Hmmm . . . Could this mean Sal is coming back?
Love this! The double Don makes me hope that we’ll get back into the mythology of Dick Whitman vs. Don Draper of the earlier seasons–with his marriage to Megan, who knows about his past, I felt that the underlying tension of this man who didn’t know himself and was always acting was lost. Mad Men is consistently the best written show on television, in my opinion.
OT: Sasha, you might like this article:
Only three women are directing blockbusters this year, and, in a system where box-office returns are used as a calling card to get a director their next job, this creates a vicious cycle that keeps female directors from getting more oppurtunites to direct studio films. It’s an interesting read.
Don Draper, how I missed thee! Love the poster.
Now what…Two Dons? Two Dicks? One of each? Different paths taken…
Seriously, who is this man?
Cannot wait to have Mad Men in my life again!
For those interested, the story behind the new poster.
Basically the whole corresponding/merging/distancing of the Don/Dick identities, and whether or not Don Draper is Dick Whitman’s greatest advertising achievement, defines the run of the series. Them being on different paths may actually be a good thing but a painful thing that a character as stubborn as Don cannot entirely drop. Or he is seeing something of himself pass by. Either way, story of the 60s and we are getting closer to the 70s on this show.
One way traffic sign: The point of no return for characters, specifically Don/Dick. Also it is off-kilter, so even the ‘one way’ street may actually be BS as the changing times also show just one way of doing things is a foolish premise.
Cops: Well ’68 and ’69 was not a time for civil obedience. Also, there is the fact that Don that, whether he has been a law abiding citizen or not, committed a federal crime. More people close to him are finding out a bit about his real identity. Somebody is bound to get loose lips to the wrong people.
Airplane: New business? Or a trip far away from New York and Madison Avenue.
Stock characters and a lady’s hand: Is it Megan, Betty, Peggie, Joan or even somebody else? I think it is Megan, as ‘I Want to Hold Your Hand’ is a song/turn of phrase they have used with each other endearingly. But Don is growing increasingly anxious about the unknown path that lies ahead in the future. Hence look on face.
Some of those background characters share a resemblance to characters on the show, specifically Peggy and Roger lookalikes arm and arm. Peggy’s left the agency and Roger feels insignificant personally and professionally to who is left at the agency. Partnership? Even the woman in purple bears some resemblance to Megan.
Thank goodness Mad Men is back so I can over-analyze every crypto-ad it gives to the general public. Also, the show is brilliant.
And the drawing was done by a professional artist from those Mad Men ad times (who also did work for Stanley Effing Kubrick!!!!).
They basically got Stan Rizzo/Sal Romano to do the poster.
The professional artist from those Mad Men ad times, Brian Sanders, took inspiration from one of his originals.
Just want to say how much I enjoy CMGs posts. You make for a great read!
Thanks, steve50. Appreciate it. I have written Mad Men recaps in the past and being a history/culture buff, this show is like a drug with such rich characters, writing, and production values. Hopefully I do have time to still do the recaps as my time is not nearly as flexible to write as it used to be.
sure it’s a great show, but Justified is the best show on TV …
That’s a strong police presence there. Uh oh.
And those cop cars are facing the wrong way on a one-way street so that’s a bad sign.
Nice analysis CMG!
Uh-oh! Looking at the police cars and Don’s face makes me think that The law is running after him! The woman in a purple dress behind Don resembles to me as Megan. I hope the hand holding Don to be Betty’s… As this is the “affair of the year”, it would be an interesting arc for Betty to comeback to Don’s life on a larger scale…
Either way, I’m glad the best show on TV is baack! Sunday nights will never be the same again with Game of Thrones having the same schedule. Thank god for DVR…
Is it the 1970s yet?
The poster was inspired by illustrations from the sixties. There’s a really cool book called Lifestyle Illustration of the 60s.
I don’t think any twelve year old could pull this off. The perspective alone is quite an achievement. The ad is great and in that time period illustration was a big big part of advertising so it’s very fitting and smart.
I honestly never want Don and Betty to have a romantic dynamic ever again. It feels too beyond repair because it was so toxic for her (and boy, she really does need a feminine mystique moment) and it was built on lies that is objectively an unforgivable sin that Don should live with the rest of his life (and he seemed to learn from it when he immediately told Megan early in their marriage). Also, Don has every right to loathe Betty for what she tried to pulled with Sally bringing Anna up. I do not mind them interacting and being on good terms with the children but nothing in Betty’s marriage to Henry seems bad. He cares for her, challenges her without making her miserable, and he is arguably the bigger father-figure in Bobby and Gene’s lives.
Then again, I was never into Joan and Roger being together again- which more and more seems like that has gone out the window. I root for relationships to take form. I pretty much would love to see Michael Ginsberg in a relationship and I have been rooting for Stan and Peggy to be a romantic/creative pair for 2 seasons.
Photos got released of the two-part premiere. Ginsberg dressing like Col. Sanders and Betty lost all that weight:
I still think “affair of the year” is cheeky and if there is an actual love affair, it will be a pairing we could never see coming.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>