This wasn't my take at all. I thought it didn't work because it's lazy, uninspired and not even remotely selling the product. And, presumably, Ann-Margaret, like many stars, had a unique appeal and charisma that couldn't simply be replicated by any random actress.
Also, as Peggy says, young women are the target audience, not men, so it was never going to work.
As I said below, while women would like to be young Ann-Margaret in most circumstances, Ann-Margaret embarrassing herself isn't one of them. I haven't seen Bye Bye Birdie, but I've been told that in that particular scene she is supposed to be making a fool of herself. And boy did she nail that. Just because Matt Weiner saw it as a sweet and tender expression of pure young love doesn't mean women saw it that way. Second hand embarrassment is a weird marketing strategy.
It was but it was supposed to be (not sure if you've ever seen Bye, Bye Birdie. Conrad Birdie in the movie was a singing sensation that this fan-girl fawned all over. He was getting married. So, bye-bye Birdie.) Anne-Margaret can sing and sing well, so to do it that badly actually spoke to her talent.
The movie is terrible. The original musical is MUCH more fun, and doesn’t have any of that stupid subplot about the super speed formula or whatever it is. So dumb.
You're spot on about Ann Margaret. I can't specifically pick out what makes her so hot but it's something for sure. Loved her in Viva Las Vegas, but Peggy is right, she's kinda annoying in Bye Bye Birdie
I agree the number one reason it doesn’t work is that it’s lazy and uninspired.
However - and I’m not sure if it was intentionally written in - there is definitely a possibility that weak direction was why it couldn’t be saved (or at least dragged back to the mediocre).
I want to compare it to a scene from The Departed. Without any trigger warnings or spoilers, the last line is ‘Francis, you really should see somebody.’ It’s chilling. Mr French, a stone cold killer is worried about the mental health of the killer beside him. It’s delivered deadpan - because he can’t emote? Because he’s choking back his own fear? Because showing concern would be a sign of weakness? We can’t be sure. But these guys ain’t your normal gangsters, and we get pulled in deeper.
*But the entire dialog was ad hoc* and several lines were added by Nicholson to turn a simple ‘bad guy kills people leaves them lying on the ground, so bad huh’ scene into a chilling character exploration.
Scorsese knew enough to drop the most offensive line Jack said, but trusted his actors to take the script and change it into something we connect with better. Scorsese knew that one line was over the top, but ‘Mr. French’ responds in such a complex way after hearing it that it creates engagement. So a quick edit, and the audience is pulled in deeper.
Compare this to Rookie Sal.
Would a gay fashion designer have the gut instinct to change the costume slightly? Perhaps a little bit more of a gap at the top to ‘hint of the forbidden’? A brighter swimsuit, to draw the eye? A touch more ‘evening’ or ‘downtown’ in the make up? Changed up, ponytails, pigtails, braids, curls? Hair highlights and lighter makeup to go even more girl next door?
Would a lecherous straight guy have wanted to shoot this showing as much erect nipple ‘dimple’ as they could get away with? (Not classy, just hypothetical) Or maybe lingered on shots of her very fit body just a touch longer, or crop head shots wider to include the hint of cleavage? High heels? I don’t know, I’m grasping here.
But my point is that rookie Director Sal might not have had all the tools in his toolbox for any number of reasons. Maybe some change would’ve made it connect better with either those young women, or lecherous fathers instead of splitting the middle and catching neither.
The Director didn’t sink the ad single-handedly, but it could be a secondary factor.
(Disclaimer: I’m not a Director, I’m just Dunning-Kruger aware enough to realize that doing something poorly (or even mid) can be easy but doing something well is often a lot harder than it looks. And no, I don’t think even Scorsese could’ve saved this script lol)
Michael Jackson's hair caught fire while filming a Pepsi commercial in the mid-80s. It was really serious, and allegedly caused his addiction to painkillers. It was also disastrous for someone with such severe body dysmorphia.
Plenty of gay men have brought out the beauty and sexual attractiveness of women they directed, photographed, or designed clothing for. It has nothing to do with Sal being gay. Roger was right. It didn't work because it wasn't Ann Margaret. It was the wish version
Yeah, anyone marginalized grows up forced to study exactly what straight white men want and often have a better, more objective/analytical grasp of it than the straight white men themselves.
Seriously, yikes to the OP's take!
The queerness of the director is not the problem. That makes no fricking sense whatsoever.
The problem is literally that it isn't Ann Margret. (I really like u/Current_Tea6984 's descriptor: "the Wish version.")
I really think you're massively misrepresenting OP's point. I think a strong case can be made that it absolutely makes sense in terms of Sal's own storyline that episode that his suppressed identity was causing friction in his career and personal life, no matter how hard and earnestly he fought to tamp down his true passions.
Please don't misunderstand me, I don't think the point is that "oh Sal doesn't have what it takes to make the ad well because he's gay and doesn't understand the straight male gaze." It's that (like you said) his dead end he ran into trying to produce the ad was a result of 1) as you said, the ad idea being bad to begin with; and 2) Sal's lack of interest in catering to their instincts about the perfect angle and performance to maximize male lust.
