Skip to main content

Mad Men

In the midst of the Gladiatorial games which are reality television, it is interesting to see some very good dramas appearing. I never managed to watch 6 Feet Under, or The Sopranos, but I am watching the new one on AMC, Mad Men. Set in 1960 in a Madison Avenue ad agency, it really has a filmic quality to it.

It starts with the opening credits--an animated sequence capturing both the glitz and the despair--worthy of a Hitchcock or some of the other amazing animated sequences of the 1960's. It's even shot like a film. A power struggle moment is shot so that the main character is framed between the underling and the boss. It's shot slightly below eye level so we're looking up at his face in the V between their bodies. Fantastic! The look is amazing, and nothing has been smoothed over. Everyone smokes, every moment. The bosses drink at lunch, pinch, ogle and proposition the secretaries. The only black faces are in restrooms and driving the cars and doing the lawns. They even got Robert Morse (of "How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying" among others) as the big and really wacky boss (a Japanophile, he makes everyone take off their shoes when they enter his office). And everyone is competitive, and everyone has secrets. The veneer of happiness is very thin.

It has been suggested that this is looking at the past through mud-tinted glasses, not allowing the real mix of nice people and nice things to show through, but that wouldn't make for good drama, now would it? In one brilliant moment a little girl runs to her mother with a plastic bag on her head and her mother, (a good mother by the standards of the time), cigarette in hand says, "If I find the dry-cleaning that was in that bag on the floor, you're in big trouble. Now go play." (How did any of us Gen-Xers live through our childhoods? Jungle gyms on concrete, our teachers smoking at the edge of the building).

It's a study in class and wealth, in privilege and race. And it's all going to explode--you just know it.

I was thinking how I don't find myself watching reruns as much as I used to. I really do believe that television writing is becoming better and better--not just on the cable stations, but on the networks as well. I'm not sure when it started--perhaps with Twin Peaks, when Lynch proved that audiences would tune in each week for tiny clues. Even with the daytime soaps and the night time soaps of the 80's you really didn't have to be there each week. In the daytime enough would be repeated to catch up, and at night some things might build, but they weren't really necessary to still enjoy J.R. getting shot. The X-Files, Babylon-5, shows where episodes were defined by whether they were "Arc" stories (meaning clues in the big mystery) or non-Arc, (stand alone's). But those were "genre" series, meaning watched by trainspotting nerds so not part of the bigger demographic, or so the studios thought.

I still watch shows without arcs, House, Bones, etc. but more and more I'm finding them less satisfying.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Driving in Boston

Inching along in a log jam of traffic yesterday on the Mass Pike I watched an Audi a few cars in front of me weave in and out of traffic determined to find the lane that was "moving" and yet for the whole half an hour that we sat there he ended up still only a few cars ahead of me. Sure there were times his lane pulled ahead, but then mine would catch up and he would switch back. The only thing he accomplished was to make the line that much slower. There was a great article that a friend sent me years ago on the physics of traffic and it has been determined that weaving in and out of tight traffic will really gain you nothing and in fact cause the very blockages that you believe you are defying. (Sidenote--an unfortunately side effect of so much of interest on the internet is that it is impossible to store all of the articles that interest you over the years in the vague belief that you will someday want to reference them to others) The article also pointed out that if all d…

Adapting a book--The Prestige

I was completely blown away by the movie of The Prestige, and I thought then about reading the novel, but it seemed too soon. So I carried the author's name around with me for over a year (Christopher Priest) and then, finally remembered to buy it through an odd sequence of events. We watched The Painted Veil based on the novel by Maugham starring Edward Norton, and while I decided I didn't want to read The Painted Veil because of it's differences from the film (which was more romantic and tragic) it reminded me that I had wanted to read Fight Club (the movie version of which starred Edward Norton) and that reminded me that I had wanted to read The Prestige (which did not star Edward Norton, but was up against The Illusionist which did). Whew...so it's all Edward Norton's fault.

The Prestige is a very good novel, and yet, the movie differs from it considerably. And I am still trying to figure out what exactly that means. The central premise is the same, AND HER…

The end of Cloud Atlas

Feel I must write this--promised it to myself, can I finish before midnight (when I said I would go to bed at 11)?

Where was I?

Oh, yes, section 5, where it gets interesting--because it's the future, at least 25 years, hopefully more. I say hopefully, because I don't want to be living in this future. The section is called "An Orison of Sonmi-451." An Orison (I had to look it up, proving I don't remember my Shakespeare) is a prayer, but in this future world where language has taken as many turns as in Orwell's 1984, it is more a confession or final statement. Sonmi-451 is a clone (as the name might suggest). The section is not entirely original. It owes much to Brave New World and Phillip K. Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (made into the film Bladerunner). I find it interesting that 40 or so years ago--when Dick wrote his book he believed that future slaves would be Androids, replicants. Now we are much more likely to presume they will be clones,…