The Television Critics Association is meeting in LA this week, and in sifting through all the news I was struck by a number of items from critics about AMC’s Mad Men, the New York advertising world centered drama ["Mad" = Madison Avenue] set in the early 60’s.
The AMC drama, set on Madison Avenue in the midst of the cultural revolution of the 1960s, is basking in accolades that have only gained momentum as the Emmy Awards nominations draw near.
The cast is still rather taken aback when it comes to its phenomenon status.
And from our San Francisco Chronicle’s TV critic, Tim Goodman:
The brilliance of “Mad Men” is that the drama is mostly in the words. Actions are subtle. … Right now there’s probably no scripted series ahead with as much anticipation,
Also the fact that AMC is about to spend $25 million to promote it.
But what really startled me was reading that it only averaged 900,000 viewers in its first season.
Taken together, I believe that makes Mad Men the #1 show for the volume of critical acclaim divided by the actual number of TV viewers. No other show with as few viewers gets even remotely as much press.
It may very well be great television. But this isn’t meant to be a review of the show, just my astonishment that there’s so much continuing attention, and now marketing money, for something that’s been ignored by viewers.
For the record, I watched several episodes last season and liked that it brought back memories of the time period (I was about the same age as the children in the show at the time), but once I got past that level, the show just didn’t have enough to keep me around.
7/10 Update: More fawning praise for Mad Men.
Hold on, is there a Mad Men skeptic out there? Lisa de Moraes of the Washington Post:
So what if more people probably read about “Mad Men” in last month’s New York Times Sunday magazine cover story than actually watched the first season (circulation 1.46 million; average audience 1.1 million). It’s the new “Sopranos.”
when l look at the MLB All Star game garnering $35 million and ads and see that Mad Men spent $25 million in advertising about the only thing I can come up with is this: AMC is hoping for a consolidation frenzy where NBC Uni will confuse it with The Weather Channel. They need to sell over a million DVDs just to cover the ad spend.
Who knew Mad Men and Gossip Girl had anything in common?
Mad Men is too cerebral for the masses. I dont love it but I can understand why many do. Look at the top 20 TV – most of it is either brain dead unscripted shows or procedural dramas or sitcoms. Maybe if it gets cancelled fans can send cigarettes to AMC? LOL ! Hey it worked for Jericho…. well not really since it got axed for good.
Shane, well it won the Golden Globe for the Best Drama category this year.
kayarn, you are reading my mind.
Not only was it the best new show last year, I consider it to be one of the best shows in recent memory. Behind The Wire of course.
I think if you take a look at the age of the critics recommending it, you'll find precious few who are actually old enough to remember the 60s let alone having lived through the decade. I watched the first ep with my Dexter-loving, HBO-watching 64-year-old mother after hearing people rave and she was left distinctly unimpressed. We agreed the drama was all right but the period detail people talk about left her feeling like it was someone's *idea* of what the 60s looked like rather than a true representation of the period (things I don't ever want to hear about again – the height of beehives and how all the actresses hair was wrong).
So, I'm thinking, if a series set in the 60s is turning off people who know and remember the era, who *is* going to watch? Frankly, Burn Notice seems more fun and they've never throw a miracle baby plot at me.
K8ie, you may very well be onto something. The one thing I *did* like about the show was the setting/era, but since the first season was set in 1960, the year I was born, my memories aren't those of an adult, but of a child, high on feel, low on detail.