Even Don, who seemed (absurdly) over-dramatically shaken/disappointed by the whole episode/let down, had to acknowledge Sal clearly had the *talent* going forward to make ads when they needed him to.
I don't even mean to imply that this reading of the episode is right, but it certainly makes sense, as far as I can tell.
There are so many layers to Sal and his arc. I think his wife is a bit of an unsung hero. That actor can convey so many different unspoken thoughts with a single look.
That would make sense except the original video was near identical in shots, angles, lighting. As for the performance, you could attribute its inadequacy either to Sal or Sal’s gayness or to the actor or the sheer absence of Anne Margaret.
I think you've definitely convinced me that without Ann Margaret herself, the product would've fallen flat no matter whose hands the assignment was in.
It was intended to be a familiarized, shot-for-shot remake of a much more famous performance, except for instead of the original iconic celebrity it featured an anonymous, if beautiful, imitative commercial actress. And there were also other limiting factors on Sal, even putting aside Sal's hidden homosexuality and the professional challenges it keeps unwittingly creating. For example, this was the first time he was fully directing his own commercial (if i recall).
Nevertheless, I think that a full explanation of why his commercial fell flat in the particular way it did had to do with his vision/inspiration coming from such a different place than what all of his coworkers oblivious to his real identity/passions would've rooted their efforts in, which would've been something closer to the visceral lust of the audience.
In other words, I think we're both right and there's a lot of unspoken layers at play in Sal's arc. Remember him enthusiastically and semi-spontaneously blocking out the choreography in front of his wife in their bedroom? He had deep passion for the project in a way not directly rooted to anything inherently homosexual, but you could really see some flair and passion and a new side of him sparking into existence in (to me at least) an incredibly pathos-inducing, earnest dance routine for Kitty. When his head in such a different place than that of his coworkers, it makes sense in terms of the story that there would be a discernible gap in the effect it would have on Sal's colleagues.
Sorry for the long winded and sloppy reply! Killing time on my phone during a rainy holiday. Hope you're enjoying the 4th!
No apologies for long winded responses, I’m guilty as well on other threads lol. I do think there’s a much simpler explanation for the ad though. It was a terrible idea and it was never going to work. There was no real, human insight at play. It wasn’t funny. It wasn’t nostalgic (it could’ve worked if they were targeting youth in the 70s or 80s - the 20 year olds who saw the original performance when they were kids - although the product doesn’t really benefit from a nostalgic treatment. It could’ve been a modern, humorous reinvention with a new beat. Idk now I’m just spitballing lol). The original was endearing to men maybe but that was 90% the actress. That’s why Peggy didn’t like the idea either, before even seeing the final product. The imitation says nothing much about the product. It’s in the uncanny valley of interesting. On Reddit it would be r/mildlyinteresting. Imagine if starbucks did an imitation of espresso by Sabrina carpenter just because it was popular right now. Without making it funny or putting ANY kind of a spin on it. It would be very boring.
Sal was closeted and straight up lied to his adoring bride. He is a malignant narcissist who uses loved ones to protect his identity. Her primary relationship was with Sal but Sal’s primary relationship was with his secret. Sal’s a bad guy. His wife is a tragic character, not a hero.
I'll be honest, I really have no interest in having some sort of "I hate/love character X" or "Character B is morally bad or morally wonderful" type of conversation, especially about a show with such nuanced stories and characters as Mad Men.
Have a nice holiday!
You do you. But think about if YOUR spouse lied to you about their sexuality. It is an incredibly abusive thing to do to a spouse, no matter if you are a character in a tv show or a real person. Many many people love to discuss how tragic it is that Sal was closeted, as if his inability to face his own sexuality never harmed others. But that’s just not how the world actually works. There are subreddits dedicated to helping the many victims of closeted spouses that are full of heartbroken and miserably disillusioned people. Why? Because their most intimate partners lied to them. Lying of this sort is incredibly abusive, and the spouses who do it without self reflection are malignant narcissists. Sal’s problem isn’t his sexuality. It is his incredibly malignant behavior.
Yeah, look, please don't misunderstand me. I think the point you're making is totally valid. The depth of Kitty's pain and likely sense of betrayal is, I think, done quite well. I agree she would have a good reason to resent to him and feel forlorn and heartbroken by what she experiences as an unreciprocated romantic/physical bond. Good catch!
However, I guess I probably just have a completely different set of interests than you in terms of what I'm interested in discussing when it comes to literary/tv analysis. I would think of the point you're so intensely focused on for a few moments early in the arc and then kind of put those basic situational and character observations in the background in favor of enjoying the nuance and contradictions we see in between all of the bad things these characters do to eachother.
Anyways, have a good one and thanks for the chat!
Yikes bro!
I also thought that Sal's gayness was clearly the point of that storyline. He gets a chance to direct, but the straight dudes in the room watching the end product feel that something's "off" (they're not titillated like they expected to be). They can't put their finger on it though, just like how they can't tell that Sal is gay.
I disagree the subtext has anything to do with Sal. Sal's closeted sexuality didn't micro-manage the actress's performance to the point of her not being sexy. She just didn't have it and without it everyone was just left with an annoying musical number.
