved with a black handled SuperSpeed, which came out well after the supposed time portrayed in the episode.

Stoli was definitely contraband in the early 60s - I read somewhere (not sure if it's accurate) that because we couldn't trade hard dollars with the Russians under communist rule, we gave them Pepsi and took out Stoli in return - I would say we got the better end of that trade.
 
I was kind of disappointed with the season premiere. Something just seemed "missing". I also found Sal's romantic liaison at the hotel jarringly graphic for the series. This isn't Tales of The City or Queer as Folk and apparently I'm not the only one that felt it was out of place.

What's with Don's hair? It's way too flat. No mention of Duck? How did Don have flashbacks of his birth? Sloppy way to frame some backstory. Sterling's overdubbed "Don't touch the Stoli" seemed to come out of nowhere, and was quite anachronistic for the time.

Bunchoffives recently posted an article concerning the accuracy of some of the minor things in Mad Men. Seems they're not quite as spot-on as they would have you think. The first thing I found wrong when starting the series was the use of mid seventies era IBM Selectrics in the office. (I'm a typewriter nerd, so I spotted that one easily.) Another thing was in a second season episode, there is a stack of new Lucky Strike cartons sitting on the table. I guess Don jumped 45 years into the future and bought some Luckies at an outrageously inflated price.

I thought it was fantastic. I've waited way to long for the return of this excellent series. I for one (no big surprise, here) found the "Fire Alarm" scene, brilliant. SPOILER ALERT: Don is about to get busy in his room with the usual blonde fare and Sal is about to have his dreams fulfilled with the bellhop, when the fire alarm goes off!

I disagree with your assessment that Sal's scene was "jarringly graphic". There have been scenes that have been equally "jarring" on this show between heterosexuals, and no one batted an eyelash. Talk around the office water cooler at work, thought it was brilliant the way it was all played out.
 
I disagree with your assessment that Sal's scene was "jarringly graphic". There have been scenes that have been equally "jarring" on this show between heterosexuals, and no one batted an eyelash. Talk around the office water cooler at work, thought it was brilliant the way it was all played out.

I'd have to agree with that. Don's "negotiating" with Bobbie Barrett in the lobby of a restaurant wasn't jarringly graphic? Joan's encounter with her fiance wasn't jarringly graphic? Not too mention the countless other, admittedly more vanilla, liaisons on the show.
 
My thoughts were that the subtext in Don's non-comment to Sal on the airplane was brilliant. Typical Don Draper. It's put away, no one will know except Don and be sure it will be used when needed and done so with a lift of Don's brow. Also, that Don would never judge anyone...if there is anyone in he world with ghosts its Don Draper. Unfortunately, those he is able to manipulate don't have the same insight we do.

I think that they had Christina Hendricks wearing a bit more padding than usual too. Maybe its the show having been away so long, or me just having seen how absolutely incredibly built she is in the latest Esquire issue, but the side shots of her rang phoney...she was way too thick.

See here:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_B4lVVtzSWe8/SndovOylnMI/AAAAAAAAAVI/keZkJp1zixQ/s400/03-christina-hendricks-***-0909-lg.jpg

proxy.php

proxy.php
 
I thought it was fantastic. I've waited way to long for the return of this excellent series. I for one (no big surprise, here) found the "Fire Alarm" scene, brilliant. SPOILER ALERT: Don is about to get busy in his room with the usual blonde fare and Sal is about to have his dreams fulfilled with the bellhop, when the fire alarm goes off!

I disagree with your assessment that Sal's scene was "jarringly graphic". There have been scenes that have been equally "jarring" on this show between heterosexuals, and no one batted an eyelash. Talk around the office water cooler at work, thought it was brilliant the way it was all played out.

I'd have to agree with that. Don's "negotiating" with Bobbie Barrett in the lobby of a restaurant wasn't jarringly graphic? Joan's encounter with her fiance wasn't jarringly graphic? Not too mention the countless other, admittedly more vanilla, liaisons on the show.

Sorry guys, gay make out sex and under the pants wanking is pretty jarringly graphic for me, at least for basic cable. I'm sorry I'm not that "progressive". :rolleyes:

I'm so burned out by regular hetero sex scenes on TV that you would pretty much have to show extreme penetration close ups for me to find it graphic. :biggrin:
 
Bunchoffives recently posted an article concerning the accuracy of some of the minor things in Mad Men. Seems they're not quite as spot-on as they would have you think. The first thing I found wrong when starting the series was the use of mid seventies era IBM Selectrics in the office. (I'm a typewriter nerd, so I spotted that one easily.) Another thing was in a second season episode, there is a stack of new Lucky Strike cartons sitting on the table. I guess Don jumped 45 years into the future and bought some Luckies at an outrageously inflated price.

Yabbut, that bottle of glue, that I haven't seen since like 1972, sitting on Peggy's desk was AWESOME...it grabbed my eye immediately.
 
I think expectations for Season 3 of Mad Men are extremely high. But I also think it is best not to expect that the first episode of the new season is going to be jam-packed with high drama: This is a show about subtlety - building a story arc over the course of a full season. If you want to have your emotional strings yanked relentlessly every episode - stick with Brothers and Sisters or similar drivel.

Mad Men does sort of set itself up for nit-picking on the historical accuracy front. I read recently that the writers actually dug up period commuter train schedules so Don could catch the right train to Ossining; and that the choice of TWA for the airline that took Don and Sal to Baltimore caused a moment of creative tension (Weiner wanted, for whatever reason, the carrier to be Eastern Airlines - but they didn't fly 707s between New York and Baltimore at that time.) While we appreciate the historical accuracy, we also have to recognize that the odd slipup is going to occur.

My favorite moment from Sundays episode: Sal's pen leaking all over his shirt.
 
Sorry guys, gay make out sex and under the pants wanking is pretty jarringly graphic for me, at least for basic cable. I'm sorry I'm not that "progressive". :rolleyes:

I'm so burned out by regular hetero sex scenes on TV that you would pretty much have to show extreme penetration close ups for me to find it graphic. :biggrin:

Yet, you reference TALES OF THE CITY and QUEER AS FOLK in your post. :001_huh: I assume you've watched these? :001_rolle
 
I was kind of disappointed with the season premiere. Something just seemed "missing". I also found Sal's romantic liaison at the hotel jarringly graphic for the series. This isn't Tales of The City or Queer as Folk and apparently I'm not the only one that felt it was out of place.

That was nothing.. apparently, you haven't been watching BROTHERS AND SISTERS? :lol: like it or not, there's an audience they have to compete for..
 
Top Bottom