'Mad Men' on AMC HD - Page 50

I've already said that I think Peggy is at sea right now. Nevertheless, because she is a woman in 1966 she is working under a severe handicap without Don to run point for her. It's unfair but there it is.

It's interesting to me that perhaps 90% of this thread is a discussion of the characters in Mad Men as if they were actual people (and maybe another 5% about whether or not their actions are realistic). This is not a put-down--I can get very interested in the motivations and actions of fictional characters.

But there are lots of other aspects of this show to consider. Here's an article addressed to college film students--it does a nice job of suggesting some other things to think about:
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~writing/ma...ies/film.shtml

I was once sent to a famous medical specialist, but was seen by a resident. At the end of the visit the Big Guy came in, signed off on the resident's work without apparently actually reading it, said nothing to me at all, and left.

I know how the Heinz guy felt. He may do the same thing I did: refuse to pay for the bait-and-switch.

I'm not sure A) is quite right. Peggy was in a bad mood, so she tried to play Don by forcing the idea on the client because she's seen it work so many times before. Problem was that Don only tries to force good ideas on the client (and when he does, it's calculated); this was clearly a poor pitch for Heinz, and her attempt to force it was just lashing out without thinking.

And then you get the added layer of because Peggy's a woman this definitely isn't going to work. But it wasn't the thrust of the scene that the outcome was inevitable because Peggy's a woman; the outcome was inevitable because Peggy was pitching garbage and being obnoxious to the client. Not sure if she was just angry because of what happened that morning and said, "Screw it, I'm going all in on this," or whether she actually believed that she can act like Don and be accepted by clients.

You get the sense that Peggy was due for a comeuppance because she's been getting more and more arrogant/careless. First, in the interview with the new guy, then with Roger over Mohawk Airlines. She's developed a very high opinion of herself, which is not wholly undeserved, but now we've seen her clearly overreach.

Isn't that a good reason to stress the brand name over the product? The guy from Heinz (in a previous episode) admitted that beans was not a "glamour" product. Would anyone say "Heinz beans taste better/are more nutritious/please my family more than brand X" ?
(Whatever happened to Brand X, anyway?)
Brand loyalty is always stronger than product loyalty. Tide detergent has the best brand loyalty in the business despite the fact that Proctor & Gamble makes several "competing" brands and admits that there is no significant difference between them. If your company makes a variety of products, reinforcing the brand name helps them all.

But, THEY ARE!....
....aren't they???

It would be interesting to determine whether MM appeals to the soap opera audience....

That was my impression. The client thought he was stuck with the "little lady" rather than the "real" ad man. Some buyers would get past that, but many would not.

?

I don't understand your comment. I've read like tutorials for years and I don't think they add much, if anything, to this particular type of discussion. The whole reason this is discussed the way it is, is because the way we feel about Mad Men. Feel. This isn't a class in film analysis and we're not being graded on our perceptions.

If you really want to get into it, we're not looking at much effort here to expand the known ways film is used, in cinematic respects. IMO, Mad Men is more like a film with a great screenplay; it's the ideas and words that are of most interest.

YMMV.

You're right, but I believe excellent production work is "invisible".

Meaning you don't notice great direction, set designs, scripts, lighting, wardrobe, props, continunity, editing etc. if its done right.

The great prodution should be seemless, unobtrusive and have the audience focused on the story and characters.

Mad Men's prodution values are the best, so the character really do "come to life".

That's ridiculous. I mean, I know what you're trying to say, and it might apply to acting/directing, aspects that are more intangible. But visual elements like scenic design and wardrobe? How can you not notice if they are good?

I agree that it is hard not to notice how good they are. Maybe his point was that they are so good that viewers can almost believe these places/people are real and not just sets and actors playing dress-up. For example, the Howard Johnson scenes really gave us the impression that they were at a New York Howard Johnson's in the 60's, not a 2011 run-down Regency Inn in LA ...
http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethe...-pit-stop.html

Not really.

I've heard that idea applied to editing.

I can appreciate the craft and still remain focused. I think it can be compared to involuntary muscles. We don't regularly think about breathing during the day but we certainly do have those moments when we do focus on it.

How can you look at beautiful cinematography and or set design and not notice? Look at the lighting in Game of Thrones, or anything on Boardwalk Empire (to name two other exceptional productions) and not appreciate the craft while staying focused on the story at the same time.

And shows like Deadwood, Luck or Justified (to name a few more greats) have writing that is so beautiful and poeticof course I notice this. I sometimes have to rewind or sub title to catch the nuances. That's okay. I had to do that in high school and college when I read great books too. It didn't take away from these masterpieces.