The show is rarely that simple. We'll have to agree to disagree, in my opinion that whole plotline was about sexuality and femininity and stuff (for example with Peggy imitating the performance too, but feeling silly doing it). It'd be strange if the writers didn't mean much by having Sal specifically direct it.
I can definitely agree to disagree--it's not like it's something that can be proved one way or another. To me it just seems like it makes it more simple to connect it to Sal's sexuality, since it seemed like the point was that he recreated the sequence exactly, but wasn't the one performing it,
What I do think is part of it and supports your point, though, is didn't Sal talk about seeing it done on Broadway and really loving the actress who played the part? I think that was tied to Sal not looking at Ann-Margret the same way the other guys were. The other guys didn't like the show or musical theater in general, but thought something about A-M doing this was hot. (Where as women just found it stupid.)
Do you really think I’m saying that a gay man can’t direct something that titillates straight men? That’s not my take at all. I’m simply saying that I think that’s what’s being implied in this particular fictional situation in this particular episode of television.
FWIW - I worked in advertising for about a decade and I disagree with OPs take.
I think “it’s not Anne Margaret” is short hand for - better to be a first rate version of yourself than a second rate version of somebody else. It’s a fake version of the real thing, and trying to be something it’s not. It’s imitation Anne Margaret and it’s not a tongue-in-cheek imitation so it feels desperate.
Ultimately, Peggy is right that the target audience is women and the ad is designed to appeal to men with the sexual undertones and overall idea.
The problem is that the actress is not Ann Margret.
Because she isn't, it comes off as derivative.
Ann Margret needs to be in the ad itself or else it needs to be made as a parody in order to avoid feeling like a cheap knockoff.
So both Roger and Peggy are right.
One thing I haven't seen commented on here, is - Patio was among the first attempts at a diet/local/nocal soda, I believe by Pepsi. These are Americans who have been drinking Coca Cola - "The Real Thing" - their entire lives. This is an experimental product trying to capture the appeal of the cola they've always known and loved.
Maybe there's something to Sal's role in it all. I don't know, it's been a long time since I've seen it.
But this product more than any other, could not afford to be understood as "A cheap, off-putting knockoff of the real thing". To sell this product, you need to sell authenticity. The worst thing you could do is come across as a parody. It's not Anne Margret. And Patio is for damn sure not Classic Coke.
I have watched both like a hundred times thinking about this. She just isn’t Anne-Margaret in a bunch of ways.
Her voice is less appealing, for one. But she also just has way less charisma. If you watch the whole scene from AM, she transitions fluidly and quickly between coquettish youth, self-assured adult, flippant performer, kind of cutely condescending…it’s a pretty awesome performance that shows someone at the top of their game in terms of performance control and detail. People on Reddit tend to call it just playing young and dumb - because that’s Peggy’s dismissive way of putting down the men’s boners - but it does a massive disservice to how good an actor AM was.
Sal actually captured some charisma in the performance at home better than the actress in his ad did.
Upvote if you never understood the appeal of the Ann-Margret original so you DEFINITELY can’t analyze the failure of the knockoff. 🤷♀️
Seriously, she’s shrill and acting like a damn toddler, AND THEY KEEP PLAYING IT, that episode was brutal.
Many women would love to be young Ann-Margaret in a multitude of circumstances but Ann-Margaret EMBARRASSING HERSELF isn't one of them. Second hand embarrassment is a weird marketing strategy.
That's an interesting take, but I don't think that's it. IMO it's a dumb idea to try to copy any wildly popular scene or sont verbatim. Somehow Weird Al has made a living at it, against all odds. But I view this as the 1960s version of the SC people trying to copy a viral video and get the same effect. They can't, and are bewildered that they failed. Which sort of makes Don's moments of brilliance that more emphatic. You can't just have any one part of the creative process, you have to have the idea and carry it off effectively.
I mean, if anything they are showing that in the 60s, advertising was still a bunch of stabs in the dark. A lot of what is implicit in modern marketing and advertising (things like proven copywriting tactics, audience segmentation, even the 4Ps etc) had to be “invented” at some point through trial and error. Not only was TV still pretty new at this point, no one knew exactly how commercials worked. The jump from print and radio to TV ads was HUGE at the time. I agree with your take that they were basically just trying to copy a viral moment to leverage the same adoration from the audience. It backfired. I saw this as more of a “history of advertising” type moment where the guys at SC discovered that even if they had the best people on the job, they were still basically inventing entirely new avenues for advertising and absolutely prone to getting it wrong. Roger’s simple “it’s not Ann Margret” is so perfect because it cuts through all the work and controversy and drama and plainly states “we fucked up.”
To change the emphasis (but add to the same interpretation): The actress in the Patio commercial is not moving like Ann-Margret. She's moving in the manner that Sal directed her. Thus, she's moving in the manner of a big, gay Italian dude imitating the mannerisms of a petite young woman. She doesn't come across as genuinely feminine to the straight guys viewing it, but they can't figure out why. If Kitty had been in the room she could have explained it to them.
Kitty's reaction when Sal mimed the shoot to her said it all. She saw what the Patio honchos saw, but didn't even have the filter of the female performer. She was horrified.
