#i had a truly Huge cast of characters that each had rich and diverse backgrounds

[lionfanged]

looks at ‘let me introduce u to my other ocs’ meme look at atticus, who has chased away every other oc ive ever tried to think of for the last nine years sweats

#LOOK... man i would LOVE to have a full cast of ocs and i?? kinda do?? #theyre all npcs in atticus's world though and ive just... never rly had the opportunity to flesh Any of them out #rp is rly all i do bcuz i have no energy anymore for personal writing beyond it #so his npcs never rly crop up and thus never get a shot at further development #but let me tell u tho when i was younger and not on tumblr i was an OC Making Wizard #i'd make a new character for every rp i started it is wild to think back on #i had a truly Huge cast of characters that each had rich and diverse backgrounds #(well as rich and diverse as like a teenager/adolescent can write gfkljfgdj) #one day... perhaps one day atticus will loosen the reins... and Share...

[briangroth27]

Ready or Not Review

I really liked Ready or Not! It’s a very entertaining horror adventure with a healthy dose of comedy and a great lead in Samara Weaving. The supporting cast is on point too and everyone involved more than capably delivers a really fun thrill ride!

Full Spoilers...

Weaving's Grace is hoping to find a family once she marries her fiancé, Alex (Mark O’Brien), but everything goes wrong when his family tradition of playing a game each wedding night leaves her running for her life. Weaving imbues Grace with a winning way that makes her easy to root for, which is very important since we don't learn much about her interests or aspirations outside the family here. Her interactions with and reactions to the members of the Le Domas clan (along with her struggle to survive) give us a good grasp of who she is as a person (and that's just as if not more important as her biography), but I would've liked to know what she wanted out of life beyond a family and a solid home. Given no one in the movie really gets those details, however, it doesn't feel like she was slighted or underwritten. Her drive to have a family after living through foster homes was strong enough to give her a relatable goal and to fuel the tragedy that what she wants demands her death. The movie sends her through the ringer and Weaving absolutely sold Grace's growing confidence and grit in the face of so many would-be killers. She wasn't ever helpless or short of the ability to defend herself, but carving out an independent life apart from what she wanted was handled really well as the metaphorical component to her literal struggle to survive. I really liked that her most deliberate murder was the one that also eliminated any chance of a happy marriage to Alex, since she kills his mom Becky (Andie MacDowell), whom he loved her more than his new wife.

The script and direction did a great job of balancing Alex’s wish that he was different from his family with the dawning truths that he really did believe as they did and that he would choose them over Grace. The very act of putting her in a situation that could lead to her death without telling her—even if the Hide & Seek card hadn't been drawn in 30 years—was a huge red flag and I'm glad they followed through to the conclusion of that plot point. The romantic music swelling when he told Grace he'd proposed to her because she'd leave him otherwise didn't convince me that he was a good guy (he would have explained why they couldn’t get married or just let her go rather than risk her life if he really loved her), so I was happy the movie used the romantic music as a trick instead of a true emotional beat. There were other small hints at his turn along the way, so his was a nicely-constructed and acted arc too.

Alex’s brother Daniel (Adam Brody) was initially drawn as sleazy and unlikable, so I wasn’t expecting either of the moments where he helps Grace escape. I definitely didn’t think he’d turn out to be the best of his clan, particularly given his role in the last Hide & Seek game they played. However, I fully bought his turn after Brody and the movie showed the toll his choice back then had taken on him and how exhausted with everything about his family he was. Most of the Le Domas family were pretty affable on the surface (accounting for niceties at a wedding), and the actors and writers crafted a nice blend of reasons for them to stick with the family as well as some very entertaining comic relief within the group. Like Grace, we don’t hear a lot about their goals or dreams, but through the writing and performances it was easy to see who these people were from their actions and interactions alone. I did believe that they were truly hoping the Hide & Seek card wasn’t pulled and not just because they knew they’d all be terrible at hunting a person. That obviously doesn’t excuse any of their actions—they still put Grace in that position and immediately went through with trying to kill her to save themselves and the family business—but I liked that the movie took the step of giving them a bit of humanity before carrying out their ritual. That actually made them scarier, since people who do evil, selfish things are still people and pretending that only inhuman monsters are murderers (or racists, sexists, white supremacists, etc.) is dangerous.

