FTA-TV Mad Men

Remove this Banner Ad

BusinessMan said:
Not if she managed her finances well enough.
Click to expand...
Being a partner she'd be responsible for paying a lot of the companies debts and payouts and the like. Remember when Pete was flipping out about having to tip in $50k?
 
I've been enjoying Mad Men from the very start on my newly acquired Showtime channel.

I haven't watched the first series in years. It was so GOOD at the start!

I guess I'm another that just doesn't think the last 2 seasons have been anywhere near as good.
 
ManWithNoName said:
Being a partner she'd be responsible for paying a lot of the companies debts and payouts and the like. Remember when Pete was flipping out about having to tip in $50k?
Click to expand...

Thats true, but being a partner she has the opportunity to sell out at any time and I don't think she has unlimited liability so her losses could be mitigated. Not to mention she would have Don/ Roger there to bail her out if she wanted to.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Richo83 said:
I'm curious why people think this.
Click to expand...

In re-watching the whole show (I finished the 7th ep of season 7 about 2 weeks ago), I think the reason I don't like the recent episodes as much as the newer ones is because the older shows are more complex, there's more going on, and there's more to think about. And beyond that, Don is obviously the main character in the show - but I never thought the show was really about him for the first 4(ish) seasons.

The show was about feminism, the rise of women, and Don's inability to control/adjust to it (ie. the white, upper class males inability).

This became much more overt with the introduction of Megan - Don went from being a man failing to adjust to a new world and just became the cliche mid life crisis character; then Sylvia's introduction almost went away from "the rise of feminism" and really, really beat us over the head showing us the Don Draper that they wanted us to see. That series almost felt like the whole show was on hold as they padded it out to 7 seasons and made sure everyone really, really understood the Don that they wanted us to understand before it went into the finale.

Which makes sense in a way - since the show ended, I think people's major curiosity is what happens to Don. It's hard to conclude "what happened with feminism" because we still don't live in an equal society, so it's almost 'how long is a piece of string' - so Don has really become a means to a conclusion as Betty and Joan have much smaller parts, and Peggy has quite a different part to what she used to (it's a bigger part, but she doesn't "do" as much). Still, the fact I can understand the reasoning doesn't change my view that it's become a lesser show.

Don't get me wrong - I still love it, it's still one of only 4-5 shows I watch, and I'm excited for the finale. I just might've been more excited if, after 4 seasons, they announced there was one more and they wrapped it up.
 
nobbyiscool said:
snip
Click to expand...


I realise that arguing about tv shows is pointless, but here goes. I don't think the show was just about feminism and Don's inability to adjust, I think it has a wider scope and a lot of its characters and relationships fall out of the range of feminist issues. Don and Roger's relationship has never really been about feminism. The problem with constantly honing in on feminism is that as Peggy has established herself professionally, it doesn't make that much sense for her to still face the struggles she faced in the early seasons. She still faces problems, but less problems and they manifest in a different way.

I think Don's life has just spiraled into what it would always become. We saw signs when he was with Betty, I don't think the writers have changed from wanting to show Don as struggling to cope to wanting to show how much of a jerk he was, he's always been both. It's just that inertia took him to this place. This is what happens when you struggle to connect emotionally with people. The acting, set design, writing, pacing is still there. The biggest difference for me is that they've replaced Betty with Megan, Betty isn't a great character, but Megan is an empty shell. Other than that it's the same to me. In fact I like watching Peggy the professional as opposed to the first season when she was just a secretary.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Richo83 said:
I realise that arguing about tv shows is pointless
Click to expand...

On the contrary, isn't it one of the best things about a show like Mad Men? That we can watch the same view but take something completely different out of it?
 
MV5BMjMwNzk5Nzg2OV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMjg1OTk1NDE@._V1_SX640_SY720_.jpg
 
nobbyiscool said:
On the contrary, isn't it one of the best things about a show like Mad Men? That we can watch the same view but take something completely different out of it?
Click to expand...

Yeh - That is what is good about Jon Hamm' s acting - the less is more approach leaves a space for ambiguity
 
Don't know why it took me so long but I finally got around to Mad Men & watched season 1 last week, knew nothing about it other than it was to do with advertising (maybe that's why I put it off for so long;) ) & have to say it is impressive if a little slow at times. Wont be reading any threads to avoid spoilers & I assume that given it has lasted so long, it maintains the standard set in S1.

Worth a look if you have been thinking about it.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

FTA-TV Mad Men

Similar threads

AdelaideGT
X-Men 97
2 3
Replies
63
Views
3K
peternorth
P

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top