This fall brings two Mad Men inspired period pieces on major networks. While they may not be as good as our beloved Mad Men, the networks clearly see a market for shows set in the early 1960s. Do you plan to watch Pan-Am on ABC or The Playboy Club on NBC this fall?
The last network drama I watched was The X-Files in the late nineties (I quit after season 5). No. NBC might have a few good sitcoms on right now, but dramatic series only belong on cable channels.
Yes, plan to watch both shows, if only to check out the stews uniforms, and was wondering when they would debut.
Tks!
No. I only have about an hour a week to watch TV, so when Mad Men’s not on I usually spend that watching 30 Rock and Parks and Rec.
I’ll read the reviews, and if they’re good, I’ll watch one episode each to test ‘em.
But I’ve been burned by network drama shows too much, as well.
Usually formulaic or crap: if they’re at all interesting they get cancelled (Swingtown.)
I just realized that like Half-Smiles, all the dramas I watch are on cable.
What a coincidence.
Oh, maybe not even one episode of the Playboy Club, after all.
Well, cross this one off my list.
I was iffy about it: seemed like just another Mad Man rip off (Pan Am, anyone?) without acknowledging the realities of the period.
But a know-nothing 20 something anorexic actress dissing an entire generation of women (who lived through that period) to defensively support her jiggle show?
http://blogs.indiewire.com/womenandhollywood/archives/2011/08/03/the_playboy_club_is_about_womens_empowerment/
Honey, we were there, and the only reason women are where they are in the professions is because we were there and fighting for them.
You want women to pretend that two steps back was “empowereing” while you pretend for a job? Fine, but we did something about real careers for real women, so shut the fuck up.
I am moving to a place where I don’t know a lot of people——I won’t turn into a MAJOR recluse but for those **few** lonely nights I will probably get into these shows. So sue me. I like the costumes.
I doubt it. I don’t have cable & have to buy MM via iTunes. I go to a lot of trouble & expense (for my budget) to see it. These look pretty awful. I will probably see them for a few minutes, once, to check out the period details. but that’s it.
I might check out “Pan Am”, but I’m with freelancewoman on “The Playboy Club”.
Network TV is basically kid-tested, mother-approved marketing slush. Middle america vanilla gusts are not conducive to jarring, cutting edge, ground breaking programming. Its strange that MM is being aped by the networks because its buzz and its actual audience are miles apart. MM’s viewership is affluent, intensely loyal, and only 2.8 million strong on average. Half of what another show on AMC gets! Its been called the best show no one watches. The quality of the show is its cache. I doubt very much that these programs will be at that elite level. No, I will not watch. My network viewing will stay at 30 Rock Modern Family, Community and Family Guy. The only dramas worth watching fir me are Boardwalk Empire and Dexter. Not coincidentally both, are on cable.
At my 10 year reunion, one of my high school class was lauded as someone who’d become a bunny in a Playboy club in New Jersey (no less).
An undeniably pretty girl, but she hadn’t been on the college prep track in school, and confided that Bunny was just a glorified waitress job.
That got her nowhere, especially in comparison to those of us who were then staking out actual professions.
Maybe, just maybe, it had been a (relatively) empowering job in the major cities in the early ’60s, but that was only because so much else was closed to women.
If Playboy Club is all glorification, I have to agree with this writer:
“Me thinks this young woman better have a damn good show or she should just shut the fuck up and admit she’s on a show that’s about women wearing bunny costumes trying to get by in the world where it was really difficult for single women to get jobs that would pay a decent wage. You see if they framed it that way, I could potentially be interested. As of right now, this show has no shot with me.”
http://blogs.indiewire.com/womenandhollywood/archives/2011/08/03/the_playboy_club_is_about_womens_empowerment
And the reality of the Pan Am girls is that at 30 all of them would have been tossed out of their high-flying careers by age discrimination. (Airlines then “retired” stewardesses around 30, or earlier, if they gained weight.)
Tossed out into the work world without having built experience in any other field. Or much savings or pension, since it was considered “glamorous” work that didn’t pay well.
I met one of those former stewardesses in 1970, aged out and tossed out at 30, who was shaken to the core. Her only option, she said, was to go back to live with her parents. And do what for a living? She didn’t know.
So much for glamor, until the “feminists” fought against the age discrimination used to retire flight attendants.
I’ll probably check out both shows, but I don’t have high hopes for either of them. At least Pan Am has Christina Ricci. I mean, Wednesday Addams as a Pan Am stewardess is at least a little intriguing. LOL.
