Listen: Firewall & Iceberg Podcast No. 134
Dan and Alan talk 'Bunheads,' 'Dallas,' 'Falling Skies' and 'Mad Men' finale
Happy Monday, Boys & Girls.
Seems like we haven't had a Monday installment of The Firewall & Iceberg Podcast for a few weeks. So... Here!
In this week's podcast episode [only one this week], we discuss the "Mad Men" finale, the premiere of ABC Family's "Bunheads," TNT's "Dallas" and Falling Skies" and then this week's "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" Rewatch episode "Teacher's Pet."
Lots to talk about and I am, unfortunately, a bit brain-dead this week. Apologies.
Here's the breakdown:
"Bunheads" (00:00:40 - 00:16:45)
"Dallas" (00:16:45 - 00:29:55)
"Falling Skies" (00:30:00 - 00:38:50)
"Mad Men" finale (00:39:40 - 01:11:45)
Buffy: "Teacher's Pet" (01:11:45 - 01:22:00)
As always, you can subscribe to The Firewall & Iceberg Podcast over at the iTunes Store, where you can also rate us and comment on us. [Or you can always follow our RSS Feed.]
And as always, feel free to e-mail us questions for the podcast.
A long-time member of the TCA Board and a longer-time blogger of "American Idol," Dan Fienberg writes about TV, except for when he writes about movies or sometimes writes about the Red Sox. But never music. He would sound stupid talking about music.
Trending Now on HitFix Boards
| Topic | Started By | Latest Post | Replies |
|---|---|---|---|
| dave1279 |
5 months ago
|
1
|
|
| suzyduncan |
8 months ago
|
1
|
|
| Discuss TV General on HitFix Message Boards » | |||
News From Our Partners
-
'Star Trek Into Darkness': What's Next For J.J. Abrams And The Cast?
'Star Trek Into Darkness' Spoiler Special: Burning Questions Answered
'Anchorman 2' Trailer Had Us At 'Hello': Watch Now!
-
Why Do I Own This?: A pint glass nicked from Forks, Washington, a.k.a. “Twilight, U.S.A.”
Scenic Routes: A quiet scene from The Matrix demonstrates how to make exposition compelling
Nerd Curious: Why the essential collection Bradbury Stories explains how to live forever
-
The Women TV Is Still Missing
Jason Isaacs Reveals The One Co-Star He Won't Work With Again
WATCH: La Toya's Tearful Break-Up Phone Call
-
One Direction Thank Their Fans for 2013 Billboard Music Award Wins
Drake + Jay-Z Working on New Music [Pic]
Taylor Swift Gets Grossed Out When Selena Gomez + Justin Bieber Kiss Backstage at 2013 Billboard Awards [Pics]
-
What to Watch Tonight: The Season Finales of Rectify and Hawaii Five-0 and the Series Premieres of The Goodwin Games and Motive
Mad Men "The Crash" Review: Uppers Give You Wings!
Hey TV.com, Should I Watch The Goodwin Games?
-
'Star Wars Rebels': New Animated Series Will Take Place Between 'Episode III and 'Episode IV'
James Badge Dale, 'Iron Man 3' Star, Is Also in 'World War Z' and 'The Lone Ranger'
'Blue Jasmine' Poster Debut: Cate Blanchett Is Strikingly Stoic (PHOTO)
-
Box Office Guru Wrapup: Star Trek Softer Than Expected at #1
Weekly Ketchup: Will Smith to Star in Wild Bunch Remake?
Critics Consensus: Star Trek Into Darkness is Certified Fresh
-
The Telefile - Veep: The Episode's Best Insults
The Telefile - Saturday Night Live: Straight Outta 8H
The Telefile - Game of Thrones: Our Weekly Westeros Scorecard
Latest Posts
-
Would Nikita kill the President or not?Saturday, May 18, 2013
-
Dan and Alan talk upfronts, reality and 'The Office' finaleFriday, May 17, 2013
-
Kree or Candice? Join as as we wade through over two hours of filler.Thursday, May 16, 2013
-
This season's shutout winner discusses his path to victoryThursday, May 16, 2013
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook
Top Stories From Around the Web
Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login SignupAsh
June 11, 2012 at 6:29PM EST Reply to CommentPlease stop saying anvilicious.
leemats I thought it was funny. Although it took me a bit to figure out what it meant.
June 12, 2012 at 4:09AM ESTOaktown Girl While I understood "anvilicious" right away, I remain totally in the dark about Dan and Alan's "Hodor" obsession (Game of Thrones). I'm still hoping for someone to clue me in on that one. Please.