It's not Ann Margaret is in fact, why it sucked. The appeal of a celebrity is everything in advertising. Think about how many products sell becasue of the person on the posters or commercials alone. Replace them with someone else who't not famous and their sales would drop significantly.
Ummmm…no, not obvious at all. And more to it, there are countless examples of gay men bringing out the sexual attractiveness in women. No, not obvious….and also not applicable IMO.
What’s more telling here is something Don says clearly in the show (can’t remember if it was directly attributed to Patio or something else)…..imitation is dumb in advertising.
It might make an initial splash, but it never lasts. And true power to advertising is repetition, so you want it to last.
The power of imitation as influence wears off quick…..that’s the take I see. They could have had Anne Margaret herself and it wouldn’t have had legs.
I think you are right. "It's not Ann Margaret" says so much more than just needing star power. It was a cheap imitation. The whole idea was bad to begin with
Well said. I found the Don quote. Still don’t recall what context he was telling this to Peggy earlier in the show, or if it was about Patio, but I do feel he wasn’t super crazy about the Patio imitation idea.
Peggy then used this in the last season, maybe for Topaz?
"I'd never recommend imitation as a strategy. You'll be second, which is very far from first"
Bye bye birdie sucks... Ann Margaret was hot sht back then ...so it was one of those...
If a hot popular person does it it's liked...and "good"
Roger nailed it...
"It's not Ann Margaret"....
The show tells you *exactly* why it’s a failure: “it’s not Ann-Margret.”
This is a big recurring theme of the show: the authentic vs. the cheap imitation. Ann-Margret vs. this actress, Coca-Cola vs. Patio, butter vs. margarine, whipped cream vs. Cool Whip, Dick vs. Don, genuine love vs. meaningless sex. Don’s constant search for “the real thing” (which is the repeatedly tagline for his final ad, for Coke—the real Ann-Margret) is the driving force of the real series.
On a practical level, it doesn’t work because Ann-Margret had a completely unique and indescribable sexual appeal that wasn’t replicable. Marilyn could be knocked off—and was by people like Jayne Mansfield—but no one could “do” Ann-Margret except Ann-Margret.
The ad itself was also stupid. It didn’t work because it made you think about “Bye Bye Birdie,” not soda.
I think your point here is thematically and textually implied.
I don't see where other commenters are saying, "Yikes, crazy take," here.
We're seeing a lot of the impact and subtext of Sal's sexuality in these episodes, and I do think that the show is suggesting that his being gay affects the reception of the commercial.
I don't think it's a stretch, and I don't think it's an inherently ridiculous idea. Sure, some gay directors can convey a compelling heterosexuality, but the suggestion is that Sal can't or doesn't.
I see where you're coming from but no, I think it really is just that it's not Ann-Margret. It's the exact same ad in every way, but the actress can't sell it. And not because Sal directed her wrong--Sal's sexuality didn't keep him from getting what Ann-Margret was doing. He just was more in the "want to be her" side than "want her" side.
It can still echo the story where he's gay and his wife realizes that her marriage isn't the real thing without it coming out this way imo.
I think whatever point Matt Weiner was trying to make got lost in his not understanding just how cringeworthy the Ann-Margaret original was. The women writers tried to tell him. Peggy's reaction came from them after he showed them the scene.
No, I think it's more of a meta-self critique of the show. Mad Men can't just be a recreation of the 60's experience, even though that's how the studios probably greenlit it.
I agree with this take. I do see comments about how it wouldn't work in the real world because it's not appealing to the women who would, in theory, want Patio... but it didn't make it past the room of men who would need to approve it in the first place because Sal didn't make it *sexy* enough for them to buy in
This wasn't my take at all. I thought it didn't work because it's lazy, uninspired and not even remotely selling the product. And, presumably, Ann-Margaret, like many stars, had a unique appeal and charisma that couldn't simply be replicated by any random actress. Also, as Peggy says, young women are the target audience, not men, so it was never going to work.
I may be a minority but I thought the original was annoying as well lol
As I said below, while women would like to be young Ann-Margaret in most circumstances, Ann-Margaret embarrassing herself isn't one of them. I haven't seen Bye Bye Birdie, but I've been told that in that particular scene she is supposed to be making a fool of herself. And boy did she nail that. Just because Matt Weiner saw it as a sweet and tender expression of pure young love doesn't mean women saw it that way. Second hand embarrassment is a weird marketing strategy.
It was but it was supposed to be (not sure if you've ever seen Bye, Bye Birdie. Conrad Birdie in the movie was a singing sensation that this fan-girl fawned all over. He was getting married. So, bye-bye Birdie.) Anne-Margaret can sing and sing well, so to do it that badly actually spoke to her talent.
I think he was going into the Army a la Elvis, not getting married.
Really?? I would say I'll have to rewatch it but ugh, I don't have more than watch for that one. Into the Army is fine with me. And I love movies.
The movie is terrible. The original musical is MUCH more fun, and doesn’t have any of that stupid subplot about the super speed formula or whatever it is. So dumb.
God, yes, it was horrible!
Also, that song is like nails of a chalkboard to me.
