Awesome.

Slattery was killing it in the meeting.

And between this week and last, Peggy has turned into a right ****.

It's not even true that she doesn't miss Don. She's miserable and stifled under Lou.

And

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/4-28-2014/O4GeHl.gif

Really good ep.

I figured she'd be thrilled to have him back. She hates Lou.

We shouldn't have to be burdened with that.

That's why we have network executives and advertising and 24 hour news...

I'm not happy with the new episodes. I'm just not enjoying them like the previous seasons for some reason. Can't put my finger on it just yet.

Its called.... the '70s

Ginsburg has a new show on NBC.

2nd 2001 reference in 2 weeks.

Last week the elevator in the dimensions and jet black coloring of the monolith, and the self-same title of the episode.
This week Lou and Curtis speaking behind glass where you see their lips move but hear nothing but the hum of the computer.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/8R8ydoPHfrY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Last night's episode was IN-SANE.

Between the throwback to Anna Draper's family, Megan's attempt to spice up the marital bed and the power move Don pulled.

Oh man.

And I'm a sucker for Cristin Millioti, so I'll give Ginsberg's show a shot if it doesn't get canceled within a day like the Jerry O'Connell and Tony Shaloub show did.

"The Moon belongs to everyone."

Love that ending.... up there with Carousel.

Jon Hamm acts the shit out of that scene.

The actual finale has a tough act to follow.

Hey fellas - Mad Men is back.

Thoughts? It's kinda feeling like Wiener may be pushing this ever so gently down the path of a fairly happy ending for most parties, which surprises me a great deal.

I mean hell, Don's unlikely to ever really have an epiphany and become an upstanding family man, but really - that's probably not happy for Don. Honestly, he looks to be heading down the same path as Roger Sterling. He's avoiding a fair number of purely self-destructive tendencies at this point and has re-established himself as a critical part of the agency. His talent wouldn't have vanished so he'll likely occupy that corner suite for as long as he can keep from blowing himself out of the water.

At this point it just looks like Don's gonna Don. I still can't stand Peggy - uptight, militantly unhappy shrew is pretty much gonna be an uptight militantly unhappy shrew. Whatever.

I feel like this season is pretty much going to be an episode to episode 'wrapup' of various characters/storylines. Wiener has put too much thought/artistry into these characters to simply drop a bomb with a couple episodes left and walk away. Perhaps someone will fall out of that window still but I don't see it and frankly would be a little disappointed by it.

Episode was okay. But holy shit... I actually got this since of nostalgic well being when the opening music came on. It was so weird.

I think we will lose 2 main characters before it's over, not including Don. I think Don ends up washed up somewhere. But I bet Roger kicks the bucket - car crash? And Pete suicide?

Ken Cosgrove was my favorite bit character.. And it looks like he's about to become more awesome.

The Cosgrove revenge play was by far my favorite part of the episode, besides the waitress reading John Dos Passos.

Trying to figure Elizabeth Reaser's casting there.

Was it just her passing resemblance to Maggie Siff?
Is she starting a more substantial arc?
Has her star power fallen far enough that she's a one-off guest star type now?

*clicks into thread excited to talk about Mad Men again*

*sees misogynistic post about Peggy*

*loses enthusiasm*

The Dos Passos mention should make up for it.

You might be a little fragile for this world.

No kidding. I don't even feel like I was being that hard on her.

I didn't care for season six at all because it was pretty much nothing but Don wandering about, sabotaging himself. I didn't care for the year that Roger spent out there walking the wilderness and trying to escape who he is and what he enjoys. Pete's self-loathing is part of who he is and it's the most grating thing about him.

I don't like Peggy because she's pretty much spent the last 5 seasons being pissed off at everything. She shits on her co-worker for just trying to be friendly (dude's happily married; he isn't even putting a move on her) and then after enjoying herself, goes right back to being angry at the world, including Stan, and running away from the fact that she had a great time.

