The TV Zone

Yes, that's the date - the big date. The date to remember...

August 16

At 10 p.m..

(A second marathon begins Monday,t he 10th, at 7 a.m.)

Interesting - AMC says the premiere episode will have "limited" commercial breaks; what's "limited?" Was/is a little controversy over this season's commercial load 'cus AMC is (reportedly) trying to carve some extra ads out of the show, and the show - naturally - is resisting.

>> Check out photos of the most recent season of "Mad Men"

Indie-prod star Jared Harris has joined "Mad Men," per Hollywood Reporter, as financial officer of Sterling Cooper (which means - another antagonist for Don!). Very interesting hire of very interesting actor, most recently in "Benjamin Button" and Tug Boat Guy in "Fringe." Question: What happens to his mad scientist role on "Fringe"? Last seen in a hospital room, having blasted through a wall, leaving a note for Olivia with just two words ("you passed") and that appeared to have been that. He teleported himself away - to a new series on a new network.

Side note: He's son of Richard Harris. Below, a nice clip from TV Guide:

Triumph... (Getty)

Yes, the cameras start rolling this morning. AMC just said production on the third season was about to get underway; August premiere, no date yet.

Note this line: "Returning cast members include Golden Globe winner Jon Hamm (“We Were Soldiers”), Elisabeth Moss (“West Wing”), Vincent Kartheiser (“Angel”), January Jones (“We Are Marshall”), and Christina Hendricks (“Kevin Hill”), as well as guest star John Slattery (“Charlie Wilson’s War,” “K Street”). "

I'm sure it's just a meaningless oversight, or maybe a way save money on ink, that Bryan Batt (Salvatore Romano), Michael Gladis (Paul Kinsey), Aaron Staton (Ken Cosgrove ), Rich Sommer (Harry Crane), or....Robert Morse (Bert Cooper) weren't mentioned.

At least I hope so.

(And nothing to worry about. Just heard from AMC, and I quote: "They are all back!"

Now I can enjoy the rest of the day...)

Don't worry! He's back, with a new two-year deal in hand, and that means at least two more years - or quality years anyway - of "Mad Men."

Matthew Weiner, creator/creative force behind "Mad Men" is on board.

This broke Friday and was all over the trades...sorry for the delay in getting this to you...Here's Matthew's statement:

"Since the beginning, the show has been a charmed experience, made possible by my partnership with AMC and Lionsgate. I am proud to work so closely with these two companies who love taking risks and value creativity and I am thrilled to get back to work with the most talented cast and crew in the business."

A surprise? Not really - AMC and Lionsgate indicated recently that a deal would happen, but working out the details ($$$$$) did seem to take an awfully long time. Reports (via Deadlinehollywood.com months ago) were that Weiner wanted $10 million per. If true, Matt didn't get it; the trades say this is a "seven-figure" deal. (Oh boo hoo.)

In any event, wonderful news, for a great TV series.

Let's get down to trick or treating a little early today, shall we?

Here's our Halloween post of 2008:

Is "Mad Men" done?

That got your attention, I hope. It was was meant to.

Now, I'll get to the list of reasons why the greatest show in basic cable history could have just ended, or have ended its run on AMC.

But first, here's my "*" - or caveat emptor. As longtime readers of 'Zone know, I like to go on occasional flights of fancy; I do this to entertain myself, and hopefully a dozen or so faithful readers. What you are about to read is based on no reporting whatsoever, no inside knowledge, foresight, hunch, or blazing burst of insight that came to me in the night.

It's just reading the basic facts, and - in this instance, Nikki Finke's sensational blog post of a few days ago, where she reported that creator Matthew Weiner's reps were demanding for him ten million per year, in addition to control over promotion, which has sent producer Lionsgate scurrying for a new show runner. None of the Main Stream Media has gone after this story yet because it seems so unbelievable. But I believe it completely.

So, here's why "Mad Men" may be gone - and let's all hope I get the press release later today announcing that Weiner has just been signed to a new deal for a third season:

1.) $10 million is insane, particularly in this economy, and everyone knows it's insane. Particularly insane for Lionsgate, which has chewed off nails on both hands and is working on bone awaiting weekend box office returns for "W" and the much-panned "Saw V."

2.) Carl Icahn recently bumped up his stake in Lionsgate, accompanied by the six most dreaded words in the language - "I believe the stock is undervalued." That's sorta like the Texas chainsaw massacre guy saying, "think I'll go down to Home Depot to see if that Black & Decker 18-volt cordless is still on sale..." Icahn is a killer, and the last thing on the planet he would happily endorse is a ten million buck payout to a producer whose show delivers UNDER 1.5 million viewers per outing.

3.) AMC is a commercial network NOT a pay network, so it MUST base compensation on cost-per-thousand, or eyeballs delivered. Even with a huge premium attached because of "upscale" viewers, ten million smackers doesn't add up. It's telling Lionsgate no deal too, I imagine.

4.) No producer in his or her right mind wants to step up to the plate to do this show, because it's so specific to Weiner's vision, which is why we've gotten no announcement. Besides, the superstars would want a bundle too. Whadaya think Fox paid to get J.J. Abrams back to do "Fringe?" (I'm sure right now he's saying, "not enough...")