June 13, 2012 at 1:47PM ESTkevincurtinred
June 11, 2012 at 9:06PM EST Reply to CommentNo, the eggs at the end are never mentioned again. That always slightly bugged me (no pun intended).
Thanks, Sepinwall
June 11, 2012 at 9:08PM EST Reply to CommentAwesome to learn DURING A REVIEW OF "BUNHEADS" that Alexis Bledel presumably played a large role in the "Mad Men" finale I'd not yet gotten around to watching. It defeats the purpose of having the show breakdown if you're going to throw in tangential asides about "Mad Men" during sections that are purported to be "Mad Men"-free.
sepinwall We just said we would get to Bledel in the Mad Men section. If acknowledging that Bledel appeared at all in a season of Mad Men where she had already appeared multiple times and been referenced other times is out of bounds, we might a well stop talking, period.
June 11, 2012 at 9:18PM ESTThanks, Sepinwall The point is, Alexis Bledel didn't necessarily have to return, in the finale or ever. The place the Beth plot had been left worked as a conclusion, while not shutting the door to future appearances. The drama was in the wondering if and when, about which you eliminated any questions by opening your yap.
June 12, 2012 at 2:31PM ESTYour position basically boils down to, "If something is a known possibility, I should feel free to confirm its occurrence; you can't be too surprised by something you knew was on the table, after all." That's ridiculous on its face.
Why not loudly announce that Ray Wise would be absent, precluding any movement on the Corning front? There'd been a good ten episodes this season where that wasn't an issue, so merely acknowledging that he didn't appear would constitute a non-event by your unassailable logic.
mcm99 Spoiler paranoids drive me crazy.
June 12, 2012 at 2:37PM ESTPrettok I was very upset that the credits spoiled Alison Brie's shocking appearance in this episode. It should have been a surprise dammit.
June 12, 2012 at 6:53PM EST
June 12, 2012 at 10:26PM ESTPrettok
June 11, 2012 at 10:18PM EST Reply to CommentI love Mad Men, but its a little late to complain about Weiner's writing being "anvilicious". That has been the case since day one. Remember Don Draper's Kodak pitch? Do you think maybe he was actually talking about his own life?
belinda this episode would be like the kodak pitch if the kodak pitch ep had Don saying out loud, "hey, i'm talking about my own life!". so idk, mad men was never a very subtle show but the anvils has been even more obvious in this season and in this episode specifically, with the music and all the spelling out stuff, quite literally so, in the lyrics and the dialogue themselves.
June 12, 2012 at 2:47AM ESTTJ I agree, Prettok. I guess it's gotten more on the sleeve this season. Maybe? But if you watch Weiner's commentary on prior seasons' DVDs, pretty much every episode they've ever done, he singles out a line of dialog as "that's the theme of the episode." Maybe it's easier to pick them out in season 5, but I certainly haven't found them any more distracting or insulting.
June 12, 2012 at 10:01AM ESTPrettok Also, isn't it in these characters' natures to constantly recognize and underline meanings and metaphors? They're ad men! It's just like Tony and Carmela and Paulie always seeing things as 'signs from God'.
June 12, 2012 at 6:47PM ESTPrettok
June 11, 2012 at 10:24PM EST Reply to CommentI don't think we need to worry about Peggy. We will probably get the same number of storylines as she got this year. We just won't get her as background in Don's or Pete's (or HArry's) stories.
In other words, she will only appear in the episodes in which she is a central character (which will still be more than half the episodes). And who knows, maybe we will see some familiar faces working for Teddy ChowGuh next year..Kurt, Smitty, Dr. Faye, Sal (fingers crossed),.
leemats My guess is that Peggy will be back working at SCDP (or whatever it will be called without Lane)by episode 3 of next season, ideally as a partner.
June 12, 2012 at 4:13AM ESTMary Fran
June 11, 2012 at 10:33PM EST Reply to CommentSchwarma was first part of the Whedon universe when actor Nick Brendon threw out "lets all go for some schwarma" at the end of his audition. Whedon was suitably impressed with that and this is where it came from.
Mary Fran
June 11, 2012 at 10:35PM EST Reply to CommentI adored the Pete/Beth drama. Pete's open-heart is obviously going to get stomped and you see it as they share a post-coital snuggle.
Oaktown Girl Oy! I cringe at the idea of referring to Pete as open-hearted. As far as I'm concerned, he's tender and loving and sensitive only when it suits his purposes. It's telling how he never goes for women who are his equal or stronger. The closest he ever came to that is Peggy, and even then remember how he melted down simply watching her dance and be happy because he wasn't the single focus of her attention at that moment. And do I even need to mention the, "My King" moment with the prostitute? How weak.
