“Mad Men” Returns and Lives Up to Its Hype

[NOTE: The following article will also appear as my regular television column for WILDsound.]

The new season of “Mad Men” (AMC, new episodes premiere Thursdays at 10 p.m. Eastern) bowed on Thursday by striking the exact right notes. Literally. The debut opens with Chubby Checker’s “Let’s Twist Again,” signifying that it was time to revisit the advertising execs of the Sterling Cooper agency, “like we did last summer.” The jaunty, fun-loving pop song may have matched my happiness at the return of this exceptionally well-crafted show, but it stood in stark contrast to the angst being felt by nearly everyone on the program.

At the end of the critically acclaimed first season, things for the main characters were decidedly up in the air. Don Draper (Jon Hamm) was distraught, having come home to an empty house, after imagining on the train ride home that he would sweep his wife Betty (January Jones) into his arms and accompany her and their two kids to the Jersey Shore to see her family. His secretary, Peggy (Elisabeth Moss), shortly after being promoted to junior copywriter, went into labor, which is only odd because she didn’t know she was pregnant. The last we saw of her, her newborn baby was lying in her arms, but all she could do was turn her head away.

The season premiere answers virtually none of the cliffhanger questions from last season, instead jumping viewers ahead to Valentine’s Day 1962 (from 1960), with only clues as to what happened in-between.

Don, who was already complicated and introspective, is even more so now, struggling with the reality of getting older. He goes for an insurance physical, lies about how much he drinks and smokes, but is still told by the doctor that he cannot keep up his current pace. He experiences pre-Viagra-era erectile dysfunction with Betty. His boss, Roger Sterling (John Slattery), all but forces him to interview two kids in their mid-20s for creative jobs, and one of them shows up for the meeting in a turtleneck rather than a jacket and tie, a capital crime in the world of “Mad Men.” After blowing off a meeting to sit in a bar and eat lunch alone, Don becomes interested in a book of Frank O’Hara poetry, “Meditations in an Emergency,” being read by someone at the bar. He ends up with a copy of his own, which he reads and then mysteriously mails to someone in the episode’s final scene. Who is the recipient? With none of Don’s mistresses from last season appearing in the second season debut, we have no idea.

Peggy, meanwhile, is trying to keep up with the boys, finding that being the only woman on the agency team isn’t easy. The men send her to ask Don’s new secretary about his whereabouts, and they meet later without telling her (and ignore her questions as to why). Peggy finds an outlet for her anger when she reduces Don’s secretary to tears, all for handling her question incorrectly. And what of Peggy’s baby? We don’t know. The only reference to the event is the conjecture of the guys (in Peggy’s absence, of course) as to how she lost so much weight so fast. One theory is that Don got her pregnant, but the prevailing opinion is that she attended a “fat farm.”

Nobody else is much happier. Betty has become colder and harder in the intervening years, possibly realizing that the stone wall that Don maintains around his feelings will most likely never be breached. Don and Betty have a housekeeper now, allowing Betty to disconnect from her kids and engage in horse riding. She seems to be lying regularly (she tells her friend that she didn’t watch a White House tour conducted by Jackie Kennedy on television, even though she did, and she also claims to have known immediately that her old roommate was a call girl when she and Don ran into her at the Savoy Hotel, even though Don had to tell her after she was gone). It’s as if she is choosing to be dishonest with others rather than with herself. Betty becomes so obsessed with the her old roommate’s profession that she stands at the brink of offering sex to a tow truck mechanic that rescues her on a dark road, in exchange for a new fan belt.

Meanwhile, Pete (Vincent Kartheiser), who bounced back from last year’s promotion snub to bring in the Clearasil account, is taking heat from his wife about her not being pregnant yet. Roger can’t stem his obsession with his former fling, office manger and resident bombshell Joan (Christina Hendricks), who is now dating a doctor, but was more interested in the Jackie Kennedy telecast than his amorous advances. Closeted Salvatore (Bryan Batt) is uncomfortably playing house with a woman, and none of the Sterling Cooper staff members are happy about the threat posed by the younger generation of ad men, all, presumably, waiting to take their jobs.