Possibly, but I got the impression that this guy's beans aren't selling as well as the other Heinz products and corporate is not happy with this. He didn't want to spend his advertising dollars helping out the ketchup division.


That would have been the first thing Don would have jumped on. My inner Don Draper is yelling something like: "How do you expect me to believe in your product when you don't even believe in it! [slam table] It's no wonder your sales are falling and they'll continue to fall unless you get behind it like you're asking me to! [feign disgust] You don't need to give me a 'glamor' product. I can make anything sell, but only if you let me sell it the way I know it will sell!"

Oh shoot, the client just got mad and I got fired. I guess I'm no Don Draper!


Sure they would. You tell them it tastes better. Then people buy the product and believe it's better than the other products even if it's really the same crap. Then they keep buying it. Really, that's how it works!

In this case VanCamp's is still doing very well in the bean business. Click on the link to see a yummy burger and a delicious corn on the cob. There is also some slimy goop in the foreground.


I'd argue that this is the opposite situation. Unlike Heinz, Proctor and Gamble knew that their names wouldn't sell anything so all of their products have different brand names, even the ones that are the same stuff. For some reason people keep buying stuff that has a certain label on it.

Tide has been the most popular detergent for decades but why didn't P&G call their new fabric softener product "Tide Fabric Softener"? Because P&G never relies on brand loyalty so they called their new fabric softener "Downy". This proved to be the right decision. P&G has had great success with advertising new brand names for every new product they release.

Heinz painted themselves in a corner by being the ketchup company and thinking that would make people think their other products were good. It doesn't always work that way. The solution could be to do what P&G did: emphasize less on the brand name and more on some catchy name for the product.

Note that VanCamp's has "New Orleans-style beans." Don would have come up with that!

1970 Heinz bean commercial.



http://www.coloribus.com/focus/steps...story/2835905/

You're both right...Of course I notice excellent prodution - as part of the story or character development.

On its own merit? That would distract...the emmys or oscars are the time for production focus.

Its like special effects/C.G.I....really good special effects or C.G.I. looks natural you don't notice it.

If you notice the special effect at the expense of the story or characters its counter-productive.

Exactly....you shouldn't be thinking its a great set, prop or wardrobe piece.

You should accept everything as real, natural and part of the story.

May I say that you channeled Don well. A mad client (particularly that one) would not get Don fired. You can't please everyone, and any Ad agency knows that. Better to not waste valuable resources on a client that will say "no" to everything anyway.
Good point on "New Orleans Style". Good way to differentiate a plain product from it's competitors.
Too bad the slogan "How 'bout some more beans, Mr. Taggart? " was still six years in the future.

That's the commercial Heinz settled for after Don threw the guy bodily from SCDP.

Truth be told around here, Mid MI, I can't recall seeing any Heinz products other than ketchup based products. I vaguely recall seeing Heinz beans many years ago, but not in recent memory. Apparently they did diversify, they own Or-Ida and TGI Fridays according to their website.

One successful product of theirs that had the Heinz name (other than ketchup) was "Heinz 57 Steak Sauce" but that name was invented by Heinz himself in the early days of the company. This may have even led to their problem with corporate wanting to emphasize the Heinz name with every product they sell.

Proctor and Gamble knew early on that relying on a single brand name would limit their product line. Now they're selling essentially the same product with multiple brand names. Genius!

Too bad that I find this more interesting than the soap opera stuff on the show.

My sister-in-law always requests Heinz 57 Steak Sauce when she orders steak at a restaurant.

This show is an adult drama. What were you expecting?

No doubt the writers intended to use Heinz beans to reflect the low quality of work creative has been doing. Beans are not sexy; beans are not glamorous; beans are not big business; and beans are not the future.

Yes, but just as beans are a staple, a "stick-to-your-ribs" food that keeps body and soul together while one strives to rise above, the Heinz account is a "staple" for SCDP, keeping it in business while it strives to rise above.
I have no experience in advertising, but major companies must have "non-sexy" accounts to pay the lease & utilities.

Maybe I missed it mentioned here, but when Peggy pushed the Heinz pitch, she pretty much copied Don's "Carousel" spiel.

Things get funny, then dramatic, then funny again and then very dramatic.

Dissapointment runs rampant...for everyone, except Roger.

Gonna be lotsa talk about the last ten minutes...

Sally got more than she bargained for. Kiernan Shipka's parents are sure to send her to bed before that last two minutes.

After that, all I can think of is "The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry." And fittingly, Roger has no plan, so he gets laid.

Top-notch episode.

ah the benefits of LSD. Walter Bishop would be so proud.

Your definition of getting laid apparently is different than mine.