There are some solid foils set up for Grace amongst the women of the Le Domas family. Becky is who Grace might want to be: the outsider welcomed into the family so that she can build a large one of her own and in doing so, find a stable home. They have the closest bond, come from similar lower class backgrounds, and the movie makes note of them both being smokers, providing another small connection between them (even if Grace lies about it to impress Becky). The ironically-named Charity (Elyse Levesque) is the cliché reflection of Grace (and possibly how we’d expect a wealthy family to see someone joining them from the lower classes): she’s literally there for the money and security that being part of this family provides. Emilie (Melanie Scrofano) is Grace without her grit (and what Grace hopes the family doesn’t see her as): a screw-up in over her head who has no idea what she’s doing, but who’s desperate to impress the family. Aunt Helene (Nicky Guadagni), on the other hand, is who Grace could be if she were all grit and devotion to the family. Looking at them this way had me wondering if the men in the Le Domas clan are foils for Alex as well. Daniel is set up as the red herring evil brother and their trajectories are opposites: Alex left but never really “left” the family while Daniel stayed, but that only allowed him to stew in how terrible they all are. Fitch (Kristian Bruun) does bring up cutting and running once, but ultimately he’s fully willing to go along with the ritual and between Alex fleeing the family and Daniel drinking himself into snark, before Alex’s turn Fitch is kind of the best son Tony (Henry Czerny) has (even if he’s a son-in-law, ensuring he’ll never be treated like blood). Tony’s devoted to the ritual and will absolutely kill to protect his family, though he wishes he didn’t have to. He’s what Alex probably would have become had Grace pulled a different card. Emilie and Fitch’s sons Georgie (Liam MacDonald) and Gabe (Ethan Tavares) also mirror Daniel and Alex, with one of them being hidden for most of the movie and the other taking part in the family’s ritual “because everyone else was doing it.” 

Since I saw the first trailer, I was hoping Mr. Le Bael would be a real demon, so I absolutely loved that he actually was mystically sustaining this family’s fortune in exchange for this ritual! Just before that reveal, when it seemed nothing would happen to the family for not killing Grace before dawn, the family’s awkward “well shoot…what do we do now?” moment was played perfectly, so that was a bit of the best of both worlds. I thought Grace was going to have to fight off the whole family at once somehow, since they’d still have to kill her to get away with it. However, the parade of exploding devil worshipers that followed instead was a fitting end to these terrible people: they’re all brought down by the thing they thought would make their dreams come true (which is a nice parallel to Grace’s biggest dream turning into a nightmare). I thought Mr. Le Bael might offer Grace a deal of her own for surviving the night, but I’m glad he just gave her a nod of approval instead.

The violence throughout the film expertly walks the same cartoony/serious line that the tone of the whole movie does. That’s very hard to do while still keeping the stakes high, but this movie completely and consistently pulls it off. There’s a lot of gore (though not too gross-out graphic IMO) that’s used well to comedic effect, until Grace starts getting injured and it takes a turn to decidedly not comedic; then they play the seriousness and pain of those injuries just as effectively. While the accidental deaths are comical, I wish they weren’t solely reserved for women (Hanneke Talbot, Celine Tsai, and Daniela Barbosa, who play the Le Dormas maids), though I suppose that’s the comment on these villains: this rich family didn’t care about their value beyond bemoaning how well they’d served them.

Criticisms of the upper class like that are effectively deployed throughout the film, from joining/maintaining a ridiculously wealthy family being the only way several characters think they can have a good/secure life, to the only non-white people associated with the family being among their hired and quickly-forgotten help, to their fortune being built on games rather than socially-helpful endeavors (not that diversions aren’t important) as if they’ve never had to take anything but this ritual seriously (not to mention the literal deal with the devil alleviating any hard work they might’ve had to do to make said fortune), to the flimsy “this is just how I was raised” excuse Alex and Georgie give. Given that the butler Stevens (John Ralston), Tony, and Helene are the most effective/vicious hunters, there’s also a vibe that the old white people are the ones fighting hardest to maintain their traditions (sometimes even if they know they don’t make sense anymore) and way of life by using the younger generation as expendable pawns and targets. Even when outside authority figures are trying to be helpful, they’re ultimately playing into the Le Domas family’s interests instead of the common person’s, like when Grace explains that she’s being hunted and the family car’s security agent Justin (Nat Faxon) turns the car off (since it’s been reported stolen) while offering half-meant hopes (and prayers?) that she makes it out alive. 