June 13, 2012 at 1:34AM ESTI'm not saying Pete didn't have any genuine feelings for Beth, and he certainly didn't want her doing electo-shock. But to call the guy "open-hearted"? I think that's really stretching the term.
John
June 12, 2012 at 5:06AM EST Reply to CommentGood discussion, though I tend to agree with Sepinwall more on the Mad Men finale. I also thought the finale wasn't particularly interesting from start to finish (after the last two episodes, it had a lot to live up to), and I thought the Game of Thrones finale both Sepinwall and Fienberg trashed was infinitely better than this one. Infinitely. I liked every single scene of that finale.
Aside from the Peggy scenes, there just wasn't a whole lot there. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't anything special either. It was very middle of the season, which is unacceptable for a finale. I didn't particularly need to see Megan's mother again. She wasn't terrible, but I wasn't particularly interested. And for the love of God, I really didn't need to see Roger naked. Ever. And I really disliked that cliffhanger or whatever the ending was supposed to be. I've always thought that it was only a matter of time before Don steps out on Megan (and even if he doesn't do it here, it will happen soon enough) because that's who he is. But I didn't need some fade to black after a girl approaches him at the bar. It just didn't work for me on any level. I would have preferred either that the season end either with him going home with her or just sitting in the bar and drinking. I really disliked this no man's land that Weiner chose.
And I think Fienberg's notion that Mad Men is "in a class by itself" or whatever he said is rather absurd. Mad Men has never--not once--been the best drama on television (it has, however, been one of the five best shows each year). Breaking Bad had a near-perfect season of television with zero bad episodes. Everything was good to amazing, including the final stretch, which was among the best I've seen on any show. Mad Men had one terrible episode ("Far Away Places"--it's answer to The Sopranos's "The Test Dream") and a few mediocre episodes (the Fat Betty episode, the fever dream episode, arguably this finale, etc.). Mad Men at its best does some exceptional episodes that are right up there with anything ("At the Codfish Ball," "Lady Lazarus," "Commissions and Fees," and I guess "The Other Woman" were in this category this season).
But the fact remains that one show had 13 very good to great episodes, and the other show had only about half that number. We can't pretend that the mediocre episodes of Mad Men didn't happen this season. They did. And for that reason, if it beats out Breaking Bad again (the third season of Mad Men was my favorite, but it still fell far short of the transcendent third season of Breaking Bad), it will be an absolute travesty. Not in a Titanic over L.A. Confidential kind of way (a mediocre movie beating out an all-time classic) but more in a Forrest Gump over The Shawshank Redemption and Pulp Fiction way (a very good movie beating out two of the best movies--THE best, in Shawshank's case movies ever).
Joh Sorry. The parenthetical in the last line should read: (a very good movie beating out two of the best movies--THE best, in Shawshank's case--ever).
June 12, 2012 at 5:09AM EST
June 12, 2012 at 12:12PM ESTAnd you also VERY clearly ignored what I said in that "class by itself" comment, since in that exact discussion I said it was completely fine for people (you, apparently) to think that "Breaking Bad" is a better show, just that I don't see them as easily comparable shows in terms of their goals or execution.
I personally prefer "Mad Men" to "Breaking Bad." That doesn't mean that there is any aspect of "Breaking Bad" that I'm not giving its adequate due. But "Breaking Bad" has a new season coming up in a month and the race for Best of 2012 can start anew.
-Daniel
Prettok What major plot developments would you want in the finale to make it acceptable. We have already seen the firm's fortunes turn, a main character leave the firm, and another commit suicide. Would it really have been more satisfying to you if all these had happened in the final episode, as if this was a season finale of 'Buffy'? MadMen isn't structured that way.
June 12, 2012 at 6:43PM ESTAnd I think MM and BB are going to lose to Homeland.
Jonathan
June 12, 2012 at 5:11AM EST Reply to CommentI love you guys, but I have heard huge rips on The Avengers and Mad Men within the past month on this podcast. If you can't enjoy even either of those things without ripping into them, I think a new career path is in order. One that won't cause you so much stress. That's just honest advice: If you can't enjoy The Avengers or Mad Men, what CAN you enjoy and why subject yourself to it?
June 12, 2012 at 12:15PM EST-Daniel
Dave I I think it is a balancing act. I'm not even a critic, however it seems like Dan & Alan both like/love media, yet like/need to debate it. I think if you are an uber-cynic, then you JUST criticize. I believe if you are a critic, or critical fan, or somewhere in between, you can critique, criticize, or discuss without hating it or even ripping it to shreds. I also think it is possible to go too far in either direction, as well as be able to criticize the shortcomings (which everything has some of, book, movie, TV show, comic, song, album, etc.), while still enjoying the story, acting, composition, whatever.