Like I said, she's just a militantly unhappy person and has been for a long while. If I call her an uptight, militantly unhappy asshole, will that make you feel better, Reaper? Because apart from very brief dalliances with enjoying herself, that's who she is. And whenever she finds herself in a positive place, she almost scolds herself for it before reverting back to angry Peggy.

Well, not really, because "uptight" and "militant" are just as much dog-whistle terms as "shrew" is.

Also, I don't think this show has ever been concerned with asking us to "like" anybody. You see Peggy as [apparently well-meaning use of every term ever used to diminish a woman with ambition], while I see her as a generally awesome person who I want to root for but who gets in her own way...but that difference isn't as important as the causes/pressures that lead her to be who she is. I think those things are the same, even if we have differing views on how likable she is.

Speaking of misogyny: the scene with Peggy and Joan meeting with the guys was ridiculously over the top and heavy handed.

It felt like a scene that would happen a few seasons back rather than now. Season premiers tend to do some re-establishing of things for the sake of viewers who are tuning in for the first time, and that's what that scene felt like to me.

I read that Wiener had to caricaturize it because it needed to pop against the already misogynistic atmosphere of the show.

I use militant in any number of settings. It's my extreme form of 'obstinate'. Militantly ignorant is probably my favorite usage of same. By all means, look it up - your desire to lug a cross on your back is not going to be a concern of mine in my word usage.

And is Peggy not uptight?

Peggy is an obstinately unhappy, restive asshole. Am I getting closer to verbiage that you find acceptable given Peggy's anatomy?

Jesus.

That scene should not be divorced from Cosgrove's assessment of their firm as a hellhole of Black Irish assholes.

I have a lot of empathy with Peggy, but it's hard to overlook that she is the most stringently classist in the separation of art and copy from creative. It might be a function of her being most interactive with the art and copy crew and a supervisor of sorts, but it's pretty blatant.

She's alway putting them in their place with her 'don't you have some mock-ups due on my desk' and 'stop goofing around [/South Park] and get back to work.'

Man, I can't know what your personal vocab tendencies are. There's a specific rhetorical context for the words you used concerning women. My point is simply that, to use an analog here, that those words all together paint a pretty easy-to-read picture, and that you'd be better off knowing that just in case that's not the picture you were trying to present.

Like, if someone describes a black male character as "well-spoken, agile, flying in the face of authority" then I'd raise an eyebrow at "well-spoken" but conclude that it wasn't used in the way that it has historically been used in the context of describing certain African-Americans. But if someone describes a black male character as "well-spoken, uppity, & athletic like a monkey" -- even if complimentary -- that will raise all of the red flags. There's little chance of me reading dog whistle terms like that all in a row and concluding it was coincidental.

Which has always read to me like her feeling she has to be a hardass at the workplace in order to garner any respect. As if she's not afforded the ability to be "the nice boss" or "the caring boss." The player's coach isn't an option for her, or at least she doesn't think so. This show continually reinforces the idea that climbing the ladder, as a woman, tend to harden you because of all the sexist shit you have to endure.

My main issue with both Peggy and Joan (and I'm playing off memory here because I haven't gone back and rewatched all the seasons) is that they both showed a remarkable lack of loyalty toward Don. That being said, I'm not sure that Don is really worthy of that much loyalty, and I think it's also meant to emphasize that a woman has to be double Machiavellian to succeed in this world... but that just made me dislike both of them at certain points in the series.

That being said, I generally like both of the characters now. I just remember being pissed at them a couple of times.

I wonder what McCann thinks of their portrayal?

Yup. It was great to be back.

Joan is kind of a dumbass. She's a millionaire who became one by ****ing a whale client, so when she judges Draper, it's pretty humorous. When she stood there clueless about what to do about the topaz account, it took Draper all of 5 seconds to formulate a strategy. She should go back to herding secretaries.