The score is fun (and the Hide & Seek song is very creepy!), while the production design of the Le Domas mansion and the movie in general feels perfectly fitting for this kind of story (as others online have pointed out). The pacing is excellent, giving us enough time to get to know Grace and her new family in the first act before everything goes crazy, which also gives her a glimpse of the life she wants before ripping it away and lets them play some relatable “dealing with the in-laws” gags. Once the game begins, the comedy and thrills don’t stop until the end!

Ready or Not continues the steady build of solid horror movies heading into the Halloween season this year! I can’t wait to pick it up on Blu-ray. It’s definitely a blast and it’s more than worth a trip to the theater to see it!

Check out more of my reviews, opinions, and original short stories here!  

#ready or not

[traincat]

speaking of mcu spidey weirdness, am i the only one who feels like they tried to fuse flash with a harry on a particularly bad trip? i remember him being brown in a comic timeline but never mean when sober. and after pheathers, making the bully a smart member of a minority group just feels tonedeaft

I think there’s a very good argument for Norman and Harry being mixed race in the main canon, because I think Norman reads best as a character if there’s something about him that he’s personally and to his detriment deeply ashamed of and repressed about and that he goes to great lengths to cover up. This could be that he’s mixed race --- the tight curl pattern of the Osborn hair, and Harry’s afro in Spider-Gwen’s flashback scenes could lend themselves to this -- or that he’s Jewish -- again, the tight curl pattern of the Osborn hair and Harry’s afro in the Spider-Gwen flashbacks, along with the extremely questionable decision to have Harry bullied for being rich by having kids call him “the Green Goblin.” (It is actually still antisemitic if you don’t actually go all the way there, Jason Latour.) The self-hating Jew aspect definitely becomes problematic in a canon where Peter Parker isn’t himself openly and proudly canonically Jewish, so I tend to steer clear of this one, though I do think it could be very interesting in terms of Norman turning himself into the ultimate stereotype of the wealth-hoarding evil Jewish business man through his own self-hatred. My current favorite reading of Norman is that Norman is a deeply repressed gay man. There’s plenty of subtext here to support this: the obsession with Peter Parker as the young and strong masculine ideal, the deeply campy original Green Goblin design with the fuschia purse and the huge fake eyelashes, Norman’s eschewing and disdain for his genetic descendants, the paralleling between Norman’s abuse of Harry with a father’s sexual abuse of his son in The Child Within, and the seduction and later the torture of Flash Thompson when Norman recruited him to be his assistant after his return from the dead. It’s all potentially, to use a word I hate, very problematic without a deft hand in the storytelling, but I think done right and balanced against some honest and positive representation any of the above could offer up some very good stories. 

Anyway, all that Osborn stuff aside, yeah, the decisions made with Flash in the MCU truly baffle me. I like the casting of Tony Revolori, who I really enjoyed in Grand Hotel Budapest, but the decision to make him a nerd who verbally bullies Peter instead of a jock who antagonizes Peter is bizarre, to say the least. I think I read an article somewhere that said the change was made because jocks aren’t the “in kids” anymore, which, like, presents a weird picture of current American high school politics where all the nerds are just picking on each other now in an attempt to become the new pop culture ruling class. Then there’s the fact that Flash, now A Smart Kid, is routinely passed over in favor of Peter, kicked off the decathlon in favor of Peter, and, during the Washington Monument scene, depicted as a person who would rather save a trophy than help his classmate and in-comics high school girlfriend, Liz. So now that Flash is brown, the MCU has decided to portray him as a smart kid who is routinely passed over for the supposedly smarter white kid, and a materialistic coward beside. I’ve seen Homecoming get a lot of praise for its diverse cast, and I have to say I do like much of the casting, but the follow through in the actual movie is, I would say, far less progressive than it looks on paper. See also: this being the first Spider-Man movie with a black love interest and coincidentally the first Spider-Man movie without a kiss scene in it, and the erasure of Mary Jane’s identity by pasting her nickname onto a character the screenwriters have been very open about saying isn’t Mary Jane, a character who isn’t even given a last name within the film, following the massive racist backlash after rumors broke out that Zendaya was playing Mary Jane. 