I understand that the cold description of these events can seem dry, even downright boring, but the show is anything but. Presented with a single sponsor and only one commercial break, the extended season debut flew by, jumping from one memorable scene to another. “Mad Men” can be complicated dark, quiet, ponderous and nuanced, but it also manages to consistently entertain, with the ability to be exceptionally funny and thriller-tense at times. The show is driven by subtle character moments, not large plot points, and yet manages to keep its audience riveted. It relies on stellar writing and powerful performances to get the job done.

The season premiere offered more than a few classic “Mad Men” moments. Joan’s obsession with finding the right place for the office’s first copy machine was a constant source of laughs, ending with its placement in Peggy’s already cramped office. Sharp lines abound, like when Paul (Michael Gladis), upon seeing the copier, tells a group of secretaries, “Happy Valentine’s, girls.” Don’s encounter with two foul-mouthed, loud men, acting boorish in the presence of a woman in an elevator, had me on the edge of my seat.

And the show’s legendary attention to period detail, from the clothing to the décor of the homes and offices, continues to amaze. If there is a better looking program on television, I haven’t seen it.

The centerpiece scene of the debut episode was the Jackie Kennedy television tour, which artfully bound together the story lines into one arc. When Betty says about the First Lady, “It looks like they’re playing house,” you can’t help but think that she could be talking about herself. With everything changing for the “Mad Men” characters, it has to be especially threatening to have such a young president, especially considering that Sterling Cooper worked for Nixon. No wonder Don was so resistant to interviewing the young creatives. After all, as he notes, young people don’t know anything.

“Mad Men” slipped onto the air barely noticed last summer. But after mass critical acclaim, abundant media exposure (including an Entertainment Weekly cover in June), and 16 Emmy nominations, the show’s return to the air was a hotly anticipated event, drawing double the audience from last season. With increased expectations comes increased pressure. But if the season premiere of “Mad Men” is any indication, the creative team behind the show is ready, willing and able to meet the challenge and live up to the program’s notices.

It’s common for critical darlings that get major coverage from the entertainment media to have to cope with a subsequent backlash. At the rate “Mad Men” is going, that negative reaction will be postponed indefinitely. It will be hard for anyone to say anything bad about this entertaining and exceptionally well-crafted hour of television.

New Comedy Central Shows Goof on Reality Programs, But Make for Strange Bedfellows

[NOTE: The following article will also appear as my regular television column for WILDsound.]

Comedy Central has dedicated its Thursday nights this summer to spoofing reality shows. But the network’s two offerings, “The Gong Show With Dave Attell” (new episodes air at 10:00 p.m. Eastern) and “Reality Bites Back” (10:30 Eastern), couldn’t be more different in their tones and intents.

The original “Gong Show” was very much a product of its time (1976-1980), from host/producer Chuck Barris’s disco tuxedos to the every-night’s-a-party attitude on the stage. Barris, with his compulsive hand-clapping and seemingly inebriated persona, presided over a parade of surreally weird and bad talent acts, who were then graded by three judges, generally minor celebrities. The judges also had the option of striking a gong, cutting the act short. The winner of the day’s competition won the oddly specific sum of $516.32.

How do you remake something that is such a product of its time? Comedy Central smartly figured that rather than try and update the concept, the best route would be to stay faithful to the original. And they’ve done a really good job in that regard. The rules are the same, the acts are dutifully odd and dopey, and the judges are party-loving, D-list celebrities, just like in the original. Even the prize for the winner is the equally insubstantial $600 (with a championship boxing-style belt thrown in for good measure).

Attell, best known for his former Comedy Central program “Insomniac With Dave Attell,” in which he essentially got drunk and hung out with people late at night, is the perfect match for the boozy, good-time-loving Barris. At one point in last week’s episode, while things kind of spun out of control, Attell took a seat and lit up a cigarette. The move captured the Barris spirit perfectly. And it’s not something you’d expect to see Ryan Seacrest do.

Interestingly, after the monster success of “American Idol” spawned a cavalcade of talent shows (I’m waiting for “So You Think You Can Tie Your Own Shoelaces,” which I’m sure is in development at one of the networks), “The Gong Show” is suddenly looking ahead of its time (even predating “Star Search,” the first successful serious television talent show). By simply keeping to the 1970s formula, the new “Gong Show” manages to parody the current plethora of talent shows on the airwaves. It’s a neat little trick.

