Mad Men.

Thanks for that, saved me from having to articulate the same feeling ;) A very selfish young man, he is, but I couldn't help agreeing with him when he left his brother to explain their mother's financial situation after he'd leaked the potential adoption news. What a family! :p
 
Yes, if Roger had just done a Jolson impression without putting shoe polish on his face it would have been much like turning up to a party today in a Boy George costume. But the blackface shocked me too. It really surprised me to hear that the Black and White minstrel show was still being broadcast up to 1978. In the States minstrel routines started to be seen as old fashioned by the 1950s. After the civil rights movement blackface was regarded as racist. TV stations cut out minstrel routines from old musical films before they screened them. In the early 70s I watched an episode of All in the Family in which Archie Bunker put shoe polish on his face for a minstrel show routine at his local lodge and he was criticised by his daughter and son in law. It was very appropriate for the show because the character of Archie Bunker was notorious for making racist comments. Personally when I was a small child blackface puzzled me - I couldn't understand why a white (and Jewish) performer like Jolson would want to put makeup on his face and look black. It's not so much the makeup that offenRAB people I think, it's the association with the stereotyped way that black people were portrayed for many years in American entertainment. I still don't understand why a minstrel show appealed to British audiences. Okay, the Black and White Minstrel show had great production values, nice music, pretty girls in lovely dresses and very talented performers, but why did they put on blackface?
 
I appreciate all the points you are making and are quite right - but my argument still stanRAB to a certain extent. John Hamm is under option to Mad Men for a limited period of time and for him to do more will involve Lionsgate paying him significantly more money than he gets now. And I can't really see Mad Men without him. Indeed, the same applies for all the core cast.

Lionsgate may want to be as bullish as they like, but the competition between AMC, HBO, Showtime and now Starz is becoming increasingly intense, and p*ssing off creative geniuses like MW won't do them any favours.
 
Just another vote for how great this series has been, though I keep getting the feeling that the Mad Men journey will be more interesting than the destination i.e. I don't think it's going to have a big finish when it enRAB...

Do we think that another year or two of story time will have passed at the start of season 3 the way it did between seasons 1 & 2? One way or another, JFK's assassination has to be a turning point. And yes, what was Pete doing with that rifle? (No, I'm not implying he'll be the 2nd gunman!)

Elizabeth Moss was amazing in that final scene as Peggy, though the flashback scene earlier in the series when she woke up in hospital with Don sitting by her bed was my favourite. Now they're in adjoining offices I hope we see more of Don & Peggy's relationship, nothing sexual, just that their unspoken bond is one of the lynchpins of the story for me...

And I'm also wondering if the hidden story of the whole series might actually be Women's Liberation, focussing on Betty (the perfect housewife fighting to break free of what she's starting to see as a straitjacket), Joan (career girl marrying an abusive/rapist husband) and Peggy (forsaking family for her career.)

Yes, thinking too much - again! :)
 
YAYYYYYY

I thought we were going to have to wait a year like last time and would be way into next year before it came on.

Makes staying away from all the episode discussion on FB easier to handle now.

Very happy and joining in with the charleston dancing celebration.
 
I know that Don would not have able to have been the main caregiver to the children due to his work, but Betty could have at least allowed him to stay with the children and Carla in the house until she got back, making it less hard on the children.
 
I've just caught up on the second episode and it's been really interesting to read all the recent posts - particularly the ones concerning the Guardian's criticism.

I do take ddarko's point that it's a style that not everyone will enjoy but how can someone who has watched the shows (as I presume Gareth McLean has) criticise it for being hollow and merely pretty to watch?

Just thinking of some of the scenes in the last episode such as Pete not knowing how to grieve, Don's anger at having to release a client, Peggy with her family - dealing with the baby and having to go to church, the party and Joan's comments to Paul about his girlfriend and so on. Fantastic, thought provoking stuff!

I'll accept 'slow' at a pinch but definitely not shallow and I strongly object to the implication of 'smugness' because I am one of the cool ones!
 
The latest series shown on BBC 4 is progressing wonderfully well and the intertwining of romance, intrigue and suspicion is immaculately done.

Looking forward to tomorrow night's episode and can only hope Suzanne appears in it as much as Betty, both are so beautiful! The facade is cracking for the man of the moment, Don which will be interesting to see.
 
My supervisor at university used to wear Italian suits, and his wedding ring took up a whole knuckle :D
Men in suits and trilbys make me swoon :)
I agree, the subtle changes in the fashion and furniture are engrossing- it will be fascinating to see how things change in the Madmen world. I wonder when the series will end- 1968? 1969? It will be fascinating to then go back to the first series and see how the characters change.
 
I am so looking forward to tonight's episode - I normally SKy+ and watch, but this one will have to be "live"!

My only comment re; the Bafta, was no matter how much Mad Men deserved it, I still feel The Wire deserved it more....... They were shining gems in an evening of polished turRAB.
 
In the '60s it was easy to open a bank account without proof of identity. All you needed was proof of your address and maybe an employer reference. They did not have the strict anti-money laundering requirements in place today to open a bank account or similar.
 
Back
Top