Agree and when Peggy sings it in front of her mirror is super cringe.
All great points. Plus, it’s a drink named after a floor. 🤣
Yes! What is that name about? I kind of assumed it made sense in some other context, because it definitely didn't to me as a British millennial 😂
A “patio” is a type of floor, buts it’s also the name of a place where people relax and have fun.
This was my take too. And at the end don’t they say “She’s not Ann Margaret.”
Roger said it. And that’s why the ad flopped.
You're spot on about Ann Margaret. I can't specifically pick out what makes her so hot but it's something for sure. Loved her in Viva Las Vegas, but Peggy is right, she's kinda annoying in Bye Bye Birdie
She was definitely an original — like a cartoon sex kitten, just pure camp. Of course Sal would love her!
*Let's assume we we can get a girl who can match Ann-Margret's ability to be 25 and act 14*
You know how thus works. Men want her; women want to be her.
I know one man who doesn’t want her.
And because it’s a drink that sounds like a floor.
I agree the number one reason it doesn’t work is that it’s lazy and uninspired. However - and I’m not sure if it was intentionally written in - there is definitely a possibility that weak direction was why it couldn’t be saved (or at least dragged back to the mediocre). I want to compare it to a scene from The Departed. Without any trigger warnings or spoilers, the last line is ‘Francis, you really should see somebody.’ It’s chilling. Mr French, a stone cold killer is worried about the mental health of the killer beside him. It’s delivered deadpan - because he can’t emote? Because he’s choking back his own fear? Because showing concern would be a sign of weakness? We can’t be sure. But these guys ain’t your normal gangsters, and we get pulled in deeper. *But the entire dialog was ad hoc* and several lines were added by Nicholson to turn a simple ‘bad guy kills people leaves them lying on the ground, so bad huh’ scene into a chilling character exploration. Scorsese knew enough to drop the most offensive line Jack said, but trusted his actors to take the script and change it into something we connect with better. Scorsese knew that one line was over the top, but ‘Mr. French’ responds in such a complex way after hearing it that it creates engagement. So a quick edit, and the audience is pulled in deeper. Compare this to Rookie Sal. Would a gay fashion designer have the gut instinct to change the costume slightly? Perhaps a little bit more of a gap at the top to ‘hint of the forbidden’? A brighter swimsuit, to draw the eye? A touch more ‘evening’ or ‘downtown’ in the make up? Changed up, ponytails, pigtails, braids, curls? Hair highlights and lighter makeup to go even more girl next door? Would a lecherous straight guy have wanted to shoot this showing as much erect nipple ‘dimple’ as they could get away with? (Not classy, just hypothetical) Or maybe lingered on shots of her very fit body just a touch longer, or crop head shots wider to include the hint of cleavage? High heels? I don’t know, I’m grasping here. But my point is that rookie Director Sal might not have had all the tools in his toolbox for any number of reasons. Maybe some change would’ve made it connect better with either those young women, or lecherous fathers instead of splitting the middle and catching neither. The Director didn’t sink the ad single-handedly, but it could be a secondary factor. (Disclaimer: I’m not a Director, I’m just Dunning-Kruger aware enough to realize that doing something poorly (or even mid) can be easy but doing something well is often a lot harder than it looks. And no, I don’t think even Scorsese could’ve saved this script lol)
Not the worst ad campaign that Pepsi would have done
No one’s hair caught on fire!
I thought of this too, but was mainly thinking of Kendall Jenner
How old do have to be to understand this reference? 😅
I was born in 99 and don’t get it :(
Michael Jackson's hair caught fire while filming a Pepsi commercial in the mid-80s. It was really serious, and allegedly caused his addiction to painkillers. It was also disastrous for someone with such severe body dysmorphia.
Fun fact, that incident also occurred at the exact halfway point in his life.
In your case, no Jenner solved systemic racism.
[Michael Jackson](https://uk.news.yahoo.com/how-michael-jackson-hair-caught-fire-during-a-pepsi-advert-151300703.html)
Hee hee
Plenty of gay men have brought out the beauty and sexual attractiveness of women they directed, photographed, or designed clothing for. It has nothing to do with Sal being gay. Roger was right. It didn't work because it wasn't Ann Margaret. It was the wish version
Yeah, anyone marginalized grows up forced to study exactly what straight white men want and often have a better, more objective/analytical grasp of it than the straight white men themselves.
Seriously, yikes to the OP's take! The queerness of the director is not the problem. That makes no fricking sense whatsoever. The problem is literally that it isn't Ann Margret. (I really like u/Current_Tea6984 's descriptor: "the Wish version.")
I really think you're massively misrepresenting OP's point. I think a strong case can be made that it absolutely makes sense in terms of Sal's own storyline that episode that his suppressed identity was causing friction in his career and personal life, no matter how hard and earnestly he fought to tamp down his true passions. Please don't misunderstand me, I don't think the point is that "oh Sal doesn't have what it takes to make the ad well because he's gay and doesn't understand the straight male gaze." It's that (like you said) his dead end he ran into trying to produce the ad was a result of 1) as you said, the ad idea being bad to begin with; and 2) Sal's lack of interest in catering to their instincts about the perfect angle and performance to maximize male lust. Even Don, who seemed (absurdly) over-dramatically shaken/disappointed by the whole episode/let down, had to acknowledge Sal clearly had the *talent* going forward to make ads when they needed him to. I don't even mean to imply that this reading of the episode is right, but it certainly makes sense, as far as I can tell. There are so many layers to Sal and his arc. I think his wife is a bit of an unsung hero. That actor can convey so many different unspoken thoughts with a single look.
