Mad Men: 5.10 "Christmas Waltz" (open spoilers)

[hajario]

Originally Posted by StusBlues

Had he done so after Kevin's birth? I thought he had been playing along with the discreet fiction that Joan's husband was the father.

He made reference to it when Joan first brought the baby to work.

[amarinth]

Originally Posted by StusBlues

Indeed. Betty never stood up to Don until she asked for a divorce. When Megan sits him down and tells him to eat his dinner, she's demanding respect for herself. Betty never did this--she waited until she had another man she could run to. Don respects Megan; I'm not sure it's possible to respect Betty.

Don may respect Megan, I don't.
On the one hand, it's good for her that she stands up for herself. On the other, the methods she uses for doing so are, to me, incredibly childish. Throwing plates across the room, this week, standing and screaming "I don't want to talk to you" last comes across as throwing a tantrum. It's a step up from Betty, but it's a far cry from where I expect a grown up to behave.

Speaking of childish - was I the only person watching through my fingers with Don & Joan? They're beautiful people and the actors have crazy chemistry with each other and still I really don't want them to hook up. I like that the characters have a great friendship and respect the hell out of each other and want it to stay that way. (I also have the thought that Don hasn't slept with either of his two work wives (Joan or Peggy) but I don't know what to make of that.)
I'd love to see Jon Hamm and Christina Hendricks in a screwball romantic comedy together. It would be awesome. Just not as Don and Joan.

[StusBlues]

Originally Posted by hajario

He made reference to it when Joan first brought the baby to work.

Sorry to keep beating this dead horse, but I thought he'd said "There's my baby..." then made a bee-line for Joan, remarking "...somebody get the kid out of the way." I.e., implying Joan was the baby in question.

[Acsenray]

Roger is a master of double entendre.

[hajario]

Originally Posted by StusBlues

Sorry to keep beating this dead horse, but I thought he'd said "There's my baby..." then made a bee-line for Joan, remarking "...somebody get the kid out of the way." I.e., implying Joan was the baby in question.

No.

I.e. making a joke that only Joan would understand.

[Fiveyearlurker]

Not sure I understood the Hare Krishna subplot. Was she trying to blackmail him after the sex? There was no proof that anything happened, so she has no leverage. What was the point of having sex with him?

[Acsenray]

You think his wife is going to be looking for ironclad proof if a hot woman shows up with that story? Harry has a history of infidelity and there are witnesses that she came to see him. And even if her story isn't 100 percent persuasive to Jennifer, it's enough to strain their relationship.

[ThelmaLou]

Originally Posted by amarinth

Speaking of childish - was I the only person watching through my fingers with Don & Joan? They're beautiful people and the actors have crazy chemistry with each other...
I'd love to see Jon Hamm and Christina Hendricks in a screwball romantic comedy together. It would be awesome. Just not as Don and Joan.

Fabulous idea! Reminiscent of Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn in Charade and Cary and Grace Kelly in To Catch a Thief.

[drastic_quench]

Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker

Not sure I understood the Hare Krishna subplot. Was she trying to blackmail him after the sex? There was no proof that anything happened, so she has no leverage. What was the point of having sex with him?

No, she was too inept for blackmail. She said that she traded herself to get Harry to manipulate Paul into staying in the cult. But even Harry pointed out that she did it backwards by first giving it away and then negotiating.

[Don Draper]

Originally Posted by Acsenray

You really think that this was a horrible tantrum? Why didn't Don call to say where he would be?

Does anyone who was around back then know whether it was usual for someone to just be gone all evening without letting his or her family know?

Megan might be justified to be angry, even yell "Where the hell were you? Why didn't you call?" when he walked in the door.

Throwing a plate of food across the room, slamming another plate of food in front of Don and demanding he eat it while she sits there in stony silence, glaring icily out the window (while the smashed plate of food sits on the floor) qualifies as a tantrum. Especially when it's the first time he's done that to her.