It’s also important, in my opinion, to note that in main comics continuity Flash Thompson’s childhood was marked by violent and repeated physical abuse by his father. The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) is the only film franchise to reference this, even though Flash Thompson is a character who has appeared in all three Spider-Man film franchises. The Thompson family in 616 is depicted as extremely blue collar: Flash is a high school football star whose father is a cop and an alcoholic who beats his son and ridicules his wife. They live in a modest apartment. MCU Flash, by contrast, is depicted as a nerd who drives a very expensive car and gets ousted from the academic decathlon by Peter, who doesn’t even care about the decathlon and just needs an excuse to go to DC where -- conveniences of all plot conveniences -- the decathlon is being held. I mean, they just bussed my dad out to Brooklyn when he was a mathlete, but whatever. (Spider-Man: Homecoming has a deeply weird undercurrent about financial status; almost everyone in the movie is either depicted as comfortably middle class, including the Parkers, or as rich.) I’m going to admit: the scene where Peter steals and wrecks Flash’s car made me deeply uncomfortable in the theater, knowing Flash’s comics backstory. Absence of on-screen or referenced abuse is not, in and of itself, a lack of that abuse within the story, or rather an erasure of the contents of the work the story was adapted from. If we assume 616 is the main universe, and that everything leads out of there, then from my perspective, unless other evidence is offered up, there’s no reason to assume things don’t line up, i.e., without direct evidence otherwise I have to assume Flash is still a victim of parental abuse. Expensive gifts like a car isn’t direct evidence against that. Flash being a nerd now isn’t direct evidence against that.

(Spectacular Spider-Man #-1)

(Amazing Spider-Man #574)

(Venom (2011) #27)

So I think about scenes like this and then I think about Flash being the butt of the joke in Spider-Man: Homecoming over Peter stealing his car and at the very least, I have to say, I’m not happy with the lack of nuance presented, or the implication that the MCU’s Flash couldn’t be a victim of abuse because he’s a rich nerd in this iteration. It is, now that you mention it, a bizarrely Harry Osborn-esque take on the character: the expensive car, the rich background, smart but not as smart as Peter, a bit of a jerk to Peter in their early acquaintanceship in a verbal rather than a physical way, not exactly the bravest crayon in the box. But there’s an issue in that too because, like Flash, although rarely depicted as physically, Harry was also abused in his childhood by his father. So we’re back to square one with the car scene and some troubling implications, turning a character who bears the name of one abused character and wears the traits of another into the butt of a joke so Audi could fit another car into the movie. 

Like I said, I do like the casting and I think Revolori is a great actor and did his best with the part he was given -- I just wish the character had been handled by the writers and director with any compassion. A big part of me wishes that instead of pasting Ned Leeds’ name over Ganke Lee, Miles Morales’ best friend, the MCU had compressed the timeline and just let Flash Thompson inhabit his future rule as Peter Parker’s best friend. Instead, we get Flash Thompson, The One Note Bully: Nerd Remix. 

#flash thompson #*replies #traincat talks comics #traincat talks homecoming #mcu negativity/ #mcu criticism/ #long post/ #child abuse cw/ #also i keep seeing fics now where the avengers publicly humiliate flash to get revenge for peter and like yikes #Anonymous

[eggoreviews]

My Top 25 Games Advent Day 12 - The Witcher III: Wild Hunt (#14)

​​"Hatred and prejudice will never be eradicated. And the witch hunts will never be about witches. To have a scapegoat — that's the key."​​

The Witcher III and I have had a very rocky relationship over the past couple of years. There was a lot of fighting and a lot of problems I ended up having with a game everyone else hailed as masterpiece. It was only recently, with some patience and a lot of convincing myself to give it another try, that I finally saw its value. And oh boy, do I value it now. So before I keep comparing my attachment to this game as a relationship like a weirdo, let’s delve into what made me change my mind about a game I was so vehemently neutral on for so very long.​​

​​When I started The Witcher, I just could not get into it. Several hours in and I was struggling with the various combat and crafting mechanics and finding I was too underlevelled to do much at all, and focusing on all this background noise meant I barely made it into Velen before I realised I was forcing myself to continue. So I stopped, for near enough two years. And then, out of nowhere, I came back and I was gone. I was sucked immediately back into Geralt’s adventures; of his thrilling quest to locate Ciri and destroy the Wild Hunt, the richly interesting side quests and characters that come with them, the challenging, often intriguing monster contracts that always came with a twist. I was absolutely taken with the world and everything that filled it and it turned out that all I needed was time away. So when I finally jumped back into completing each and every plot thread, whether as huge as dethroning the mad tyrant of the Wild Hunt or as tiny as winding a peasant’s lost frying pan, it kept me engaged and left me wanting more until the very end. I know I just recently called the first Dragon Age the Lord of the Rings of gaming, but I think that title may in fact have to go here instead, from pure story and character quality alone, not to mention the excellently crafted and detailed fantasy world they inhabit.​​