June 12, 2012 at 1:38PM ESTStill, not to pat Dan & Alan on the back too much, if all they did was say how awesome everything was or even just blanket-statement say "it was great" or "I did not like it" without going into any detail, it would be a pretty boring site. It would also be less than useful since some gripes are things that would possibly make me dislike a movie while others are things I would easily look past from just a casual viewing experience.
However, I'm not a critic, so take it with a grain of salt.
-Cheers
Ryan
June 12, 2012 at 5:58AM EST Reply to CommentI think critics are looking on previous seasons of Mad Men through rose-colored glasses. What are all of these examples of non-"anvilicious" metaphors from previous seasons?
TJ I'm with you, Ryan. For all the complaints about Pete's scene in the hospital with Beth, to me it's nowhere near as HERE IS THE THEME OF EVERYTHING PAY ATTENTION as his speech to Peggy at the end of season 2. This is something the show does, it announces its themes.
June 12, 2012 at 10:04AM EST
June 12, 2012 at 10:31PM ESTTJ And while it still wears its themes on its sleeve, it's still incredibly layered and complex. Even if some of the main themes were IN YOUR FACE there was still so much going on underneath that it's almost impossible for the episode (and the season) not to seem better and better the more you think about it.
June 13, 2012 at 7:10AM ESTScout
June 12, 2012 at 10:36AM EST Reply to CommentI love anvilicious. How fun :)
Mia Monroe
June 12, 2012 at 1:26PM EST Reply to CommentThere was nothing more anvilicious than the last line of the episode "Are you alone?", i'm surprised you didn't say anything about that. Don walks away from Megan in the dark (away from the light in the background) and that girl asks if he's alone. To me, how Don looked at her without response was more about her question "Are you alone" than whether he was considering cheating on Megan. From what you said, it didn't seem like you saw it that way, just that Don was open to advances.
I really, really don't want to see Don be the cheating husband we saw him be with Betty, all over again. We've seen that Don, I hated that Don, i've never hated him more than when he called Betty a whore when he had been sleeping around. That was disgusting. If he wants to sleep around this time, he better divorce Megan first. If he has that much trouble dealing with his wife having a life that's about more than just him and causes him pain seeing them do what they want, he isn't meant to be married with anyone.
This was my favorite season of Mad Men by far. I liked S1, I didn't care for season 2 a whole lot, I really liked seasons 3 and 4, and I loved this season. The women had great moments, and I watch this show for them (and Megan was a great adition to the group of Mad Men women), I could take or leave Don, he's not that interesing to me.
Dave I Well, on one hand, I do not want to see Don relive the life he had with Betty where he cheats on Megan and uses sex as his way of numbing himself to the problems in his life.
June 12, 2012 at 1:44PM ESTOn the other hand, this show is largely about Don's issues. I suspect if Don had no problems in his personal life we would grow bored with it. I hope he ends up ending this cycle, however if that comes in a couple of years or whenever the show ends, so be it. I WANT Don to grow and evolve into a better, healthier person, however I also trust Matt Weiner to tell the best story and lead us toward whatever ending he has in mind in the time we have left with this character.
-Cheers
Mia Monroe Dave, sure, I accept that Don is the central character and the show does work that way, and the character needs constant conflict, I get that. I'd just rather we didn't have to go through the repetition of Don cheating on Megan countless times until she dumps him. I don't think that's gonna happen, and it's not how I viewed the last scene, I took it as an expression of Don being alone.
June 12, 2012 at 2:26PM ESTEven though the show is largely about Don's issues, if that was all the show was about, i'd definitely not watch. Don is so set in his ways, he's so serious all the time and so against the women in his life having independence, that I just find it difficult to sympathyse and root for him, and if he doesn't evolve, he could become a detriment to this show.
I refuse to feel pity for men who have everything. Boo hoo Don Draper and Pete Campbell. You are successful, white, privileged, good looking men who have supportive and beautiful wives, but poor you that you just can't be satisfied and you just WANT MORE. Boo freaking hoo.
Dave I @Mia, FWIW, I'd love it if Don was beyond philandering and the sex-based pity party for himself. I think it could be just as good if Don got beyond that and dealt with his problems in other ways. Of course, if it's well-written and ultimately has a point, I will still watch. I just like seeing character growth, and that can come in many forms.