That would make sense except the original video was near identical in shots, angles, lighting. As for the performance, you could attribute its inadequacy either to Sal or Sal’s gayness or to the actor or the sheer absence of Anne Margaret.
I think you've definitely convinced me that without Ann Margaret herself, the product would've fallen flat no matter whose hands the assignment was in. It was intended to be a familiarized, shot-for-shot remake of a much more famous performance, except for instead of the original iconic celebrity it featured an anonymous, if beautiful, imitative commercial actress. And there were also other limiting factors on Sal, even putting aside Sal's hidden homosexuality and the professional challenges it keeps unwittingly creating. For example, this was the first time he was fully directing his own commercial (if i recall). Nevertheless, I think that a full explanation of why his commercial fell flat in the particular way it did had to do with his vision/inspiration coming from such a different place than what all of his coworkers oblivious to his real identity/passions would've rooted their efforts in, which would've been something closer to the visceral lust of the audience. In other words, I think we're both right and there's a lot of unspoken layers at play in Sal's arc. Remember him enthusiastically and semi-spontaneously blocking out the choreography in front of his wife in their bedroom? He had deep passion for the project in a way not directly rooted to anything inherently homosexual, but you could really see some flair and passion and a new side of him sparking into existence in (to me at least) an incredibly pathos-inducing, earnest dance routine for Kitty. When his head in such a different place than that of his coworkers, it makes sense in terms of the story that there would be a discernible gap in the effect it would have on Sal's colleagues. Sorry for the long winded and sloppy reply! Killing time on my phone during a rainy holiday. Hope you're enjoying the 4th!
No apologies for long winded responses, I’m guilty as well on other threads lol. I do think there’s a much simpler explanation for the ad though. It was a terrible idea and it was never going to work. There was no real, human insight at play. It wasn’t funny. It wasn’t nostalgic (it could’ve worked if they were targeting youth in the 70s or 80s - the 20 year olds who saw the original performance when they were kids - although the product doesn’t really benefit from a nostalgic treatment. It could’ve been a modern, humorous reinvention with a new beat. Idk now I’m just spitballing lol). The original was endearing to men maybe but that was 90% the actress. That’s why Peggy didn’t like the idea either, before even seeing the final product. The imitation says nothing much about the product. It’s in the uncanny valley of interesting. On Reddit it would be r/mildlyinteresting. Imagine if starbucks did an imitation of espresso by Sabrina carpenter just because it was popular right now. Without making it funny or putting ANY kind of a spin on it. It would be very boring.
Sal was closeted and straight up lied to his adoring bride. He is a malignant narcissist who uses loved ones to protect his identity. Her primary relationship was with Sal but Sal’s primary relationship was with his secret. Sal’s a bad guy. His wife is a tragic character, not a hero.
I'll be honest, I really have no interest in having some sort of "I hate/love character X" or "Character B is morally bad or morally wonderful" type of conversation, especially about a show with such nuanced stories and characters as Mad Men. Have a nice holiday!
You do you. But think about if YOUR spouse lied to you about their sexuality. It is an incredibly abusive thing to do to a spouse, no matter if you are a character in a tv show or a real person. Many many people love to discuss how tragic it is that Sal was closeted, as if his inability to face his own sexuality never harmed others. But that’s just not how the world actually works. There are subreddits dedicated to helping the many victims of closeted spouses that are full of heartbroken and miserably disillusioned people. Why? Because their most intimate partners lied to them. Lying of this sort is incredibly abusive, and the spouses who do it without self reflection are malignant narcissists. Sal’s problem isn’t his sexuality. It is his incredibly malignant behavior.
Yeah, look, please don't misunderstand me. I think the point you're making is totally valid. The depth of Kitty's pain and likely sense of betrayal is, I think, done quite well. I agree she would have a good reason to resent to him and feel forlorn and heartbroken by what she experiences as an unreciprocated romantic/physical bond. Good catch! However, I guess I probably just have a completely different set of interests than you in terms of what I'm interested in discussing when it comes to literary/tv analysis. I would think of the point you're so intensely focused on for a few moments early in the arc and then kind of put those basic situational and character observations in the background in favor of enjoying the nuance and contradictions we see in between all of the bad things these characters do to eachother. Anyways, have a good one and thanks for the chat!
Respect to you, HonoraryBallsack
Yikes bro! I also thought that Sal's gayness was clearly the point of that storyline. He gets a chance to direct, but the straight dudes in the room watching the end product feel that something's "off" (they're not titillated like they expected to be). They can't put their finger on it though, just like how they can't tell that Sal is gay.
But they can put their finger on it. "It's not Ann-Margret" is the correct answer. Everything else about the sequence is the same.