And besides, Megan was Don's secretary for a year (and an office receptionist for longer) and certainly knows that Don is quite often pulling very late nights, or all-nighters, often on the spur of the moment, and rushing out at the drop of the hat to glad-handle clients. Running out for cocktails on the spur of the moment with the CEO of Heinz Baked Beans (for example) is just a part of his job.

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

Funny, I read his expression of bemused acceptance.

He messed up significantly, she went over the top. But then she made some fair points and enacted a "punishment" that fit the crime (missed dinner with no word? You'll eat with me now), but was rediculous because she threw her dinner away, so she didn't have dinner! She knew she was rediculous, he knew he was wrong and they got over it.

[drastic_quench]

Yeah getting mad at Don Draper for coming home drunk, late, and without calling is like getting mad at Roger Sterling for wearing a vest.

[phreesh]

Originally Posted by drastic_quench

No, she was too inept for blackmail. She said that she traded herself to get Harry to manipulate Paul into staying in the cult. But even Harry pointed out that she did it backwards by first giving it away and then negotiating.

I'm also confused by this. Coming out of that scene, has she won (in her head)?

In the end, he did his own thing. Kind of a weird sequence.

[WOOKINPANUB]

Originally Posted by Don Draper

Megan might be justified to be angry, even yell "Where the hell were you? Why didn't you call?" when he walked in the door.

Throwing a plate of food across the room, slamming another plate of food in front of Don and demanding he eat it while she sits there in stony silence, glaring icily out the window (while the smashed plate of food sits on the floor) qualifies as a tantrum. Especially when it's the first time he's done that to her.

And besides, Megan was Don's secretary for a year (and an office receptionist for longer) and certainly knows that Don is quite often pulling very late nights, or all-nighters, often on the spur of the moment, and rushing out at the drop of the hat to glad-handle clients. Running out for cocktails on the spur of the moment with the CEO of Heinz Baked Beans (for example) is just a part of his job.

100 % agreed. If that wasn't a tantrum, I don't know what is. Of course, I don't like her anyway (neither the character nor the actress) so I may be biased.

As was stated by others, I really didn't connect with anything that occured in this episode. What was the point of the whole Hare Krishna thing? It was bizarro, like the LSD episode, but that at least led to Roger and whatshername breaking up. Why bring an old character in for one episode, much less a new one (and I thought she resembled Juliette Lewis also) if the story isn't going anywhere?And I know I'm in the minority but I didn't much care for the Joan/Don scene. Not that the actors weren't fabulous - holy cow could those two set the world on fire- but it seemed so uncharacterisctic. Don't get me wrong; the worst episode of Mad Men is better than the best episode of just about anything on TV today, but I had to give last night's installment a solid "meh".

[lisacurl]

I noticed an interesting hint of where the Lane storyline might be going when he told his wife the reason why SCDP has another shot at landing the Jaguar account. His buddy Mr. Chewing-Gum-on-His-Pubis, from the whorehouse episode, got fired from Jaguar and lost his visa. Lane's wife says something like, "Oh, that's why they returned to England so quickly." If Lane gets fired (or loses his partnership or whatever) for embezzlement, he'd have to go back to England and face jail time for his unpaid taxes.

[Exapno Mapcase]

Originally Posted by WOOKINPANUB

As was stated by others, I really didn't connect with anything that occured in this episode. What was the point of the whole Hare Krishna thing?

I looked it up and the guy they kept mentioning really did start the Krishna church in New York City in 1966. Maybe it was a gift to calendar watchers. I'm beginning to hate these made-for-tv timely sequences, especially after the NAACP demonstration that spawned Dawn and led nowhere, the awful Howard Johnson fiasco, and Roger's out-of-character LSD trip. It happens often but this show especially seemed like the various scenes were written by different people and awkwardly spliced in.

But I'm biased too. Throwing something to show that the character really is ooh, so mad, is one of the worst overused tropes on television. You especially don't throw messy, sticky, gummy stuff that you'll have to clean up yourself. So the Megan portion bothered me as well.

When are we getting back to a good Peggy episode?