The Playboy Club looks lame. Did I say that loud enough? LAME! If the show were more about the magazine — or even the Playboy empire as a hole — rather than one club in Chicago, it might hold some promise. Considering what was happening in the 1960s, and Playboy’s role in shaping and reflecting that, well, that could be interesting. Especially given the timbre of their articles and interviews, which were, at that time, first rate — candid, provocative…just honest, not sugar-coated or watered down. Some of the best reportage of figures like Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr., for example, came from Playboy. Was there public outcry and outrage over this? Was that outcry different then than it is now? Did they have trouble with distribution? With censors or advertisers? How did their reportage on controversial issues affect circulation and the subsequent water cooler conversations that followed? How did the women who worked there really feel — especially the ones not involved in the “glamor” jobs of modeling or “bunnying.” By making it about the club, or rather one guy who frequents the club (at least that’s how they’re marketing it), they take away these possibilities, and it becomes more about high-fiving men having drinks and getting to ogle women who wear bunny suits. Yuck.
I find it really disturbing that a show with the direct participation of Hugh Hefner is being marketed as being all about women’s empowerment. A critique of The Playboy Clubs might be interesting, but that’s not going to happen with Hugh Hefner involved. I have my doubts about Pan Am too, but I’m willing to watch the pilot. But ever since these shows were announced, I’ve been worried that they’re just going to be Mad Men minus the feminist critique.
I don’t have high hopes for either show, but I’ll probably review at least the premieres here.
the “smart” money says to cash in on the retro 60′s fad before it flames out. so let’s give those can fall prey to the Jedi Mind Trick some eye candy and tell them these ARE the droids they’re looking for and maybe, just maybe, we hit paydirt.
i hate to pre-judge anything without looking, after all Mad Men didn’t (and still doesn’t) sound like it can hold an audience. so what’s the gimmick, the smart money asks. it’s gotta be the 60′s retro thing.
the nostalgia for times never known. god forbid the smart money try ecellent writing, compelling acting and serious direction.
like anyone trying to cash in on a “fad”, they generally miss the heart of the original. i remember how the smart money said the Beatles fad was over when Lennon made his Jesus crack. then the boys stopped touring and released Rubber Soul. the samrt money never saw it coming.
but the answer is yes, of course i’ll watch; if for no other reason than to laud it all over those shows as they fail to hit the high water mark already established. or, hopefully, they might even be good.
@11 Freelance, that’s incredible, and so sad. I hope that former stewardess found a new career, and happiness.
I’m interested in Pan Am, but not so much Playboy Club. I’ll watch both once or twice to see how they are. I’m not expecting the caliber of MM at all, and in today’s competitive TV climate, who knows if either of these will last for more than a month? But if Pan Am is fun and dishy enough, it will hold me until THE REAL THING comes back in March! Only Seven months, kids!
I’ll watch them both.
I am curious.
Truth be told, cable has the networks beat.
If I am not watching cable dramas like Boardwalk, In Treatment, Curb Your Enthusiasum, then I am watching TCM looking for Clark Gable, Van Johnson, Joel McCrea, Cary Grant, ect.
I love to live in the past.
I will be looking for the Lipp Sisters review.
I’ll check both shows out, even though I was PO’d when NBC cancelled “The Event”. It didn’t get great ratings, but I thought it was a pretty novel sci-fi drama. I wish AMC had put on “The Event” on instead of “Rubicon”.
I’ve heard rumors that NBC-owned SyFy might put together a 2-hr movie to tie up all the loose ends of “The Event,” but I’d much rather see the show continue production for a new season or two, to let it all play out that way. There are also rumors that Netflix might produce new episodes of the show and stream it.
I just don’t watch network shows. Every time I try one, I lose interest. Didn’t even watch Lost.
March, Therese? I though MM season 5 is gonna start in Jan. 2012..
??? Anybody confirm this?
By the by, Gloria Steinem is still working in her profession, fifty years later. The likelihood is that in a decade or two this blonde bimbo actress defending Playboy Club (by slagging “feminists”) will herself be as irrelevant as the Playboy Bunny.
But if even one of the five actresses leads in Playboy Club still has an acting career 20 years from now, in her 40s, it will be because “older women” constitute an audience the entertainment business will want to serve more than it does now.
And if any of them are able to extend their career by producing, directing or writing, it will be because the “feminists” fought for that the last 40 years.
