Ugh. Brothers & Sisters. I wanted to like that show so badly... but I just couldn't deal with the overwelming smug.

Smug?

I like Jane Espensen, though. Not sure how good a fit she is for Mad Men...

Marti will be writing for Mad Men, not Jane. Jane is with Battlestar.

Smug?

Yeah. Smug. Over-written, over-acted, "witty" dialogue. People moaning about their perfect lives over the perfect glass of chardonnay at the perfect dinner table in the perfect McMansion. It is so glossy, so cute and so in love with itself. If it were chocolate, it would lick itself to death. I like Paul Rhys and Sally Field is great as the over-protective, meddling mom. However, Ally McBeal Does Politics? I hated Calista when she played the anorexic lawyer. Think I'm gonna like her as a political spin-doctor? Think again. Rob Lowe is looking mighty fine for his age, but still -- smug. Smug as all get-out.

Plus the saccharine music which forces the audience to FEEL, to RELATE, to AWWW and AHHH and HA HA HA with every beat of the script. It didn't help that the characters Learned Something Very Important About Themselves and Each Other at the end of every episode.

Oh, and Justin as a shattered Arghanistan marine? That skinny J.Crew model? LOL, please.

Marti will be writing for Mad Men, not Jane. Jane is with Battlestar.

Oops! Actually, Marti might be a better fit.

Edited September 10, 200817 yr by Cat

"Like I said, all flops. Just admit it, Eric. "

Now who's being smug I don't see things as black and white as you do when it comes to beyond the screen talent SHe was a consulting producer for the first half of season one of Prison Break which wasn't exactly a flop. If we're being technical--and to say she worked on all flops and then dismiss her work on Grey's ANatomy as not counting is just moronic Just sayin'

Haha I like Bros and Sis but I admit most of the things you say are what keep me at arm's length from it--if that makes any sense. I enjoy it but I'm *always* aware I'm watching a show (unlike other family framas from Six Feet Under--as stylized as that was--to the Herskovitz/Zwick dramas like Once and Again which on the surface look so cloying but are so well written you--well me--almost forget that you're watching a show by the end).

I think Marti could fit on Mad Men--it is interesting that there seemed to be a conscious choice to hire more femail writers. Whatever her work on it--the last three episodes of the show have been beyond wonderful, each one topping the last. I assume you say baf for her leaving PP because it's a hit? But really I think it was yet another example of a bad fit for Marti--she seems to need a show where she gets a lot of say--you do NOT get a lot of say at Shondra's shows--whereas Mad Men has a reputation for havign a very free and open writer's room and attitude. I can see wy she made the decision (and I'm not just saying that as someone who has zero love for Grey's or PP)

Sylph why don't you like the show (just curious)--is it the slow pace?

 If we're being technical--and to say she worked on all flops and then dismiss her work on Grey's ANatomy as not counting is just moronic Just sayin'

Are you calling me a moron? 

No not at all. We disagree a lot and I think sometimes you see things (or seem to on here) as more black and white than they are--but I'm sure you think lotsa what I say is baseless But you're genuinely one of my fave posters on here and far from moronic. I shouldn't have said that--although I do think you can't say she's only been invovled with flops and then discount her work on a hit series...

Eric, I liked Once & Again, too. In fact, the series is on my Amazon wish list. One of these days, I WILL purchase it!

I didn't find that show smug at all. I think Sela Ward helped to keep it grounded. And the kids -- especially the young girl -- were very real and relatable in that awkward My So-Called Life kind of way. It wasn't about perfect people and their perfect problems.

Anyhoo, back to Mad Men (I'm behind, sorry! Treasuring every show that i tape, though).

Just read the tail-end of this thread and felt the need to ask -- Sylph, why would you ask if Eric called you a moron? I don't think I've ever seen Eric personally attack or insult a poster here. Ever!

We love you and your posts, Sylph. Even when you disagree. Sometimes ESPECIALLY when you disagree. Emotions can get high on this board but a lot of us really wouldn't attack others (over a TV show), implying they are "morons" -- something you most definitely are NOT.

No not at all. We disagree a lot and I think sometimes you see things (or seem to on here) as more black and white than they are--but I'm sure you think lotsa what I say is baseless But you're genuinely one of my fave posters on here and far from moronic. I shouldn't have said that--although I do think you can't say she's only been invovled with flops and then discount her work on a hit series...

I am not dismissing her work; I have already said that I say all this as a fan. But, honestly, those were all flops. Either cancelled, either bad shows, either she left in a feud. Flops. And her work on a "hit series" can be dismissed: she had very little creative input, wrote only one episode, produced 14 (either as consulting/supervising or co-exec, whatever), which is just a title given to senior writers and often means very little. Especially when Grey's has a platoon of other important producers like Gordon, Beers, Vernoff (Shonda's right hand and day-to-day chief on the show). So, face it: she was not the crucial element in Anatomy becoming a hit. Not even close.

I like your posts a lot, I really do. But there are two things that bug me: sometimes you seem to intentionally want to offend someone, you just sort of conceal it or try to make it a joke, and your spelling sucks! I mean, use a browser with in-built spell checker!

So... Was that an apology?

Just read the tail-end of this thread and felt the need to ask -- Sylph, why would you ask if Eric called you a moron? I don't think I've ever seen Eric personally attack or insult a poster here. Ever!

We love you and your posts, Sylph. Even when you disagree. Sometimes ESPECIALLY when you disagree. Emotions can get high on this board but a lot of us really wouldn't attack others (over a TV show), implying they are "morons" -- something you most definitely are NOT.