The original “Gong Show” was risqué for it’s time, often with judge Jaye P. Morgan in the center of the naughty storm, and the new version is happy to follow in those footsteps. On last week’s show, judge Andy Dick, looking at a performer covered in green makeup, observed, “Cut to me and the Jolly Green Giant (bleep)ing in my dressing room.” Later, Dick tells an effeminate guy with an 1980s Howard Jones hairstyle who played music by rubbing water glasses that, “You can’t teach that kind of talent. A gay wizard has to (bleep) it into you.” Morgan was known for occasionally baring her breasts during tapings, but Dick went her one better, whipping out his penis as part of a joke (this being basic cable, all exposed key body parts are blacked out in post-production). And the nudity in that episode wasn’t limited to the judges. One act was essentially a burlesque Cirque du Soleil, as a scantily clad woman and a man in a bottom-revealing monkey costume performed fairly impressive feats of acrobatics and strength, before the woman stripped down to her bikini bottoms.

If all this sounds infantile, it clearly is. But so was the original. There is certainly a kind of anarchic charm to Attell’s “Gong Show” that is reminiscent of the Barris version, but there is no doubt that the appeal will only extend to a specific audience. Dick exposing his genitals alone is enough to put off a huge chunk of potential viewers, and the decidedly un-PC humor will send many more people packing. One of the acts last week featured two “midget” wrestlers, first battling each other, before taking on Dick and fellow judge J.B. Smoove (Larry’s house guest in the most recent season of “Curb Your Enthusiasm”). After gonging the comically suggestive heavy metal band Trash, who featured two women in tiny schoolgirl outfits sucking on giant lollipops while the musicians played, Smoove said he couldn’t concentrate on the girls sucking because the band was sucking so much. Another act last week consisted of a guy pretending to pull a rabbit out of his own abdomen, complete with fake blood and guts. If that isn’t gross enough for you, Dick then proceeded to taste some of the faux innards and share one stringy piece, “Lady and the Tramp” style, with fellow judge Dave Navarro. The winners of that show were two buff, shirtless African-American guys with 1980s cornrow Mohawks slapping their bodies along with music.

If the last paragraph has made you vow to turn off your television when “The Gong Show With Dave Attell” is on, just to make sure you don’t accidentally stumble onto Comedy Central and see this nonsense, I understand. But if you have a bit of nostalgia for the Chuck Barris edition of the program, and you can marvel at the silliness of it all without taking any of it seriously, you might enjoy this insane half hour.

It’s odd that Comedy Central has decided to follow up “The Gong Show” with “Reality Bites Back,” which will appeal to a very, very different audience. “Reality Bites Back” features 10 comics competing in a different reality show parody each week. The target of last week’s episode was “Big Brother,” and last night’s edition was a send-up of “Rock of Love.” “Reality Bites Back” veers to the quirky, requiring a kind of ability to go with the flow that stands in stark contrast to the in-your-face debauchery of “The Gong Show.”

The tone of “Reality Bites Back” comes straight from its host, Michael Ian Black, who, depending on how lucky you are, you know from either the CBS show “Ed,” the Comedy Central sketch program “Stella,” or all those grating VH1 disasters where snarky comics make fun of stuff (“Best Week Ever,” “I Love the 80s,” etc.). On screen, Black has perfected a signature character, the pompous idiot who thinks he is more important and smarter than he really is. So it’s not surprising that in playing the host of “Reality Bites Back,” Black’s character is a pompous idiot who thinks he is more important and smarter than he really is.

There is no doubt that “Reality Bites Back” is a one joke endeavor, sending up the clichés and conceits of the genre. And while the program does a good job of nailing these now-familiar moments (the manufactured, misdirection drama employed by the host before someone is kicked off; the perp walk and subsequent exit interview of the loser; etc.), the whole thing wears thin. It’s hard to parody something as ridiculous and silly as reality programs, which tread dangerously close to parody themselves. So five minutes in to “Reality Bites Back,” I had kind of seen enough.

The same can be said for Black. As a supporting character on a well-written, well-acted ensemble program like “Ed,” he is a solid addition to the mix. But having to watch his overly exposed persona throughout a show is a bit much. A little Black goes a long way.