5.) Weiner's most insane demand is for promotion. No producer gets promotion at a commercial web - it's an unthinkable demand, or as Don Corleone might say, "That I cannot do."

6.) Weiner obviously wants out at Lionsgate and AMC - my speculation - because he does in fact hate the promotion, one of the great drivers of television circulation, and is disgusted with the low ratings, which he probably blames on promotion.

7.) By floating ten million, Weiner's reps have put the big guns in play, notably HBO and Showtime. They WILL pay that kind of money for Weiner, but they'll want "Mad Men" in the bargain.

8.) Aha, Gay - that's the biggest flaw in your reasoning, says you. AMC already HAS "Men" locked and loaded for the next two seasons, along with the entire cast. It just doesn't have Weiner. Here's what I'd say - AMC's interest can be bought out too. All HBO has to do is float a sufficiently large check, and the entire production shifts over there.

9.) Why would Weiner want HBO or Showtime anyway? Here's the best reason of all. At heart, "Mad Men" is NOT a commercial TV show, as good a job as AMC has done. It'd work best as an hour on a pay web, uninterrupted by ads for Viagra or Listermint. I know this for a fact because that's how I've watched the show, either on DVD or Cablevision's On-Demand. The show, frankly, is ruined by commercials.

10.) My last reason - this season's last episode played like a series finale. Of this, I cannot be dissuaded. If "Mad Men" is in fact done, then Weiner can hold his head up and say, "I completed my vision. I'm satisfied."

Of course, hard core fans aren't. Let's hope I get the press release any minute now.

Last night's "SNL" was a cameo parade off "Mad Men" stars - publicity like this you cannot buy - plus, the return of Maya Rudolph. First clip is Don Draper's Guide to Picking up Women... Amusing. The next one is a winner too: Barack Obama's new variety hour, which is solid as a rock...And, I'm sure by now you know the reason Amy Poehler missed last night, but in case you don't...baby boy, eight pounds, Archie Arnett. Congrats to the parents.

This morning's Variety has what I believe to be one of the more exhaustive discussions of "Mad Men" I've seen, and the guy doing the discussing is none other than creator Matthew Weiner. I could send you to Variety, and Kathy Lyford, who asked the questions, or keep you here, and would prefer to do the latter, but it's so long that that would be ridiculous. So here ya go... There are some good thoughtful questions here, and Weiner is clearly in an expansive mood; there's so much that I've just scanned it. But for you hardcore "Mad Men-iacs," this is a full breakfast.

My quick re-ax: No question about his deal renewal! Unimaginable, unless he set that as a pre-condition (no deal questions). I'll have a little more to say about the "Mad Men" finale in the next day or so, but here is my initial read: Sunday's wrap doesn't feel simply like a season wrap but a SERIES wrap. Really does. The overwhelming sense you (too) will have is that the producers structured this so that it could work as a series' ender - just in case AMC or Lionsgate made the unthinkable decision to pull the plug (they did not, of course) or fail to come up with the money to keep Weiner on board.

They still haven't done the latter.

Please go to the jump to find out what Matthew says about the finale...

Continue reading "Weiner Talks 'Mad Men'" »

Remember that funky contest that "Mad Men" launched a couple months or so ago? To wit: Impersonate someone on staff and you too could land a walk-on role on TV's Best Drama...

We have a winner: Justin Zell and (are you ready for this one?) he does a pretty good Joan Holloway, though I imagine Christina Hendricks may be a little put off by his multi-day facial growth and rather large meaty arms. But use your imagination here...this COULD be Joan, with a lot of make-up and a very skillful photoshop editor...

Way to go, JZ...

In my continuing and unashamed efforts to promote "Mad Men" - great show, have you heard? - I now post this trailer or "sneak peak" of this Sunday's second episode. It's thin gruel, I'm afraid, and barely - and I do mean barely - hints at what you'll see this weekend, but (for us hardcore fans) something's better than nothing...

Not being at the press tour, and thus not having an opportunity to ask all the big questions at yesterday's Matthew Weiner sesh - Matthew is the show-runner and creator - then I'm going to have to ask them, and answer them myself. It's a lonely and somewhat delusional task, but someone's gotta do it. Here goes:

Have you told your AMC bosses that you're gonna end the show after five seasons?

Yup, the fact that Weiner has a five-and-over strategy in mind was the headline yesterday, but did he tell the network? Remember how pleasantly surprised ABC was when Darlton told the press tour that they were wrapping in a couple seasons? (I think they told press tour, tho coulda been somewhere else.) Poor ol' AMC finally has a hit and maybe even a Best Drama Emmy winner, and it's already OVER? If I was them, I'm not entirely sure I'd be pleased at this moment...

Is five-and-over a good idea?

Hell yeah! Five is perfect (Weiner will hop the show each season up two years, so that it'll end by '69.) Here's why. There has to be an end-point in the Don Draper story. A dramatic arc has been set - his real identity - and if you think of an arc as, well, an arc, then you realize that what goes up, must come down. Why '69? One reason: can you imagine Jon Hamm with '70s sideburns and leisure suits? God knows, I can't.