Cat, this is the part:

If we're being technical--and to say she worked on all flops and then dismiss her work on Grey's ANatomy as not counting is just moronic Just sayin'

HAHA my spelling is fine, my typing is atrocious--and I never spell check. You can usually tell the more I get into posting something the worse it gets--a while back I told myself I'd be more careful with this, and I'll try to stick to that.

and yes, that was an apology-- I know it's hard to read tone on here and putting a wink beside something can only cause it to seem all the more catty (no relation to Cat ), which wasn't my intention. I also admit you have the kinda personality on here that makes me a bit competitive and want to impress, which is prob that we share a lot of the same itnerests (my perceived love of shmaltz aside ). I honestly, though, don't think I try to mask my condesension in jokes--I HATE online feuds that get in the way of good conversation and do try to offset them with jokes, etc, to lighten the mood and it prob works less than in should. Honestly if you see me trying to offend someone in a roundabout way send me a PM about it, cuz I'm really not aware of it.

As for the moron line, I stand by what I said, but not the tone it came across. I really didn't intend it to sound like I was implying you were a moron.

Bibel talked about Mad Men again.

Sylph why don't you like the show (just curious)--is it the slow pace?

Period piece. Specifically, 60s piece.

Also, this what Sam Ford posted on Sara A. Bibel's blog describes perfectly how I feel about the show, especially the last three paragraphs:

I was intrigued by your bringing Mad Men up, Sara, and likewise seeing other reader enthusiasm for the show. I likewise am watching Mad Men. Working for a PR company, I've found that the show is generating a lot of buzz in the world I'm getting to know, in part because of the nuanced way it deals not only with gender politics in the workplace but ethical considerations of the business world, most notably the beautiful storyline with Mohawk and American Airlines.

But I was surprised to see your reference to Mad Men as the best soap opera around today. In fact, I feel quite the opposite, more like this person, who describes the show as "deliberately joyless." It's a show with wonderful dialogue, in which every interaction has deeper meaning and every line has multiple possibilities. The show is supremely casted and acted as well. Yet, there's something missing, an emotional dissonance that I believe stems from the fact that they're depicting all that's hollow and unsatisfying about this world of surface prosperity, and thus the viewing experience itself is intentionally unsatisfying as well.

That's great, in one sense, but I find myself not really relating to anyone, and not really caring about any of their fates. To me, Mad Men feels more like anthropological study than soap opera, to use the dichotomy from the linked article above. It feels like a mini-series rather than a long-term serial drama, one that I'm fascinated when watching but spend little time wondering about in between and certainly not a piece where I have the desire to get to know the characters more deeply in any true sense.

I compare this to my favorite show Friday Night LIghts, and the differences are unbelievable. That's not to criticize Mad Men in the least; I think it's setting out to do exactly what it's accomplishing. But the community relations, emotional connections, and social nuance of a show like FNL, and soap opera at its best, stands in stark contrast in my mind to the stylized, muffled, and intentionally emotionally and physically confined world Mad Men inhabits.

Edited September 16, 200817 yr by Sylph

BTW, what a gorgeous pic this is:

SYlph how much have you watched? I think I sorta felt that way for half of season 1 (except I didn't find the experience joyless as that poster does, but rather fascinating--but I didn't, however particularly connect) so much so that it surprised me when I did find myself identifying with characters and getting so involved by the season 1 finale. But obviously different styles of shows appeal to different people (for some reason I've never quite gotten the love for Friday Night Lights--I know it's quality, and I should give it more chances but... it leaves me all kinda indifferent). I do think he raises a point though and does so better than I was coulda--I love Sara's blog and the way she writes but I did kinda wonder about Mad Men being the best current example of a classic Bill Bell soap opera (i think that was what she said--or something similar). As the reply says it's written in quite a differnet way although I no longer find it emotionally cold at all--nearly every episode has a scene that makes me tear up (how embarassing ) I suppose the way she meant was similar though--and this is true--is it's more about character and how characters interact than story.

Edited September 17, 200817 yr by EricMontreal22

Bibel talked about Mad Men again.

Period piece. Specifically, 60s piece.

Do period pieces never interest you? Because they're distancing? Just interests me--I don't think I see somethign as more or less appealing because of *when* it's set--although certain eras appeal to me more than others (and late 50s/early 60s is one of them I suppose)

BTW, what a gorgeous pic this is:

I don't think that woman takes a bad pic--but yeah add the lighting and every detail--wow

SYlph how much have you watched? I think I sorta felt that way for half of season 1 (except I didn't find the experience joyless as that poster does, but rather fascinating--but I didn't, however particularly connect) so much so that it surprised me when I did find myself identifying with characters and getting so involved by the season 1 finale.

I watched all. It was painfully difficult because I really didn't like it, but I just made myself watch it (some would say I must have liked something!). The problem is not the identification with characters, I hate that whole tale, I watch a whole load of shows in which there are no characters I identify with, the problem was that it was cold, slow, in the 60s, and as Sam Ford said — more of an anthropological/sociological study than a drama show.

But obviously different styles of shows appeal to different people (for some reason I've never quite gotten the love for Friday Night Lights--I know it's quality, and I should give it more chances but... it leaves me all kinda indifferent). I do think he raises a point though and does so better than I was coulda--I love Sara's blog and the way she writes but I did kinda wonder about Mad Men being the best current example of a classic Bill Bell soap opera (i think that was what she said--or something similar). As the reply says it's written in quite a differnet way although I no longer find it emotionally cold at all--nearly every episode has a scene that makes me tear up (how embarassing ) I suppose the way she meant was similar though--and this is true--is it's more about character and how characters interact than story.

I was surprised by that claim, but somehow... After i thought about it, I agree with her. Although, I'm not sure she referred particularly to Bill Bell style. She didn't work on Y&R as a writer while he was there, I believe.