​​Speaking of characters, I would say they were the aspect of the game I most appreciated. Matching the game’s perfect tone of knowing when to balance serious dialogue and epic battles/setpieces with humourous characters and sometimes utterly wild and hilarious side quests, the characters Geralt encounters on his journey are as rich and interesting as they are real and faithful to the world they live in. Of course, the main cast of Geralt, Yennefer, Triss and Ciri are consistently brilliant characters throughout the game, growing and changing through the experience and through the choices you make as the player. Geralt’s fraught relationships in particular as he works through a rough patch with his beloved, Yennefer, and chooses whether it would be better to reconcile his relationship with Triss instead is a well-written, realised love triangle that did the unthinkable; it made me care about a romance plot. And a straight romance plot too! How??​​

​​Alongside them come the side characters; while even the lowly peasant quest givers deserve a mention here, every named side character is pretty much unforgettable. Dandelion, the hapless bard who can’t keep it in his pants, Djikstra, the hilariously slimy criminal who keeps a strenuous friendship with Geralt, Zoltan, the friendly dwarf who’s ever your helpful companion and Ves, my rebel wife who I wish got more screentime (seriously I love Ves so much). Vesemir as the father figure to everyone, the sarcastic, bitter but still in some way caring Lambert and the suitably powerful Eredin and Imlerith as central villains. All incredible, all consistent with the world and it makes it all the better.​​ ​​Onto the world itself, this is another example of a not-quite-open world that fills every single square inch of its land and sea with something to explore or conquer. Whether or not you explore the war-torn marshes of Velen, the bustling city of Novigrad or the fraught isles of Skellige, there’s no end of content to satiate you aside from the main questline. New side missions to pick up, treasures to discover, monster nests to destroy, places of power to increase Geralt’s strength in your chosen area, whether that be vanilla combat, your magical signs or your expansive alchemy capabilities. The world and what inhabits it truly compliments the richly developed gameplay mechanics that make Geralt so engaging and diverse to be, as there’s so many different ways to approach the challenges the game throws your way. And nothing quite matches the thrill of knowing you’re Geralt of Rivia, masterful witcher and slayer of giant monsters. It’s the purest form of escapism in every sense of the word and I adore absolutely every aspect of this game that makes this such a flawlessly unique fantasy experience.​​

​​On top of all this, The Witcher III contains the best minigame I’ve ever encountered in anything: Gwent. The act and quests for hunting down a full deck of Gwent cards, the tactics and amount of unbridled fun you can have just playing this card game on its own is dizzying in itself. Counting alongside this Gwent related questlines where you can do anything from playing innkeeps across the world to entering into high stakes Gwent tournaments, all to further your skill and continue to collect unique cards, is brilliant fun and endlessly satisfying. If I’m honest, it’s a damn shame I can’t get ahold of a real Northern Realms Gwent deck because I would be all over that and I would absolutely play anyone at it.​​

​​To sum up The Witcher III as a whole, I would call it the definitive fantasy role-playing experience with one of the most well-realised protagonists in all of gaming. I haven’t quite got round to playing through the expansions yet, but you bet I’m gonna and I massively recommend this to anyone who enjoys fantasy. You’ve got a real classic waiting for you in The Witcher.​​

​​Standout Moment Award: The battle of Kaer Morhen is, for lack of a better word, just epic. With the fortress as a setpiece, the foreboding Wild Hunt relentlessly marching forward towards you and having near enough every character you’ve met so far gather to help you in your fight was incredible and a great catalyst for the game’s upcoming climax. It’s totally reminiscent of LOTR’s battle of Minas Tirith for all the right reasons.​​ ​​Standout Character Award: Geralt of Rivia. I know, massively obvious choice, but as I said, Geralt is one of the most well-realised protagonists I’ve ever played as. He was so brilliant a character, I’m genuinely scared of how they’ll change him for the upcoming Witcher series. Big, big shoutout to Ciri, Dandelion, Triss, Ves and Lambert too though, who all also could’ve taken this. ​​ ​​Tomorrow: No. 13; a prank gone horrendously wrong, local cannibals dismayed. ​​