Then again, in some circles, Black is a genuine star. “Stella” and Black’s first show, “The State,” have a dedicated cult following, and I’m sure Black’s fans will enjoy “Reality Bites Back,” since it is so infused with his approach to comedy. At the same time, I can’t picture these fans enjoying the brainless fun of “The Gong Show,” making the two shows an odd pair to share a night of television.

Odds are you will like “The Gong Show” or “Reality Bites Back,” but certainly not both.

McCain's New Commercial Should Drive Voters to Obama

[This article also appears on Huffingtonpost.com. You can access it from my author page here.]

Have you seen John McCain’s latest commercial? I’ll describe it to you:

Over an image of a gas pump in the middle of a lake, a narrator says: “Gas prices four dollars, five dollars. No end in sight. Because some in Washington are still saying ‘no’ to drilling in America. No to independence from foreign oil. Who can you thank for rising prices at the pump?”

A photo of Barack Obama is shown side-by-side with a gas pump, while, in the background, we here a crowd chanting, “Obama.” We then see footage of McCain talking to an audience while the narrator continues: “One man knows we must now drill more in America and rescue our family budgets. Don’t hope for more energy. Vote for it. McCain.”

(You can watch it on McCain’s Web site.)

In campaign ads, it is normal for politicians to massage the facts to portray a candidate in the most flattering light possible. But McCain’s latest commercial is such a work of fiction--and a clumsy one at that--that any undecided voter who watches should immediately decide to vote for another candidate.

In an nutshell, McCain’s commercial blames high gas prices on Obama. The spot says that because Obama won’t agree to “drilling in America” and isn’t in favor of “independence from foreign oil,” gas prices are high.

By “drilling in America,” McCain must be talking about Obama’s opposition to lifting the ban on off-shore oil exploration, but to correlate that position with higher gas prices is absolutely absurd. It is well-established that it would take years for any oil to be pumped from drilling off-shore, and even when oil did begin to flow, the effect on pricing would be minimal. The Bush administration’s own report estimates that if drilling were allowed in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, oil production would not begin until 2018, and the effect on pricing would be a reduction of 75 cents a barrel (less than one percent of the current price) in 2025.

In other words, not only is McCain’s claim patently false, it’s ludicrous, beyond anyone’s definition of the truth. He is knowingly being dishonest to the American people (so much for “straight talk”), using a hot-button issue to scare citizens into voting for him based on inaccurate information.

It is also quite clear that Obama is not opposed to “independence from foreign oil.” One of the chapter headings in his energy plan is: “Set America on Path to Oil Independence.” Obama wants to achieve true energy independence that addresses the larger financial, environmental and national security issues involved, not simply engage in gimmicks or quick-fixes that ignore the real dangers and concentrate on squeezing every last drop of oil out of the ground.

What makes the commercial especially outrageous is that it is completely hypocritical. Most analysts blame speculating, made possible by the deregulation of the oil markets, along with increased worldwide consumption, for the spike in oil prices. (Keith Olbermann did an in-depth and detailed report on this issue, which you can watch here.) And who was a leading figure behind the deregulation of the oil markets? Former Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, who, until a few days ago, was McCain’s chief economic advisor, and was the architect of his economic plan. In his New York Times column on Sunday that assailed McCain's ignorance on economic policy, Frank Rich said that McCain’s “bond” with Gramm “is more scandalous” than Obama’s relationship with Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

So not only is the commercial completely fabricated, but, in fact, it blames Obama for something for which a key member of McCain’s team was far more culpable.

It would be easy to write a short essay on all the reasons why Obama’s position on the drilling issue is far smarter than McCain’s, who is essentially supporting the proposal as a way of courting votes. (After all, McCain supports the gas tax holiday that most economists say would not significantly lower the actual price of gas for consumers.) But anyone watching McCain’s commercial should not even need to engage in that discussion. Rather, the artlessness and bluntness with which the ad states things that are ridiculously false should alert any voter to the lack of intelligence and vision, as well as the desperation, of the McCain campaign. And the ease with which McCain is willing to pander and use dishonesty to pick up votes should also send up red flags for anyone still on the fence.

What is McCain’s next commercial going to be? That Obama is responsible for global warming? The recent outbreak of salmonella? The inability of the Chicago Cubs to win a World Series (after all, Obama IS from Illinois)?

The new McCain ad marks a new low in the campaign. I hope that enough people watching it understand how inaccurate and off-the-wall the claims are.