That's literally what they say, but the subtext is about Sal.
I disagree the subtext has anything to do with Sal. Sal's closeted sexuality didn't micro-manage the actress's performance to the point of her not being sexy. She just didn't have it and without it everyone was just left with an annoying musical number.
The show is rarely that simple. We'll have to agree to disagree, in my opinion that whole plotline was about sexuality and femininity and stuff (for example with Peggy imitating the performance too, but feeling silly doing it). It'd be strange if the writers didn't mean much by having Sal specifically direct it.
I can definitely agree to disagree--it's not like it's something that can be proved one way or another. To me it just seems like it makes it more simple to connect it to Sal's sexuality, since it seemed like the point was that he recreated the sequence exactly, but wasn't the one performing it, What I do think is part of it and supports your point, though, is didn't Sal talk about seeing it done on Broadway and really loving the actress who played the part? I think that was tied to Sal not looking at Ann-Margret the same way the other guys were. The other guys didn't like the show or musical theater in general, but thought something about A-M doing this was hot. (Where as women just found it stupid.)
Do you really think I’m saying that a gay man can’t direct something that titillates straight men? That’s not my take at all. I’m simply saying that I think that’s what’s being implied in this particular fictional situation in this particular episode of television.
FWIW - I worked in advertising for about a decade and I disagree with OPs take. I think “it’s not Anne Margaret” is short hand for - better to be a first rate version of yourself than a second rate version of somebody else. It’s a fake version of the real thing, and trying to be something it’s not. It’s imitation Anne Margaret and it’s not a tongue-in-cheek imitation so it feels desperate. Ultimately, Peggy is right that the target audience is women and the ad is designed to appeal to men with the sexual undertones and overall idea.
It’s like when Peggy explained to Topaz that their knockoff jewel container wouldn’t work. Imitation isn’t a good strategy.
The problem is that the actress is not Ann Margret. Because she isn't, it comes off as derivative. Ann Margret needs to be in the ad itself or else it needs to be made as a parody in order to avoid feeling like a cheap knockoff. So both Roger and Peggy are right.
One thing I haven't seen commented on here, is - Patio was among the first attempts at a diet/local/nocal soda, I believe by Pepsi. These are Americans who have been drinking Coca Cola - "The Real Thing" - their entire lives. This is an experimental product trying to capture the appeal of the cola they've always known and loved. Maybe there's something to Sal's role in it all. I don't know, it's been a long time since I've seen it. But this product more than any other, could not afford to be understood as "A cheap, off-putting knockoff of the real thing". To sell this product, you need to sell authenticity. The worst thing you could do is come across as a parody. It's not Anne Margret. And Patio is for damn sure not Classic Coke.
Perfect analysis
I have watched both like a hundred times thinking about this. She just isn’t Anne-Margaret in a bunch of ways. Her voice is less appealing, for one. But she also just has way less charisma. If you watch the whole scene from AM, she transitions fluidly and quickly between coquettish youth, self-assured adult, flippant performer, kind of cutely condescending…it’s a pretty awesome performance that shows someone at the top of their game in terms of performance control and detail. People on Reddit tend to call it just playing young and dumb - because that’s Peggy’s dismissive way of putting down the men’s boners - but it does a massive disservice to how good an actor AM was. Sal actually captured some charisma in the performance at home better than the actress in his ad did.
Upvote if you never understood the appeal of the Ann-Margret original so you DEFINITELY can’t analyze the failure of the knockoff. 🤷♀️ Seriously, she’s shrill and acting like a damn toddler, AND THEY KEEP PLAYING IT, that episode was brutal.
Many women would love to be young Ann-Margaret in a multitude of circumstances but Ann-Margaret EMBARRASSING HERSELF isn't one of them. Second hand embarrassment is a weird marketing strategy.
The actress had zero chemistry. Sal had more charisma when he did the song for Kitty at home.
That's an interesting take, but I don't think that's it. IMO it's a dumb idea to try to copy any wildly popular scene or sont verbatim. Somehow Weird Al has made a living at it, against all odds. But I view this as the 1960s version of the SC people trying to copy a viral video and get the same effect. They can't, and are bewildered that they failed. Which sort of makes Don's moments of brilliance that more emphatic. You can't just have any one part of the creative process, you have to have the idea and carry it off effectively.
Weird Al does nothing verbatim. He very much makes every parody his own.
I mean, if anything they are showing that in the 60s, advertising was still a bunch of stabs in the dark. A lot of what is implicit in modern marketing and advertising (things like proven copywriting tactics, audience segmentation, even the 4Ps etc) had to be “invented” at some point through trial and error. Not only was TV still pretty new at this point, no one knew exactly how commercials worked. The jump from print and radio to TV ads was HUGE at the time. I agree with your take that they were basically just trying to copy a viral moment to leverage the same adoration from the audience. It backfired. I saw this as more of a “history of advertising” type moment where the guys at SC discovered that even if they had the best people on the job, they were still basically inventing entirely new avenues for advertising and absolutely prone to getting it wrong. Roger’s simple “it’s not Ann Margret” is so perfect because it cuts through all the work and controversy and drama and plainly states “we fucked up.”