June 12, 2012 at 3:30PM ESTI would watch if it was just about Don's issues. However, I greatly prefer if there is character growth on some level. I also have some sympathy for Don & Pete. Not the sympathy I have for the starving and oppressed in say Syria, Darfur, lower-class or homeless Americans, or the like. Still, everybody has their issues. It pales when you compare say Pete to some near-homeless family that cannot afford to put food on the table and warm clothes on their kids' backs. However it does not make strife any less real. Plus, Don pretty much IS the show. The direction they take could become detrimental, however without Don and his overall arc/development, the show would seem pretty hollow.
-Cheers
Mia Monroe @Dave - I just don't respond well to characters who are miserable when they have so many good things in their lives. Have you seen Shameless? Those characters are pretty happy despite their struggles. Shameless doesn't ask me, the viewer, to pity Fiona, and I don't, I cherish her. But Mad Men asks me to pity Don Draper and Pete Campbell, and I refuse to. They're miserable because that's what they make themselves, there's no conspiracy against them, they're just weak and egotistical.
June 12, 2012 at 4:29PM ESTDave I @Mia, I can see where you are coming from. I find Don more relateable? Sympathetic? Charismatic? Something. He seems like he has more to be miserable in his life, or at least unresolved issues. Plus, he's the hero (or at least protagonist) of the show so I'm more inclined to sympathize with him. Even if he is kind of putting himself into terrible situations and in reality has things really, REALLY well in his life. Pete? I know less about why he's flawed. He is ambitious yet his "permanent wound" seems less clearly defined. Do I "pity" Don, Pete, Roger, etc.? I feel for them, sure. Everybody, no matter the situation, has good and bad in their lives. Of course, you are right. They just seem I would argue not weak, flawed, searching, unfulfilled, ambitious, lots of things.
June 12, 2012 at 5:02PM ESTShameless? No, I'll have to track it down.
Maybe I just see Mad Men (and Don & Pete) in a different light. Which seems totally fine to me. I can buy their lack of satisfaction in life. I am not sure I "pity" them, nor quite sure I am supposed to. They are interesting to me, and I still have sympathy even if they are perhaps not as deserving of such as people in worse-off situations.
I CAN totally see your point and maybe I should feel that way. I'm a sap. I can empathize with most people so I feel bad for people that are struggling no matter the situations they are otherwise in. Looking at Pete or even Don critically, perhaps I should not. I guess it is just in my nature.
-Cheers
Chris
June 12, 2012 at 2:48PM EST Reply to CommentPeggy didn't have a natural reaction to the dogs humping, imo. I've seen that myself and I was very amused, nothing to be taken aback by. And, this is not either here nor there, but I find it can also be a good argument for those who claim people should be heterosexuals because ~~nature intended it that way~~. "Uh... have you seen animals? they don't much care for gender".
Weiner missed an opportunity to have Sal working for the angency Peggy's now at. It would give us another familiar character in Peggy's storylines next season.
Dave I Well, Peggy's reaction was fine. I know people who would be shocked to see two dogs fornicating outside their hotel. Plus, she had been expecting a luxurious trip to Paris in her fantasy probably complete with a nice view of the Eiffel Tower. Instead, she's in some cheap motel with a ground floor view and two dogs humping right outside the window. It's a bit of a shock to have your dreams run headlong into a stark reality.
June 12, 2012 at 3:35PM ESTSal could come back. Just because he does not work where Peggy does or at SCDP does not mean he could not get a job at either place in the future, or even just show up in some other capacity. Peggy's probably been there for a month or two so I doubt they are letting her have much if any say in hiring decisions at the moment.
-Cheers
shmrck14
June 24, 2012 at 7:36PM EST Reply to CommentBehind on listening to the podcast but wanted to note that the bunheads in the Bunhead title are the teenage ballet dancers, not the Vegas dancers. You suggested during the cast that the title no longer applied, but it does.
dan SHMRCK14 - Did we say that?
June 24, 2012 at 8:42PM EST-Daniel
shmrck14 You did, and I'm pretty sure it was you not Alan.
June 25, 2012 at 9:56PM ESTdan SHMRCK14 - Weird. Just relistened to the "Bunheads" segment in which we didn't mention the title at all and neither of us said anything incorrect about it. So it must have been a toss-off comment in the podcast at some other point? Since I've known the phrase "bunheads" in reference to young ballet dancers previous to this show, I can't imagine why I would have gotten confused, but you say it was me, so... Shrug. Oh well.
June 26, 2012 at 2:50AM EST-Daniel
shmrck14 So sorry, my bad. I re-listened this morning before seeing your comment cause I thought maybe I was confused and clearly I was. Ignore me going forward, I get confused really easily. I listen to several podcasts so it was someone else who said it.
June 26, 2012 at 9:06AM EST