[drastic_quench]

Originally Posted by lisacurl

I noticed an interesting hint of where the Lane storyline might be going when he told his wife the reason why SCDP has another shot at landing the Jaguar account. His buddy Mr. Chewing-Gum-on-His-Pubis, from the whorehouse episode, got fired from Jaguar and lost his visa. Lane's wife says something like, "Oh, that's why they returned to England so quickly." If Lane gets fired (or loses his partnership or whatever) for embezzlement, he'd have to go back to England and face jail time for his unpaid taxes.

Oh so you think, until Lane discovers Pete Campbell's office suicide, switches their Curricula Vitae, and assumes his identity.

[Acsenray]

I actually thought it was a funny impression of Swami Prabhupada.

[Gangster Octopus]

Two women throwing tantrums, two divergent audience reactions. In some ways Megan's reaction is healthy, she gets it out if her system, unlike the former Mrs. Draper who kept out all bottled up inside. Note also that Megan basically was fine after she had her say, even asking Don if he wanted some cheese.

[Voyager]

Loved Don and Joan. Lane's embezzlement is a bit too soap-operaish, and I didn't like the Mata Hari Krishna subplot.

Quibble department. I was waiting for them to put in a Star Trek reference, but they did it in a ham-handed way. As of December 8, 1966 ST had shown up to "Conscience of the King" and had shown none of the socially conscious episodes yet - especially considering when he must have started to write the script. "A Taste of Armageddon" with the peaceful but deadly war might qualify, but the first real example is "A Private Little War" in February 1968. I'm not sure the presence of Uhura on the bridge, significant as it was, would have inspired such a 3rd season script.

[Alessan]

I have to hand it to Kinsey, though - writing Trek fanfic in 1966? That's what I call being ahead of the geek curve.

[BluePear]

Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker

Not sure I understood the Hare Krishna subplot. Was she trying to blackmail him after the sex? There was no proof that anything happened, so she has no leverage. What was the point of having sex with him?

I think she might end up pregnant. The references Harry had to seeing his daughter's face while chanting, having 2 children and one on the way, perhaps they were clues.

[Alessan]

She's too much of a professional for that to happen. Remember, she was a hooker before she was a Hare Krishna, and she still has a hooker mentality. Just as Kinsey in a shaved head and robes is still the same deluded, insecure Kinsey. It's one of the themes of the show - the cultural markers may change, but the people don't.

[JKellyMap]

Originally Posted by Alessan

It's one of the themes of the show - the cultural markers may change, but the people don't.

Excellent point! That really sums it up well. You could expand this to include the subtext that advertising methods and content change, but its effectiveness as psychological tool in our commercialized world doesn't.

Responding to an earlier point -- I, too, thought Megan's reaction to Don's pecadillo (of not calling to say he'd be late) was over the top. I hate it when characters throw things like that. In that moment, she lost her "just the sort of 'fighter' Don needs to keep him straight" status for me.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by Don Draper

Megan might be justified to be angry, even yell "Where the hell were you? Why didn't you call?" when he walked in the door.

Throwing a plate of food across the room, slamming another plate of food in front of Don and demanding he eat it while she sits there in stony silence, glaring icily out the window (while the smashed plate of food sits on the floor) qualifies as a tantrum. Especially when it's the first time he's done that to her.

And besides, Megan was Don's secretary for a year (and an office receptionist for longer) and certainly knows that Don is quite often pulling very late nights, or all-nighters, often on the spur of the moment, and rushing out at the drop of the hat to glad-handle clients. Running out for cocktails on the spur of the moment with the CEO of Heinz Baked Beans (for example) is just a part of his job.

Read the earlier posts that better explained why Meagan was pissed. It wasn't because he came home late and drunk, but because he's slacking at the job he used to love. He needed a kick in the pants, and it seemed to work.

Now, you could argue that it was time well spent to get Joan's groove back, but still, it wasn't just this one event that had her pissed-- it was the cumulation of how Don had been slacking for some time. And she isn't the only one noticing it.