#gaming #eggoreviews #best games advent #the witcher #the witcher 3 #witcher #geralt of rivia #geralt #ciri #witcher geralt #witcher ciri #witcher yennefer #yennefer #witcher dandelion #dandelion #triss merigold #triss

[whitewolfofwinterfell]

How do you like Mad Men so far? I never know how to feel about it, I really had high hopes for Betty, but was disappointed at the overall lack of character development/focus on her in season 2 and onwards! But I was generally happy about Peggy and Joan. And Don is quite the intricate & complex character (at least in the first couple seasons), but the level of detail and accurate depiction of the time is really well done and so fun to watch! Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year!!! :)

Hey there, anon! I just finished watching Season 4 Episode 7, which was an amazing episode, so it’s quite fitting that I’d get an ask like this.

Mad Men had been on my ‘To Watch’ list for years because it seemed to be considered a timeless classic along with shows like The Sopranos, The Wire and Breaking Bad. I finally got around to it because one of my mutuals (shoutout to @sulietsexual​) recently finished watching it and when I started seeing posts about it on my dash it gave me that push to finally commit to watching it.

So far I really like Mad Men. It’s very specific in its style, which means that it might not be everybody’s cup of tea. I didn’t know that much about it before I started watching and it is quite a lot different than I expected. It’s unlike a lot of other shows because it’s very character driven. There are character arcs and sub-plots related to the characters careers and personal lives, however, there’s no overarching plot across the seasons and no central story. It’s completely devoted to the evolution of the characters, but since I’m such a character orientated person, that works out fantastically for me. I believe the best thing any show can have is a cast of diverse, complex and well-written characters, and Mad Men certainly has that.

In addition to the character focus, the other main element of the show is definitley the decade that it’s set in, which is of course the 1960s. For me, the decade is a character within itself, because it’s such a rich period in American history. It’s not just about the aesthetics with the fashion, hairstyles, cars and media, it’s the fact that Mad Men manages to capture the spirit of the 1960s so well. And I think if the show was set in any other time-frame it wouldn’t work half as well. That specific period presents challenges for the characters (the female characters, in particular) and shapes everything that is happening in the world of advertising, and consequently what happens to and around the characters.

Surprisingly, I didn’t know the show was set in the 60s until I started watching, but it was a very pleasant surprise for me. As a history student, American history was one of my favourite areas of history, I even specialised in 1960s America. When I got to my final year and had to start planning my dissertation I knew almost immediately that I wanted to write it on 1960s America, I just didn’t know which part. As I said, it’s such a rich decade of history where so much happened: the Civil Rights Movement, MLK’s assassination, JFK’s assassination, Malcom X’s assassination, the Vietnam War, and the Cold War. There was such huge political, social and cultural change; there was a growth in social movements not just for African Americans but other racial minority groups such as Latin Americans and Chinese Americans, women and LGBTQ groups. The rise of rock ‘n roll came about (Elvis, The Beatles etc.) and with it a new kind of rebellion expressed through the art of music. The introduction of and access to the contraceptive pill gave women more sexual freedom, later followed by the “Summer of Love”. This was a decade where anything felt possible; where man landed on the moon and a president was assassinated in broad day light; where groups of people across America stood together, challenged the status quo, fought for what they believed in, dreamed big and strived for positive change for the millions of Americans that had been suppressed and voiceless for decades. It proved just how powerful unity can be and how citizens can truly have an impact and drive political and social change if they have the courage to stand up. The 1960s changed America in significant ways and was such a decisive period in its history. I could continue talking about this all day, because I bloody love it, but the point is that this period of history is a personal favourite of mine and so seeing the characters live through this time makes it particularly enjoyable for me.

As much as I love the character-centred approach of the show, at times I do think it suffers from the lack of plot and can feel very slow. Sometimes I don’t really have motivation to watch an episode for this reason. This becomes more noticeable when the characters I’m most invested in don’t get as much screen-time. Betty is a classic example of this. Just like you, I adore Betty’s character but I’ve been so diappointed with how she’s been cast aside. So far, she hasn’t featured in season 4 at all and based on what you’ve said, I’m guessing she probably won’t get much focus or development in seasons 5-7. There’s also the issue that character focus and development doesn’t always feel consistent. As the lead, Don obviously gets the most focus, but other characters like Pete, Roger, Joan, Peggy, Betty, Sally etc. sometimes get a few episodes where they get a lot of attention and development, then they disappear or are barely present for the following 5 episodes. Despite this, Mad Men, still does character development better than almost any other show and episodes like 4x07 completely blow it out of the water.

