Amph [MAD MEN] Guy walks into an advertising agency...

Game of Thrones....

beat Mad Men.

I'm speechless.

 

You can always rely on too many idiots having no taste whatsoever.

 

On a more positive note, Jon Hamm did finally win for "Outstanding Lead Actor In A Drama Series" after being nominated 7 times before. But that made me think. Did he win the award because of his portrayal of Don Draper in the last 7 episodes of the final season or his portrayal of the character throughout the ENTIRE series? How did the voters vote? Did they take in account just the recent "season" or the entire show as a whole? Because if I was a voter, I believe he and all his co-stars ALL deserve Emmys for the ENTIRE series, but for the latest season alone...not so much.

 

i wonder that too, although the final episode had a wider emotional range with the character

 

The Emmys are always based on the past year of television (the specific eligibility period for this year's being June 1, 2014 - May 31, 2015).

 

As it usually happens with the Oscars, maybe the award was to compensate for his being overlooked/ignored on past nominations. But this was also a season - needlessly split or truncated as it was - full of great performances from all involved, including him. So, everything's possible. But my money is on the former reason, not the latter.

 

If you want some real horse****, Vincent Kartheiser has never even been nominated. The cast is so big and so outstanding that it works against itself.

 

It's so bizarre that not only did it take Jon Hamm 8 years to win (losing in past years not only to Bryan Cranston but also ****ing Jeff Daniels), he's also the recipient of Mad Men's only acting Emmy. Jesus Christ.

 

Like Havac said, the cast of the show is so incredibly talented that it works against itself with the Emmys and so it is best to just go with the most visible member of the cast even if the rest of the cast is better at what they do than 99% of everybody else nominated.

 

it's not like they didn't get a lot of nominations tho. christina hendricks was nominated six years in a row or something.

 

all i need to know about the emmy's is that Larry Hagman never won one for Dallas.

 

Well, she got six supporting actress nominations in a row, but nobody was nominated for the show's first two years. Slattery also got a regular tip of the hat for the first four years, then they gave Jared Harris a nod, and then ignored the show for the last three years in the supporting actor category. Moss has five leading actress noms, plus one supporting in the year that January Jones got the best leading actress nomination. Guest noms have also been thrown at Robert Morse, Harry Hamlin, and Linda Cardellini. It's not so much that there's not a quantity of nominations as that there's a shocking scarcity of wins for a thoroughly oustanding cast. There wasn't even one year that Hendricks, Slattery, or Moss could break through, and it took the show ending for the voters to grudgingly give Hamm a make-up award for the whole series. There's also the fact that the repeated nominations of the same supporting actors who couldn't get through to the voters kept any of the other cast from having a chance at recognition. Kartheiser, Shipka, and other deserving people didn't even get token nominations, so it makes it feel more exclusionary than if the same number of nominations had been spread out among the cast, so at least you know they're aware of how amazing Kartheiser is as Pete, or that Shipka is giving one of the all-time great child performances.

It's just a weird contrast in that even when the show was winning for Best Drama, it couldn't get love in any other category than writing. When the voters are genuinely enthusiastic about something, they seem to reward it as often as they can. Witness the way Modern Family had a run of just winning everything by default, because the voters could not express their enthusiasm for Modern Family enough (apparently the industry is dumb as ****), or the way everybody decided Olive Kitteridge was the miniseries they liked this year and just voted for it straight down the line, or the way you can generally gauge if a movie is going to win Best Picture at the Oscars by the way it's picking up all the other awards on the way. You'd just expect there to have been something else somewhere, sometime, and that the show wouldn't have to end to wring out an acting award.

 

I'm watching the first season. So far I like it. It's really well written.
I don't understand the relationship between Peggy and Pete. They have sex the first episode after they barely talked and then I don't get what's going on between them. Maybe after a second viewing things will be clearer.

 

I think you’ll develop a better understanding of the characters as the show goes on, but basically the key to understanding that moment is that Peggy is a fairly inexperienced and naive girl, but she’s also someone who’s attracted to the big city world and she’s not as unworldly as her naïveté makes her seem. When she’s presented with a handsome young man who desires her, she responds to that and it probably makes her feel sophisticated. To Pete it’s just sort of lashing out with desperate pre-wedding jitters, but to her it’s an interesting young businessman taking an interest in her. That’s how I read it. So then of course Pete considers it just a fling and moves on in shame, but she’s got a sort of residual crush on him.

But you will definitely learn a lot more about both characters as the show goes on. The best show ever made, in my opinion, and the richly drawn characters are a huge part of that.

 

It will be clear by the end of the season what is going on.

 

I've said it far too many times, but I want John Hamm playing Batman and Superman. His range in this is amazing.

Has anyone watch Matthew Wiener's The Romanoffs on Prime? I know it's an anthology, and the main character in each story believes they're related to the Romanov's, but little else.

 

It’s on my watchlist. I’ll probably get around to it soonish.

 

Watched seasons 1-3 about a year ago. Got sidetracked and started season 4 last weekend and finished 5 earlier today. Some fine television

 

i rewatched it 2 years ago when Audience network started playing it. probably watched it 2 or 3 times through again. kind of becomes obvious on rewatches they didn't think Don's and Adam's ages through all that well

 

Some dialogues are quite difficult for non English mother tongue.

Joan: I heard you were being considered for an account, because a client's wife saw you and thought it would be ok if he worked with you
Peggy: you know? You're not a stick!
Joan: and yet I never wonder what men think of me.

I have no clue what "stick" means in this context, nor do I understand what they're talking about.

 

I'm sure what you meant to say here specifically was "and damn those historical researchers for the writers' room were great!"

 

Joan is implying that Peggy is fat, and because of this, men won't be attracted to her. Hence the thing about the client's wife seeing her and saying it's ok to work with her (they won't have an affair).

Stick in this context means very skinny person. Peggy is pointing out that Joan isn't skinny herself.

Always let us know if you're confused!

 

Edit: ^Beaten to it

 

thank you so much! So, this was actually a pretty important dialogue to understand the two characters' personality. I'm glad I didn't let it go

 

I'm just glad I beat JaziB to it and made him edit his post, muahahahah!

But yeah keep asking if you have cultural context or language barriers. Especially because there's also a lot of historical stuff. Some outdated words or such. Or even just the history going on that you may not be familiar with.