I think Joan's character is supposed to make us feel sympathetic toward the limited options available to the women in that era. No matter how high she rises, she always knows that at the end, she got there thanks to prostitution. That's the irony of Peggy's line about her wealth. Peggy means it as a reminder that she doesn't have to do this, but for Joan its a reminder of her inability to rise in the corporate structure through any means other than sex. She's smart as hell, but her abilities lie in operations, not in accounts.

Excellent Post!

I also feel that they spoon fed us so much of the "Life not otherwise lived" theme - like we got it already and then they had to go and vocalize it.

The Joan /Peggy / Mcann scene was so cartoonish I have just been laughing thinking as if I could say those things to women today - would be awesome (and is awesome in the context of anonymous posting apps)

Overall Happy to be back, but also ready to wrap this ship up - Don't disappoint me weiner

Jesus.

Don is worth millions in an era where millions actually meant something.

Outside of Don's demons, he could live anywhere in world very comfortably so if he washes up anywhere, it's on a tropical beach,

I think it was typical of that era. I saw it as a child when I was five in 1970 and it's stuck with me ever since.

If anything, I think the scene was understated.

But Don doesn't want to retire. He needs to work. He'll end up on the Pollo Hermanos account in Albuquerque.

I just can't imagine the constant sexual innuendo to women. Maybe it's because I'm southern and was raised in a conservative christian household, but damn... we might have made off color jokes and had a locker room humor with the boys, but certainly not right to a lady's face.

I get it. I couldn't believe it when I saw and heard it with my own eyes. Fortunately, times have changed.

Yep. IMO, they've stretched out too far already. As I've probably stated earlier, I didn't need to see Betty, her weigh battle, her husband and his overbearing mother, nor did I really need to see Don's relationship with his daughter (while his relationship with his sons isn't even a footnote).

Six more episodes. Hope it doesn't disappoint.

Betty and the kids have always been the worst part of the show.

Agreed. I never understood the reason for their participation in the show, especially since Don is almost never shown with his boys.

I think Weiner has a large deal of empathy for the kids since he's said in early interviews that the show is inspired in part on experiences of him & his parents. So he continues to write scenes for them even though his story outgrew that particular household.

Personally, I've always found Sally's storyline throughout the series (and Kiernan Shipka's performance, of a different energy than most of the other cast members') to be one of the parts of Mad Men that I'm most drawn to.

I think she's a phenomenal actress with an incredibly bright future, but I can't help but "sigh" every time they shift to her, Betty and her new husband. I'd rather see more of Pete, Joan, Don, Roger and most of all, Harry.

The "Media Guy" is essential to ad agencies beginning in the late 60's (and of course, indispensable today), so for me, I'd have liked to see more of his character as opposed to Don's former family.

I keep waiting for the show to get around to Harry's eventual takeover of agency importance but it doesn't happen. I'm guessing he'll be something like king shit by the time the finale ends.

Not a fan of Megan anymore...

Well, now you've seen Harry. What a king sized fail.

That answers that.

You all realize the entire show was a figment of Dick Whitman's imagination as he lies dying in Korea. :p

Dick's snow globe. Or Dick's Jacob's Ladder.

Jesus. What a money grubbing twat. How the hell did Don ruin her life? He set her ass up and gave her free reign to pursue her career.

And then she thought the check was a practical joke or something AFTER he made a point that he'd take care her financially.

There's a reason why nobody likes the Quebecois.

Everyone is proving to be shallow and phony. Maybe Winer's intention is to make the audience revile everyone but Don by the time the series is over.

On a side note, a friend shared some pics of Hamm the night before he entered rehab and good grief, what a disaster. That coupled with the revelation that he severely beat a kid during a hazing incident is really hurting his public persona.

I can imagine that playing Don Draper would drive one to drink. Hell, the show makes me feel okay about drinking more than normal when I'm immersed in it (I binge watched the series over a month last year) because they normalize it so much. I've actually thought to myself "i don't drink that much. I mean. At least not like those guys on Mad Men."