[Jophiel]

Originally Posted by Voyager

Quibble department. I was waiting for them to put in a Star Trek reference, but they did it in a ham-handed way. As of December 8, 1966 ST had shown up to "Conscience of the King" and had shown none of the socially conscious episodes yet - especially considering when he must have started to write the script.

Kinsey was all about showing how socially conscious he was at SC so I could see him writing a terrible heavy-handed allegory even if it wasn't yet SOP for Star Trek. It's not as though Star Trek pioneered the use of terrible allegories in (science fiction) literature.

Peggy: "I don't know... will I catch the Negron Complex?"

[Acsenray]

Yeah, remember, Kinsey was a fan of The Twilight Zone, which also combined speculative fiction and allegory.

[Don Draper]

Originally Posted by Voyager

Loved Don and Joan. Lane's embezzlement is a bit too soap-operaish, and I didn't like the Mata Hari Krishna subplot.

Quibble department. I was waiting for them to put in a Star Trek reference, but they did it in a ham-handed way. As of December 8, 1966 ST had shown up to "Conscience of the King" and had shown none of the socially conscious episodes yet - especially considering when he must have started to write the script. "A Taste of Armageddon" with the peaceful but deadly war might qualify, but the first real example is "A Private Little War" in February 1968. I'm not sure the presence of Uhura on the bridge, significant as it was, would have inspired such a 3rd season script.

Trivia aside - I recall DeForest Kellley stating in an interview (sorry, no cite) once that there had been a script in the works in which Bones & Uhura went on an away mission and ended up stranded on a planet where the dominant skin color was black, and Bones (a Southern man) would have to pass himself off as Uhura's slave. So, Harry was probably speaking more truthfully than he realized when he fed Kinsey his line about "a script being written."

[Miss Mapp]

Originally Posted by Don Draper

Trivia aside - I recall DeForest Kellley stating in an interview (sorry, no cite) once that there had been a script in the works in which Bones & Uhura went on an away mission and ended up stranded on a planet where the dominant skin color was black, and Bones (a Southern man) would have to pass himself off as Uhura's slave. So, Harry was probably speaking more truthfully than he realized when he fed Kinsey his line about "a script being written."

I was just coming in to ask if anybody Trekkier than me remembered this. I think it's mentioned in one of David Gerrold's behind-the-scenes Trek books, which I read years ago. I thought of it the moment I heard the story idea.

[salinqmind]

Originally Posted by Alessan

She's too much of a professional for that to happen. Remember, she was a hooker before she was a Hare Krishna, and she still has a hooker mentality. Just as Kinsey in a shaved head and robes is still the same deluded, insecure Kinsey. It's one of the themes of the show - the cultural markers may change, but the people don't.

She irritated me - look at "reformed whore" Dora May Dinglehopper from Buttsville, Ohio - calling herself Lakshmi!! - latching on to the Hare Krishnas. She may or may not be a true believer, but her actions show how she is in it for gain, not blind worship. She isn't a saved devotee of the Krishnas, she's an enforcer, or trying to be. She is trying to keep Kinsey in the cult because he's their best recruiter, so she falls back on her whore-skills to try to make that happen. Dope. I hope hope hope he takes the money and leaves for California.

[Jophiel]

Originally Posted by Alessan

Just as Kinsey in a shaved head and robes is still the same deluded, insecure Kinsey.

I love his pissed, petulant look when Harry casually mentions having a vision while chanting for the first time.

[Voyager]

Originally Posted by Miss Mapp

I was just coming in to ask if anybody Trekkier than me remembered this. I think it's mentioned in one of David Gerrold's behind-the-scenes Trek books, which I read years ago. I thought of it the moment I heard the story idea.

I think I've heard of this plot also. There was "Let this be your last battlefield" with Frank Gorshin about a two races, half black and half white, fighting because one was black on the left and the other was black on the right.

Kinsey's script would fit in well with other ST scripts - just not at the beginning of the first season. There were plenty of deep scripts, like Richard Matheson's on the good Kirk and bad Kirk. Just not this type, not yet. And I watched it from the very first show.