Thanks for the gratitude, you who pretend for a living.
freelancewoman, I don’t think it furthers the cause of feminism to call an actress a “blonde bimbo.” If she has a stupid opinion, call out the stupid opinion without engaging in gendered insults.
berk, I haven’t see The Good Wife. In all honesty, I never understood the fuss over Julianne Marguiles on ER.
Nope, didn’t follow Lost, either.
But I’m not a big fantasy fan.
Is Fox considered a “network”? Is Glee considered a drama? If so, Glee is the only network drama I watch.
With all this (fully justified) slagging off of network drama, I’m surprised that no-one here has mentioned The Good Wife, which is pretty good.
The summer of ’81 brought Raiders of the Lost Ark. That very fall 2 networks tried to cash in on the adventure thing with (are you ready?) Tales of the Gold Monkey AND Bring ‘em Back Alive. I still laugh my ass off thinking about it. Belly laugh. What’s sad is that I still recall this unbelievably useless bit of info. Im goin nuts without MM. Yes,Peg. March is the debut of S5.
I like Laura Benanti from Playboy Club, so I’ll watch the premier to see her and how the show is. Pan Am I won’t watch. I automatically lower my expectations with broadcast tv. I’ll watch the final season of Chuck, even though I thought their previous season was weak, and current spoilers don’t hold that much interest for me. Oh, and there is Criminal Minds and the Mentalist, but that’s because of Shemar Moore and Simon Baker. I can be very shallow when I watch tv too!!
I’ve seen some early reviews for Pan Am that were positive. (I can’t find them now, of course, but they were written with a tone of surprise.) The combination of Christina Ricci and Thomas Schlamme — who directed and EPed The West Wing and SportsNight — intrigues me. The previews actually seem to acknowledge the sexism and size-ism of the job. Unless the reviews are really good, however, I don’t think I’ll even sample The Playboy Club.
I’ll probably check out the first episodes, then see what Deborah has to say. And Tom & Lorenzo, of course!
You mean that after she insulted feminists, Gloria Steinem (and me!) with that false “combat boot” analogy, I’m supposed to be polite?
Fuck that shit. I’d never heard of the actress before, but from what I read later in one thread she may be known, primarily, for appearing nude in just about everything.
Whether that’s true or not doesn’t matter to me, I don’t think nudity earns a her a “bimbo,” but her empty-headed insults did.
Whatever. She’ll be history in a decade, or two: it’s the Meryl Streeps and Kathy Bates and Gloria Steinems who continue to work after 40 (and into their 60s!), not the bimbos.
freelancewoman, I believe that feminism means that calling someone a name based on being a woman, or being a sexual woman, isn’t okay, because being a sexual woman shouldn’t be inherently insulting. If we can’t remove that shit from the language of people who care deeply about women’s rights, we haven’t a hope of changing people who care less.
According to the Miriam Webster dictionary, bimbo is genderless:
Definition of BIMBO
1slang : man, woman —used as a generalized term of disapproval especially for an attractive but vacuous person
Yeah, that’s bullshit. If it was genderless, people wouldn’t say “himbo.” That’s the dictionary speaking to an original meaning, not current usage.
I never said be polite. You’re a writer, surely you can come up with insults that aren’t guided by the patriarchy.
Finally looked her up on IMDB, and it turns out I’ve seen Amber Heard in two films and a TV series.
(Can’t remember any nudity, but also didn’t remember her, which can’t be a good sign.)
One of the first reviews of Playboy Club is in, and it’s not a rave:
“The Playboy Club: A cheesy TV show is marketed as ‘empowerment’
On the evidence of the pilot episode, The Playboy Club… is all surface and not much substance. The show is set in the first club founded by Hugh Hefner in Chicago in 1961. Everybody smokes and drinks with abandon. Men make sexist remarks with blithe ignorance of the social rules that would evolve and rule us today. Anyone who has seen Mad Men would find it all very banal…
The real issue, however, that ignites extreme wariness about the series, and some outright hostility, is a central tenet of the production – the suggestion that the Playboy Club was “empowering” for the women who worked there…
Many critics were not buying the hard sell. And it’s easy to see why. The show is a mess of melodrama, gangsters, skirt-chasing rich guys and musical numbers…
But the debate about whether Playboy – in all its emanations – empowers or exploits women is not what will draw viewers. It’s the jiggle and the controversy that will achieve that. The show isn’t Mad Men, it’s mediocre TV.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/arts/television/john-doyle/the-playboy-club-a-cheesy-tv-show-is-marketed-as-empowerment/article2117217/
Tks, tilden, for clarifying!
not Bridget- count me as another Tom & Lorenzo fan!….I’ve had trouble finding all the scrumptious MM stills, from seasons past. Any tips? I know they’re around the summer months-into fall, and their search engine is not real precise.
