Mad News, January 7-9, 2009
Matt Weiner has been nominated for a Director’s Guild of America award for Meditations in an Emergency. Also nominated is Alan Taylor for The Mountain King. (Also, an episode of Lost, of In Treatment, and of The Wire. Whatever.) The Hollywood Reporter helpfully points out that this is only the second television episode Matt ever directed. Pretty damn impressive.
Jennifer Aniston wants a Mad Men cameo.
Numerous articles are reporting on AMC president Charles Collier’s remarks on the TV critic’s tour. He says season 3 will be back in the summer and Matt Weiner is still negotiating with Lionsgate. People, this isn’t news. “Will be back” we knew over a month ago, when the actors signed, and “still negotiating” is the very definition of “not news.” Like, our header even knows that! Of some interest is the vitriol poured out by “Anonymous” commentator(s) at Alan Sepinwall’s palce. All about Weiner’s evil ego (as bad as Sorkin! Oh the humanity!).
Lazy Eye Theater includes the dazzling Christina Hendricks on its list of Twenty Redheaded Ladies.
The gossip will not die: Was Jeremy Piven fired from Speed-the-Plow? EOnline says yes.
Rob Salem writes about the TV critics tour, hoping AMC will announce the return of Matt Weiner.
Pre-awards season, the LA Times explores what it is about Mad Men that drives critics wild with praise.
The 60s are back in men’s hairstyles. Of course, they’re referred to as “Mad Men” styles.
The Gawker hates Trust Me, which it calls a bad Mad Men rip-off.
In an article about AMC’s mini-series remake of The Prisoner, The Observer takes a shot at Lionsgate for not finalizing negotiations with Matt Weiner.
The House Next Door reviews an abysmal year in television, with Mad Men singled out as one of the few bright spots, and then lists “20 episodes and TV moments” that were 2008 highlights. Does it seem like everyone who singles out an episode picks a different one? This time it’s Three Sundays.
Eric Deggans gives us Golden Globes should win/will win. For Best Drama, he says Mad Men should, In Treatment will. For Best Actress in a Drama he says January Jones should, Anna Paquin will.
January Jones got fugged again. We can expect more, come the Globes. Just a feeling.
January 10th, 2009 at 3:35 am
Oh, Jan. Again with the fugs? How many does this make? Oh well, at least it means you’re on the radar. Welcome to the big time…
January 10th, 2009 at 10:45 am
Kristen Dos Santos has a video posted predicting the Golden Globes, she talks about January and the show winning or not…check it out…
http://www.eonline.com/videos/index.jsp
January 10th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Jennifer Aniston on MM would be a very bad idea. She is no so high-profile that she would take viewers out of the scene.
And JJ’s fug is, imho, one of her lesser ones. She might have escaped, had she not posed with Alba. She needs to dress like this more often.
January 10th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
And here’s a direct link to the Dos Santos clip.
January 10th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Years ago, and I mean years ago, I remember Aniston on an episode of Quantum Leap. I think she was playing a 50s girl, maybe an early 60s girl. It was obviously pre-Friends, and certainly pre-too-thin and pre-nips-and-tucks. She was such a cutie, if a bit of a funny-face, but in the sweetest possible way.
So were her hugeness not such a distraction factor, I’d be for it.
No. Today I found the girl I want on Mad Men:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001694/
January 10th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Karl, she is gorgeous in that dress and her hair is perfect.
January 10th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Aniston needs to put the pipe down. No way Miss Toned and Zone-dieted to within an inch of her life is going to make a convincing MM character.
January 10th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Drama at a party honoring January’s Golden Globe nomination….
http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/marc_malkin/b78299_mad_mens_january_jons_good_crush_have.html
January 10th, 2009 at 5:56 pm
Jan’s regular appearance on GFY make me laugh because Friday Lara Spencer was all excited about seeing what JJ would wear to the GG because she “Wears fashion so beautifully.” !! The fact that she said that with a straight face made me want to ask for a breathalyzer. She certainly has her moments, like the pic you referred to Karl, but more often than not she looks terrible.
January 10th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
I have to second (or third) the No-Aniston-on-MM campaign. Definitely too modern looking and air-brushed. Didn’t MW once state in an interview that he specifically didn’t hire actors who looked like they had work done?
Anyway, love the girl you found on IMDB, Roberta. She has a nice smoldering quality that would give DD agita (sp?). Thanks for sharing.
January 11th, 2009 at 2:10 am
catherine, I have been a Meredith Salenger fan forever. And she is one of these actresses who has been cast more than once in period pieces or roles.
January 11th, 2009 at 10:46 am
I love Meredith Salenger! I remember seeing her and John Cusack as teen actors in The Journey of Natty Gann and looking forward to them becoming adult stars. Well, I was half-right. Also, she’d be yet another Whedonverse connection: Grace the teacher in the 1950’s flashbacks in “I Only Have Eyes For You” (Buffy, Season 2).
January 11th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
Me too, the loving her. And it is both of those roles that make me say, Hmm. Period. 30s and 50s, if I’m recalling correctly.
When I saw her on Buffy, I knew I recognized her, and went back, looked up the name, and put it together with Natty Gann.
Love her.
And whatever happened to that John Cusack? :- )
January 11th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Someone’s complaining about Weiner having an ego? Egads! Someone in Hollywood has an ego!
What a bunch of garbage. In Hollywood (says someone talking from experience) ego often sells your idea mroe than the property itself. They want to act like humilty is important when all it means is your offering your neck to be stepped on. Without ego, how else do you expect a mediocre hack like Seth “Family Guy” MacFarlane got himself a 100 million dollar development deal? Not by talent.
January 11th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
*you’re, not your.
January 11th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
I wasn’t going to get into the MW ego thing, but:
1. Tom has a point about H’wood and ego generally;
2. Despite that, MW goes out of his way to give credit to others. Consider his complaint about the exclusion of MM cast members as presenters at the Emmys. Or the way in which the S1 DVDs (over which he also had control) mix commentary from cast members, directors, writers, and production folks like Janie Bryant and Dan Bishop. And that MW’s own commentary mentions people like Joanna Bradley, etc.
3. It’s tough to give much credit to blog commenters who assert that the S2 ratings were about the same S1, when they were significantly higher. At that link, you also discover:
So some ego on MW’s part would be entirely warranted — and I write that as someone who has previously written that MW’s reported initial position (Sopranos-esque money) was more likely a bargaining stance than a realistic expectation.
January 12th, 2009 at 9:58 am
Add me to the “please, no Anniston on Mad Men” throng. Did anyone else note the comment she made about loving the ’50’s??? Has she actually SEEN the show, or does she just know it’s the coolest thing on TV?
January 12th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
I’m betting she is aware it’s the coolest thing on t.v. and is wanting a boost to her, dare I say it, sagging career. She’s still super high-profile and making movies, but she isn’t the draw she used to be. She gets more media attention these days for comments about Brad Pitt & Angelina Jolie than for her acting work.
The wildly successful book is what put backsides in theatre seats for “Marley & Me” for the most part, not it’s 2-legged stars.
I’ll jump on the “no Anniston on Mad Men” bandwagon.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Jennifer Aniston? 1950’s? Oh, no. Please, no! That sort of self-promotion would diminish the whole mood of the Mad Men world. Everyone will be wanting to trot out a cameo. I crave the story’s substance. Celebrity be damned.