[Mixolydian]

My first thought when Kinsey said he had written a Star Trek episode was that it was "The Way To Eden" (the "Herbert" episode)

[Slade]

Why are we getting a Christmas episode in May? Didn't this just show in the US for the first time a couple of days ago?

[Acsenray]

Mad Men has never coordinated plots with airdate. I can't think of many dramas that bother, especially on cable.

[enalzi]

Originally Posted by Acsenray

Mad Men has never coordinated plots with airdate. I can't think of many dramas that bother, especially on cable.

And usually a month or so passes between episodes of Mad Men, so it's pretty much impossible to get them to line up.

[Gestalt]

Originally Posted by John Mace

Read the earlier posts that better explained why Meagan was pissed. It wasn't because he came home late and drunk, but because he's slacking at the job he used to love. He needed a kick in the pants, and it seemed to work.

Now, you could argue that it was time well spent to get Joan's groove back, but still, it wasn't just this one event that had her pissed-- it was the cumulation of how Don had been slacking for some time. And she isn't the only one noticing it.

I generally don't think that throwing a plate of food across a room is a great way to get any across.
Also she had been seeing him slack off for a looong time now and it never seemed to bother her before. I think it was some combination of concern about his diminished interst in work and a strong awareness of Don's cheating past and the fact that she grew up in a household of infidelity. But mostly the last two.

I loled when she brought up the "hollowness of consumerism" while wearing a fancy dress in a penthouse in Manhattan.

[Exapno Mapcase]

Originally Posted by enalzi

And usually a month or so passes between episodes of Mad Men, so it's pretty much impossible to get them to line up.

When has this happened? They've been running weekly with no interruption this year.

[Washoe]

Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase

When has this happened? They've been running weekly with no interruption this year.

enalzi means a month in the Mad Men timeline, not in the presentation schedule of the episodes. If I’m not mistaken, it’s now December of ’66, right?

[ThelmaLou]

Originally Posted by Washoe

If I’m not mistaken, it’s now December of ’66, right?

Correct.





The end of the first semester of my freshman year in college (if anyone is wondering).

[Washoe]

Originally Posted by ThelmaLou

The end of the first semester of my freshman year in college (if anyone is wondering).

I had just turned five that October. They’re just now starting to show things that I have a vague memory of.

[Mr Downtown]

I keep trying to figure out who the Jaguar salesman was. He sounded just like Tobey Maguire.

[zbuzz]

Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase

Throwing something to show that the character really is ooh, so mad, is one of the worst overused tropes on television. You especially don't throw messy, sticky, gummy stuff that you'll have to clean up yourself.

Maybe Megan was up for the roll of Oscar Madison in the Broadway production of The Odd Couple.
"It's not spaghetti, it's linguini."
"Now, it's garbage."


I really love what a conscientious slime ball Harry is. He cheats on his pregnant wife, bangs the love of Paul's life, screws her again by pointing out she gave away the only thing she had to offer and then makes an earnest effort to help Paul, not out of guilt, I think, but to actually point him in a better (or at least different) direction.

And it dawns on me that if Lane really needed some quick cash, between Roger's and Harry's largesse, all he had to do was pitch a few campaign ideas, sell his office and join the Hare Krishnas. At SCDP, that alone is worth like $1700.

[alphaboi867]

Originally Posted by enalzi

And usually a month or so passes between episodes of Mad Men, so it's pretty much impossible to get them to line up.

Plus Weiner did originaly want a fall, 2011 start date for the season. He probally took that into considertion when he was ploting the arc out.

[Tim R. Mortiss]

First of all, my apologies for the late bumping of this thread. I'm a bit in arrears in my MM watching. I just saw this ep tonight.

I loved the Star Trek reference. Especially in light of the fact that Kinsey always reminded me of Will Riker, with his beard and pipe. I couldn't look at him and not think of Jonathan Frakes. And then he returns with a Star Trek script? It was just tooooo perfect. Yowza!