• Network: AMC
  • Series Premiere Date: Jul 19, 2007
  • Season #: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8
User Score
8.8

Universal acclaim- based on 222 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 9 out of 222

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Oct 8, 2010
    0
    Mad Men is poorly written, it spews continually lackluster dialogue, and it struggles with one boring plot line after another. The show boasts quite the cast, but this only underscores how poorly the writers have done in utilizing the talent at their disposal. When it first came out I was intrigued, and subsequently watched several episodes, but it didn't take long to come to the realization that there is simply no "there" there. Short of the somewhat unique premise of the series, there is absolutely nothing about this show that warrants the attention it is getting. Are people really so shallow that they fall for this sophomoric, gimmicky drivel? When I heard that it was actually winning awards I couldn't even believe by ears. Mad Men is every bit as trite and pathetic as our modern movies and music. Style over substance, nothing more. Expand
Metascore
88

Universal acclaim - based on 20 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 20
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 20
  3. Negative: 0 out of 20
  1. 90
    Mad Men returns for season 2 in excellent form: There's a rich and active subtext in this series, you just have to discover it.
  2. The premiere jumps the series from 1960 to 1962, but it plays coy with most of last season's cliff-hangers, including the whereabouts of Peggy's son with married exec Pete Campbell (played with oily brilliance by Vincent Kartheiser). It's quite a tease, but the debut proves Mad Men is as smart as ever
  3. Far from devolving into soapy Madison Avenue pablum, Mad Men is painstakingly building its way to genuine greatness.