The dropdown menu at the top of Tom & Lorenzo’s screen will take you to TV, then to Mad Men. http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/category/television/mad-men
All the articles, from newest to oldest, although the comments disappeared when they switched formats.
Love, love, love TLo on Mad Men, and just about anything else they write.
Howsumever, they held out the promise of an analysis of the lingerie on Mad Men, which has yet to be fulfilled.
That’s my only criticism: I want more TLo on Mad Men!
That bad review of Playboy Club is probably not the last.
I’ve been to a number of TCAs, and the critics don’t pile on in the general interview like they did unless the pilot episode they’ve seen is a ginormous pile of crapola.
The U.S. TV critics are usually constrained from publishing their critical reviews until just before the season starts: so their attitude in the general interview is a telling indication of the quality of the show.
The “combat boots” actress may be revelling in the attention now, but if she can’t read between the lines, she should prepare for the mudslide of bad reviews that will be barrelling downhill in September at Playboy Club, similar to the one in the Canadian newspaper which sums it up as “cheesy” “banal” “a mess” and “mediocre TV.”
Christina Ricci is in PanAm ? This could be subversive. I will watch if only to see what she does. I might watch Playboy Club (ironic that the title would abbreviate to “PC”), if only to see how bad it is.
I’m going to try them. I saw a promo for Pan Am the other day and it looked good. I can’t remember if I’ve actually seen any promos for The Playboy Club – if so, not recently. But I had read about both shows being on. I’ll give them a try.
Well, I called her “combat boot” actress in the last comment I wrote — but deliberately twisting recent history, and cheap insults simply to deflect from what’s a lousy show, sorry but that still earns a “bimbo” as far as I’m concerned.
Especially since the primary dictionary definition is genderless and apropos:
bim·bo noun \ˈbim-(ˌ)bō\
plural bimbos
Definition of BIMBO
1slang : man, woman —used as a generalized term of disapproval especially for an attractive but vacuous person
2.slang : tramp 1c
I’m not buying the “himbo” defense. Dictionary definitions aren’t static, but are updated to reflect usage and meaning — otherwise we’d still be using Dr. Johnson’s.
Sorry about the bold for the last four lines, it’s late and I apparently screwed up the closing
I’m a little unclear as to what ER has to do with anything, Deborah. The actress didn’t write either that show nor the one she’s in now. It’s a pretty good, well-written, acted and produced show.
ER has to do with the lead actor, berk. I loved the show, the seasons she was on especially were well-written and incredibly entertaining, and the cast was stellar. But I never understood why anyone thought Marguiles could act, and so I haven’t been interested in checking out a show with her as the lead.
Another critic damns Playboy Club with faint, well, not exactly praise:
“The pilot is silly and full of bad dialogue, but it’s cheesy more than offensive…the show is mostly just silly. Stereotypes are thrown into a big furnace and that furnace drives a big engine of pretty, goofy television”
But she also does an excellent job of dissecting the argument of the show’s claim of “empowerment.”:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2011/08/02/138924658/the-bizarre-pitch-for-the-playboy-club-its-all-about-female-empowerment
Sounds like Playboy Club probably won’t earn a slot in my regular viewing, but I’ll at least watch the first episode or two just because it has the adorable Sean Maher.
Pan Am? Probably not.
not Bridget- thanky maam!
I find it absolutely predictable and hilarious that just because Mad Men is a hit, network television figures that anything retro *must* be something the audience will tune into.
Yeah… Pan Am I might see what it’s about (it has Christina Ricci, that’s a big plus) but… Playboy Club, no thanks.
Here’e what Gloria Steinem has to say about “The Playboy Club”, including a mention of “Mad Men”:
http://old.news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110809/tv_nm/us_playboyclub_steinem
I might check out an episode or two. This is funny because I remember in Fall of 2003, the networks decided to do their edgy Sopranos/ The Wire- inspired shows so we got stuff like Kingpin, Line of Fire, and Skin, all of which I watched. Then in Winter ’08, we got the Sex and the City knockoff shows. I guess Kings on NBC was possibly inspired by The Tudors (which I never watched)…
never change network TV, never change. It’s like once cable shows supassed them in quality they just stopped doing anything creative on their own- it’s crime or medical procedurals, and then watered down versions of cable hits- unless the subject is too advertiser-unfriendly i.e. Dexter, Weeds, Queer as Folk.
I also watched Swingtown, and hated that they canceled it.