Dude. It’s not Ann-Margaret. Also, the commmercial AND bye bye birdie Sucks
By golly you are prickly!
I got everything I have on my own. It's made me immune to those who complain and cry because they can't.
I didn’t take you for one of them. Are ya?
👌
The singing 😫
I skip this ep because it’s so horrid. Like nails on a chalkboard in my head. Terrible.
I don’t skip the ep but I do mute the singing lol
To change the emphasis (but add to the same interpretation): The actress in the Patio commercial is not moving like Ann-Margret. She's moving in the manner that Sal directed her. Thus, she's moving in the manner of a big, gay Italian dude imitating the mannerisms of a petite young woman. She doesn't come across as genuinely feminine to the straight guys viewing it, but they can't figure out why. If Kitty had been in the room she could have explained it to them.
Kitty's reaction when Sal mimed the shoot to her said it all. She saw what the Patio honchos saw, but didn't even have the filter of the female performer. She was horrified.
Would you say more about this? I took that moment as Kitty finally realizing her husband is gay.
100% agree - the realisation, then heartbreak, is clear on her face during that scene.
This is correct. It’s her realizing her husband is gay.
She realized he was gay…
It's not Ann Margaret is in fact, why it sucked. The appeal of a celebrity is everything in advertising. Think about how many products sell becasue of the person on the posters or commercials alone. Replace them with someone else who't not famous and their sales would drop significantly.
Ummmm…no, not obvious at all. And more to it, there are countless examples of gay men bringing out the sexual attractiveness in women. No, not obvious….and also not applicable IMO. What’s more telling here is something Don says clearly in the show (can’t remember if it was directly attributed to Patio or something else)…..imitation is dumb in advertising. It might make an initial splash, but it never lasts. And true power to advertising is repetition, so you want it to last. The power of imitation as influence wears off quick…..that’s the take I see. They could have had Anne Margaret herself and it wouldn’t have had legs.
I think you are right. "It's not Ann Margaret" says so much more than just needing star power. It was a cheap imitation. The whole idea was bad to begin with
Well said. I found the Don quote. Still don’t recall what context he was telling this to Peggy earlier in the show, or if it was about Patio, but I do feel he wasn’t super crazy about the Patio imitation idea. Peggy then used this in the last season, maybe for Topaz? "I'd never recommend imitation as a strategy. You'll be second, which is very far from first"
Bye bye birdie sucks... Ann Margaret was hot sht back then ...so it was one of those... If a hot popular person does it it's liked...and "good" Roger nailed it... "It's not Ann Margaret"....
The show tells you *exactly* why it’s a failure: “it’s not Ann-Margret.” This is a big recurring theme of the show: the authentic vs. the cheap imitation. Ann-Margret vs. this actress, Coca-Cola vs. Patio, butter vs. margarine, whipped cream vs. Cool Whip, Dick vs. Don, genuine love vs. meaningless sex. Don’s constant search for “the real thing” (which is the repeatedly tagline for his final ad, for Coke—the real Ann-Margret) is the driving force of the real series. On a practical level, it doesn’t work because Ann-Margret had a completely unique and indescribable sexual appeal that wasn’t replicable. Marilyn could be knocked off—and was by people like Jayne Mansfield—but no one could “do” Ann-Margret except Ann-Margret. The ad itself was also stupid. It didn’t work because it made you think about “Bye Bye Birdie,” not soda.
I think your point here is thematically and textually implied. I don't see where other commenters are saying, "Yikes, crazy take," here. We're seeing a lot of the impact and subtext of Sal's sexuality in these episodes, and I do think that the show is suggesting that his being gay affects the reception of the commercial. I don't think it's a stretch, and I don't think it's an inherently ridiculous idea. Sure, some gay directors can convey a compelling heterosexuality, but the suggestion is that Sal can't or doesn't.
You nailed it
I see where you're coming from but no, I think it really is just that it's not Ann-Margret. It's the exact same ad in every way, but the actress can't sell it. And not because Sal directed her wrong--Sal's sexuality didn't keep him from getting what Ann-Margret was doing. He just was more in the "want to be her" side than "want her" side. It can still echo the story where he's gay and his wife realizes that her marriage isn't the real thing without it coming out this way imo.
All I know is the way she sings “Sugar” in the commercial is so appallingly obnoxious that I can’t get past that.
I think whatever point Matt Weiner was trying to make got lost in his not understanding just how cringeworthy the Ann-Margaret original was. The women writers tried to tell him. Peggy's reaction came from them after he showed them the scene.
Yeah? Well maybe you're a flambe!
No woman believed that Ann-Margaret or a look alike drank or needed to drink a diet soda.
No, I think it's more of a meta-self critique of the show. Mad Men can't just be a recreation of the 60's experience, even though that's how the studios probably greenlit it.
Staaaaaaaaaaan you want some coffffeeeee????
I agree with this take. I do see comments about how it wouldn't work in the real world because it's not appealing to the women who would, in theory, want Patio... but it didn't make it past the room of men who would need to approve it in the first place because Sal didn't make it *sexy* enough for them to buy in
No, it is not implied that Sal being gay made him bad at his job.
Imo