[minckster]

Besides its obvious concern for details, Mad Men had a great "look & feel" and compelling, if troubling, realism, but I may give up after the lack of an interesting storyline in this episode. I don't care about the wife or whatever medical or psychological problem she's having. (It looked a little like petit mal seizures to me.) The hopeless crush of the secretary on the newlywed is only slightly more interesting.

The focus of Mad Men should be on the Mad men and not their wives. Give us some back stabbing politics, while showing the dynamics of teamwork leading to successful ad campaigns, and the natural conflict between the two. I.e., focus on the relationships among the Mad men and women at the office. There's no need to leave out the smoking, drinking, and occasionally-successful skirt chasing though.

I liked the way they never explained the unnamed secretary sobbing in the bathroom - and then showed our heroine secretary (she with the crush) not doing the same. Anytime a writer doesn't resort to women breaking down in hysterical fits of sobbing is good by me!

So is the firm's token Italian Mad-man gay or not gay? He pegs the meter on my admittedly faulty gaydar, but he threw some curve balls tonight. Was he just closeting a little better?

 

[PJO1966]

The closets were closed much tighter back then. He's definitely gay, but hides it well enough so that his clueless co-workers don't figure it out.

 

[Bill Reeves]

So in the first episode, I was shocked at how sexist the workplace was. I don't doubt that it's true, but it was still jarring to see.

In this one, I was shocked at what the kids could do. Playing with plastic bags? Bouncing around in the car, going over the divider from the front to the back? It shouldn't be shocking, I mean, I did stuff like that growing up in the 70s, but as a relatively new parent, driving without the kid strapped into a five point restraint car seat seems crazy.

I have no doubt that these little touches are what the producers are going for, and they're probably exaggerating them for effect, but it makes you think.

 

[brianric]

In this one, I was shocked at what the kids could do. Playing with plastic bags? Bouncing around in the car, going over the divider from the front to the back? It shouldn't be shocking, I mean, I did stuff like that growing up in the 70s, but as a relatively new parent, driving without the kid strapped into a five point restraint car seat seems crazy.

I have no doubt that these little touches are what the producers are going for, and they're probably exaggerating them for effect, but it makes you think.

What's so shocking? Seat belts were not in cars, no padded dash, etc. I can remember going to the shoe store in the 1950ies and using a shoe fitting fluoroscope. Remember the slogan in the early 60ies nuclear power will be to cheap to meter. You had to have lived in the era to know what's going on. I don't think the producers are exaggerating.

 

[lpamelaa]

So in the first episode, I was shocked at how sexist the workplace was. I don't doubt that it's true, but it was still jarring to see.

In this one, I was shocked at what the kids could do. Playing with plastic bags? Bouncing around in the car, going over the divider from the front to the back? It shouldn't be shocking, I mean, I did stuff like that growing up in the 70s, but as a relatively new parent, driving without the kid strapped into a five point restraint car seat seems crazy.

I have no doubt that these little touches are what the producers are going for, and they're probably exaggerating them for effect, but it makes you think.

You forgot to mention the pregnant smoking woman. That scene cracked me up for the barrage of things we now think are outrageous.

 

[bicker]

Well, it's not that... those things are outrageous -- it isn't just that we think they are -- and the jarring aspect of that is: "How many of the things we don't think twice about today are things that 40 years from now we'll look back and shake our heads in disgust at ourselves for having done?"

 

[bicker]

Incidentally -- we watching Mad Men in HD now on On Demand. Very nice.

 

[dianebrat]

I still think the series has huge potential, and liked the less frenetic way the 2nd episode progressed (especially the '60s life vignettes) but it was clearly not the same amazingly high-caliber of the first.

The first episode was like a symphony by a world class orchestra, seamlessly gliding from piece to piece, this week seemed more "normal" the breaks and plot shifts were more "tv-like"

I still really liked it considering that I could watch this, or "Don't forget the lyrics" type shows in the summer. Mad Men is more my style and preference.

Diane

 

[minckster]

After watching the episode, a doctor friend diagnosed the wife's illness or psychiatric disorder as

Spoiler

MS.

He seems quite confident is his diagnosis. Time will tell.

 

[astrohip]

In this one, I was shocked at what the kids could do. Playing with plastic bags? Bouncing around in the car, going over the divider from the front to the back? It shouldn't be shocking, I mean, I did stuff like that growing up in the 70s, but as a relatively new parent, driving without the kid strapped into a five point restraint car seat seems crazy.

When we were kids and took road trips (this would be early sixties), we would argue over who got the back shelf. This is the flat area above/behind the back seat. It was neato because you could lay down up there. Then another sib would get the back seat. And usually my little dweebo brother would be forced to lay down on the floor, which meant the dreaded "hump".

Aaah, the good ol' days . . .

Incidentally -- we watching Mad Men in HD now on On Demand. Very nice.

What!?! It's in SD in the original AMC broadcast, but HD in VOD?

 

[PJO1966]

After watching the episode, a doctor friend diagnosed the wife's illness or psychiatric disorder as

Spoiler

MS.

He seems quite confident is his diagnosis. Time will tell.

That was my guess as well, but I'm not a doctor.

 

[bicker]

What!?! It's in SD in the original AMC broadcast, but HD in VOD?

That's correct.

 

[cheesesteak]

I hope they make the next episode interesting.

 

[ElJay]

I hope they make the next episode interesting.

Me too. It's a bit early for a series to be having self-absorbed episodes like this one.

 

[mwhip]

Really enjoying this show but I wish they would re purpose it on either HDnet or Universal HD because I can tell it would look absolutely gorgeous in HD.

 

[TiVo'Brien]

Me too. It's a bit early for a series to be having self-absorbed episodes like this one.

I think maybe they're taking a page from The Sopranos and doing a lot of story line building before the payoff. If so, we could be in for more than one of these episodes.

Either way, I still enjoy the show. Gotta love the mother's non-reaction to the girl wearing the dry cleaning bag.

I was sickened by the psychiatrist's violation of the doctor-patient privilege, feeding all the private details to the husband. :down: I have no doubt that that was not uncommon in those days, though. With attitudes about women like we see in this show, it's no wonder the Women's Lib movement came about ten years later.

 

[bicker]

Heck, it's summer. As long as it is HD, I'll give it a chance.

 

[mwhip]

Heck, it's summer. As long as it is HD, I'll give it a chance.

I did some looking up and it is only available in HD if you have onDemand...which I don't.

 

[minckster]

I did some looking up and it is only available in HD if you have onDemand...which I don't.

Link: http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6454890.html

 

[mwhip]

Link: http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6454890.html

I have DirecTV they have no on demand type service.