I started smoking more frequently after binging the first few seasons..

I could maybe see that in the begonia but seven years later? Personally, I think it's because Mad Men is coming to an end and every thing else Hamm has done has been met with disinterest.

I started having more and more meaningless affairs

That's not nice.

He had a great turn on Kimmy Schmidt

Perfect example

Why?

Little known Netflix show as opposed to toplining a major AMC cable network show. His Disney film was a flop and people are running the other way from him.

It's nice that Tina Fey didn't reject him but it that was long before rehab.

AMC wished it were Netflix before Mad Men and Breaking Bad came along.

OitNB, House of Cards, Daredevil. They're putting out quality work and people notice. Cable is grandpa land. Netflix carries over a third of all internet traffic. Not to mention HBO Now and Hulu and the like.

Going from a star turn to a streaming service isn't exactly climbing the ladder.

What studio is going to bank on Hamm as a lead performer again?

That's not his only gig, and streaming original content isn't exactly regional dinner theater. Kevin flipping Spacey is on the same service, in a high profile manner.

I'm sure also that SNL would be more than glad give him a shot in the arm if things were that dire. He's already in what, the 5-timers club.

Bruce Willis was in flipping Hudson Hawk. RDJr was drunk in some stranger's kid's bedroom.

Don's probably going to die, but I could also see him and Megan giving it one last shot.

Don will end up happily ever after with Peggy before he'll get back with Megan.

She gone.

of course a big Hollywood guy like you knows it was an NBC show that was sold off to Netflix after production

Yup - they're going to go with the 'loose end of the week' approach.

Cosgrove and Meagan were fairly easy to dispatch. I suspect we'll see something happen with Chaough because they can probably tie him off fairly easily. Hell, we might have just gotten as much of a Betty sendoff as we're likely to get (and as much as we need). There's nowhere near enough time for them to waste any more of it on Megan.

They're narrowing the focus as it winds down and that's exactly what they needed to do. They really can't put a bow on Don, Roger, Joan, Pete or Peggie but they could essentially point them in a direction and send them down the road. Maybe Don or Peggy get called to the 'big leagues' by McCann or something. Maybe Roger calls it a career.

Of course but what does that have to do with Jon Hamm's falling star? BTW, NBC Universal still owns the show, they just chose to bypass airing it on NBC.

His Disney movie underperformed at the box office, then he hit rehab, then it was revealed he helped to beat a guy to a pulp as part of a hazing ritual at the University of Texas.

This is not exactly his shining moment.

I had never even heard of his Disney movie. I'm not sure what genius cast a man known for his drinking and womanizing character as a lead in a kids movie. Based on the reviews I read, Hamm was not the problem.

I've seen the movie. Hamm was just Hamm. Having seen him in various roles, it's hard for me to see him as anyone other than John Hamm, who most people believe to be Don Draper.

He has limited acting ability and it will be difficult for him to find success, IMO.

It's the Tony Soprano syndrome.

I want to agree with this post in spirit, because I do think that Hamm is dramatically limited in certain ways (even though I think he's pretty great as Don Draper). And I want to agree somewhat with the idea that actors known for a lead TV role that becomes a cultural phenomenon won't ascend past that level of success. Because I recognize how James Gandolfini never climbed higher, and the same is going to be said for Bryan Cranston. Age is a factor too, and Hamm is young enough to break that mold. But it looks like he won't.

But I can't agree with what's actually written in the post. Hamm's comedic roles can't be discounted here. And Gandolfini was not a limited actor. That dude was capable of tremendous work, most of which was less showy than Tony Soprano.

I agree that Gandolfini wasn't a limited actor, not in the least. But it was difficult for him to escape Tony Soprano, which is why his last film (unfortunately) was so different, yet effective. Enough time had passed that he could finally escape that persona, then sadly, he passed away.

As for Hamm, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I just haven't seen any range from him. It's just a variation of John Hamm, even in his comedic bits.