What's the deal with Peggy's baby, Matthew?

I mean, how can someone - in the course of a 44 minute episode - discover that they are pregnant and then deliver the kid? This always seemed to me like a strange misstep in one of the most sure-footed shows on TV.

Will Betty have an affair?

Of course she will, but with whom? And how will Don find out? Or will he? And will she find out about his serial affairs by 1962 when the new season begins? I mean, don't you think she should after the last part of last season hinted broadly and strongly that the scales had finally fallen from her eyes, and she realized what a cad the perfect husband really was? Don't you just love questions that are answered with a whole bunch of other questions?

What about Roger - played to incandescent perfection by one of the great character actors in TV history who is none other than John Slattery? Will Roger be back?

I haven't seen the new season opener yet, but I'm worried about Rog, with his bad ticker and doomed personality, much as Victor Lang was doomed to be offed by a fence post in "Desperate Housewives." I just can't see this show without Slattery. I don't WANT to see it without him. He's the core of the show - the man who believes the lie and lives the lie and has perfected the lie. To Roger, a lie is the truth, and Slattery has captured this alternate universe aspect of his character so perfectly that when he's on screen, the whole show tilts visibly and forcibly in his direction. Please, Matthew. Please tell me Rog is OK.

How are you gonna incorporate black characters on the show this season?

You spoke of this, I guess, in that NYTimes piece or maybe somewhere else - I don't remember where. But this is the '60s - not to point out the obvious - and not 2008. I think I counted two black characters last season. The elevator operator and the janitor who glanced - in shock and amusement - at the silhouette of Peggy's foot during the scene that, umm, yielded the baby. Peggy ultimately got her promotion because she understood female products, like that weight-loss-vibrator-sex-device. Will a black character be developed in a similar way?

(Pix courtesy of AMC.)

I love these gimmicks - they offer the possibility that I too will one day be as famous as Spencer Pratt, and maybe get my own reality show.

But I'm getting ahead of myself. Here's the deal: AMC is launching a contest to a.) get more people to watch its break-out hit; and b.) Offer a lucky Pratt wannabe to stand next to Don Draper and tell him how to create a new campaign for Clearasil.... The cameo will air in the third season (which I don't believe AMC has even officially announced yet.)

Details, per AMC: "Just perform pre-selected lines for Don Draper, Pete Campbell, Roger Sterling, Betty Draper, Peggy Olson or Joan Holloway and send us your video." I checked out some of the lines, and they're pretty well-known to "MM" fanatics - like the one after Roger recovers from his heart attack and tells Joan Holloway (right) what, ummm, a nice lady she is, and how lucky he is to have, ummmm, known her. Or the time when Campbell says he invented direct marketing.

AMC says to go here for more details and how to enter, etc.

And...the second season begins July 27. But you already knew that.

The second-season premiere of our favorite series, "Mad Men," draws closer -- just six weeks from this Sunday.

But if you need your "MM" fix before July 27, AMC will be airing "The Best of Mad Men: Season One," a 30-minute special premiering Sunday at 11:30 a.m.

The special offers interviews with cast members Jon Hamm (Don Draper), Elisabeth Moss (Peggy Olson), Vincent Kartheiser (Pete Campbell), January Jones (Betty Draper), Christina Hendricks (Joan Holloway) and John Slattery (Roger Sterling) as they reminisce about favorite moments on set and what they really think about the sex, lies and storyline surprises from the first season.

Here's Hamm talking about one of his most powerful moments. “It’s one of the first times where you really see my character show emotion,” says Jon Hamm about the scene where Don Draper pays off his younger brother to leave him alone. “The guy who played my brother (Jay Paulson) was really excellent. I just remember shooting and thinking, ‘This guy is amazing.’ The scene was incredibly powerful. That was the only time on the set where the camera crew actually applauded.”

And by the way, the DVD of the first season drops on July 1.

I’m really gonna miss “Mad Men.”

But I’m glad that it’ll be back in the summer of 2008. Something to look forward to, along with finding out whether Willie Randolph will still be managing the Mets.

Anyway, last night’s finale was plenty intense: Don finally showing some emotion (learning the fate of his brother, returning to an empty house) was a satisfying breakthrough. And Betty’s first tentative steps away from being a submissive housewife was a nice touch as well.

But the pregnant Peggy (and she didn’t know it?) storyline was right out of grade-Z soap opera. Peggy sure has looked porky the past few months — and I guess it’s been about nine months since she had that late-night tryst with groom-to-be Pete, so it wasn’t a total surprise. But can’t “Mad Men” do better than that? (You just know that Peggy is gonna give away the baby when next season arrives, the better to focus on her new career as junior copywriter.)

All I can say, it’s gonna be a lot more fun in ‘61.

(And very cool was the shots of the wrap party. I always wondered what the actors looked like as their 2007 selves, not their 1960 characters, and now I can rest peacefully)

What did you think of "The Mad Men" finale? Post here.