I’m only on season 4 and there’s still 3 more seasons to go, but Don is already one of the most of the complex and well-written characters from any show I’ve ever watched. There’s always something new to learn about him and he’s so multi-layered that I don’t even think I could begin to unpick his character. Peggy’s arc is inspiring and empowering. But all of the characters are well-written regardless of whether I like them on a personal level or not. However, my personal favourites at the moment are: Pete, Joan, Betty, Don and Roger. I’m intruiged to finish the series and see where these characters end up. I’ve seen a couple of spoilers and already know that I’m going to be upset with how Betty’s story ends, but hopefully the other characters I love they will have a satisfying and deserving ending to their arcs. 

I do think that there could be more diversity within the cast and dare I say it, better representation. Given the period it’s set in, it would be interesting for a POC to be a series regular. I understand that the world of the “Mad Men” is one of white men and white priveledge. So it makes sense that the only times we  see people of colour is when they’re in the background working as maids, housekeepers, janitors etc. And in those moments, they’re purposefully portrayed as being invisible to show how overlooked, excluded and inferior they are in the eyes of the characters. But in my heart of hearts, I’d still love to see even one person of colour have a genuine arc and place on the show. Sal counts as LGBTQ representation, but sadly, his time on the show was so short-lived. As I say, I know that these omissions are deliberate because the characters are all wealthy, priveleged white people who embody the very idea of the “American Dream”, but I definitley think there’s more room to have explored these themes. Race, in particular, was such a huge factor in the 1960s that it’s strange to me that it’s practically non-existent and that there are only brief mentions or scenes that give a nod to the racial context of the period (e.g. when Carla is listening to MLK’s ‘I Have a Dream’ speech on the radio).

Mad Men also knows how to write relationships well, which I suppose is an extension of the characters. It’s strange, because I don’t ship anybody on the show because every single relationship is toxic, unequal or volatile in some way, but every single relationship is completely authentic. There’s no epic romances that are pushed in our faces or over-dramatised and cliche; every relationship is human in nature. The characters cheat and they enter into casual sexual relationships and both parties know exactly what the relationship is - it’s not a “real” relationship, it’s not marriage and it’s not love - yet the couple build a companionship and understanding which adds layers to it. We see this with Roger and Joan, Pete and Peggy, and Duck and Peggy, to name a few. Even the “proper” couples like Don and Betty, Pete and Trudy, Roger and Jane, Joan and Greg, aren’t relationships that are exactly happy or built on love. I think what the show does so well is show that the big, epic, fairytale romances we see in film and television, that most of us aspire to have, don’t exist. All of these characters don’t have sex, get married or enter into relationships because they’re head over heels in love and give each other butterflies and steal each other’s breath away - it’s because they happen to be in each others’ lives and over time develop some sort of connection that evolves from being in the same space on a daily basis. It’s really that simple. 

Overall, I think the show does a fantastic job at showing the way in which humans connect and the various levels that those connections can develop and grow. Most shows show three levels of relationships: family, friendship and romance. Mad Man exceeds this massively and is one of the few shows that I feel actually realistically portrays the nature of human relationships. Not every person in our lives slots neatly into one of those boxes - family, friendship, romance. In fact, most people don’t. Human emotions, bonds and relationships are much more complex than that. And when I see relationships like Peggy and Pete or Don and Anna, those are the sort of relationships that are so complex and real, but that don’t fit into any of those boxes. 

Mad Men is certainly a good show; it’s well written and I’m enjoying it, but for me personally, it doesn’t stand out as being a show that’s going to go onto my favourites list. I still have 3 seasons to go, so that might change, but stylistically it’s not my ideal kind of show. I love the character-orientated approach, but I do think that the lack of plot lets it down. I like to have a real story to get invested in but Mad Men just doesn’t really have one. 

So, those are my thoughts on the show so far. With any luck, I’ll finish the show over the Christmas holidays (however, I’ve become slightly preoccupied by The Witcher, oops) and will have more to share with you. 

Thank you for stopping by to ask this, anon, and I also wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

#answered #mad men #my meta #mad men meta #anonymous