I am not really someone to judge. I'm not perfect. I've done things I'm not proud of. That I regret. And I'm not here to judge you Jon Hamm. I consider myself a supporter. A fan. A fan since Mad Men. But just a few days ago I learned of something you were involved in that I had absolutely zero idea about. That I think a lot of people don't know about. Something that has, unfortunately caused me to have to utterly reevaluate what I think of you. Not just as an actor; but a fellow human being. But even before that...
About a year ago this commercial started running for some car resell place and you were in it and I have to say...it left a real sour taste in my mouth. It made me go, hmmmmmmm, because it seemed to reveal an aspect of your personality that I suspected might be there, that I didn't want to be there. Let's look at it and remember; you are playing yourself here. Jon Hamm.
About a year ago this commercial started running for some car resell place and you were in it and I have to say...it left a real sour taste in my mouth. It made me go, hmmmmmmm, because it seemed to reveal an aspect of your personality that I suspected might be there, that I didn't want to be there. Let's look at it and remember; you are playing yourself here. Jon Hamm.
So...what? You're shining this man on because...why? Because he's a nerdy, homely, loser that someone like you; who is most decidedly not a nerdy, homely, loser would never really be friends with. You're just being nice to him because you have to? You're calling him utterly insincere nicknames like "Gar-Bear" and lying to him about your pending attendance at his party because why would JON HAMM ever go to a party hosted by a homely, nerdy, loser like "Gar-Bear"? Jon...you do not come across well in this commercial. Did you not learn anything in your eight years of playing Don Draper?
But then Don Draper's whole persona was a sham, wasn't it? And I'm not saying you're a "sham," Jon. If I recall correctly, "Don Draper" wasn't even Don Draper. If I recall correctly, he stole a dead guy's identity somehow during the Korean War. The entire point of "Don Draper" was that he was an empty shell. Someone "faking it 'til they're making it." So Don Draper was a walking, talking metaphor for what is the utter facade of advertising: selling stuff to people that they don't need by convincing them they need it. Don was a faker who was really good at intuiting how to fool people. But I think even he would've realized that having a celebrity play themself as an insincere dissembler would be a mistake. Or am I wrong? Would Don Draper have instinctively known that having that celebrity "lean into" the inherently phony aspect of their being would be something that the masses would lap up, because most of them know too that "Jon Hamm" would never really be their friend; let alone deign to even address them from his front yard (and we'll get back to that). But wouldn't it be "fun" to think that they might be the exception? It seems "Gar-Bear" has made some in-roads. Maybe I can too!
Jon, I am not here to armchair psychologize you. No, wait. I am here to armchair psycho-analyze you. Now I am not a trained psychologist or psychiatrist nor have I played one on TV. But that doesn't seem to have stopped Dr. Phil, so what the fudge? Firstly, I want us to look at the following clip from 1996 which was six years on from the 1990 incident (which I will address shortly) and eleven years away from Mad Men. I think this is key in figuring out "who" you are. And let me just state that I am not trying to be glib or funny here. I am very serious about this; but I can't say humor won't creep it's way in. And I found this in it's entirety and I suggest we all watch the whole thing for full context.
But then Don Draper's whole persona was a sham, wasn't it? And I'm not saying you're a "sham," Jon. If I recall correctly, "Don Draper" wasn't even Don Draper. If I recall correctly, he stole a dead guy's identity somehow during the Korean War. The entire point of "Don Draper" was that he was an empty shell. Someone "faking it 'til they're making it." So Don Draper was a walking, talking metaphor for what is the utter facade of advertising: selling stuff to people that they don't need by convincing them they need it. Don was a faker who was really good at intuiting how to fool people. But I think even he would've realized that having a celebrity play themself as an insincere dissembler would be a mistake. Or am I wrong? Would Don Draper have instinctively known that having that celebrity "lean into" the inherently phony aspect of their being would be something that the masses would lap up, because most of them know too that "Jon Hamm" would never really be their friend; let alone deign to even address them from his front yard (and we'll get back to that). But wouldn't it be "fun" to think that they might be the exception? It seems "Gar-Bear" has made some in-roads. Maybe I can too!
Jon, I am not here to armchair psychologize you. No, wait. I am here to armchair psycho-analyze you. Now I am not a trained psychologist or psychiatrist nor have I played one on TV. But that doesn't seem to have stopped Dr. Phil, so what the fudge? Firstly, I want us to look at the following clip from 1996 which was six years on from the 1990 incident (which I will address shortly) and eleven years away from Mad Men. I think this is key in figuring out "who" you are. And let me just state that I am not trying to be glib or funny here. I am very serious about this; but I can't say humor won't creep it's way in. And I found this in it's entirety and I suggest we all watch the whole thing for full context.
Okay, so I watched episode 50 of 1996's The Big Date and here are my thoughts:
How did apparent Douche-in-Training, Mark L. Walberg end up becoming most famous for his sedate tenure on the equally sedate Antiques Roadshow? You know what? I'm just gonna number these and then answer them if I feel they should have a response.
2. I really like Mark's outfit by "Bernini," as it is actually quite good. I love the single inverted pleat on a pant. I do feel, however, he should have worn either a crewneck style top or a necktie with the dress-shirt.
3. Is Bernini still a thing?
-Yes. They have a website.
4. Do they have single inverted pleat pants on their website?
-I could not find any on the website but they do have an inventory that ranges from 100 dollar sweat pants to this:
How did apparent Douche-in-Training, Mark L. Walberg end up becoming most famous for his sedate tenure on the equally sedate Antiques Roadshow? You know what? I'm just gonna number these and then answer them if I feel they should have a response.
2. I really like Mark's outfit by "Bernini," as it is actually quite good. I love the single inverted pleat on a pant. I do feel, however, he should have worn either a crewneck style top or a necktie with the dress-shirt.
3. Is Bernini still a thing?
-Yes. They have a website.
4. Do they have single inverted pleat pants on their website?
-I could not find any on the website but they do have an inventory that ranges from 100 dollar sweat pants to this:
5. Is Jon Hamm the "Best Looking" guy on the panel of potential daters as he was named "Best Looking" in his high school yearbook; and does this designation transfer to the "Big Time"?
-There seems to be online confusion as to whether Jon or actor Paul Rudd was named Best Looking in their shared(?) h.s. yearbook. I concur with Mr. Walberg and I would also say that the three men are equally good looking in different ways. Jon is not a clear stand-out, clearly; as he was not picked and did not move on to The Big Date. And I can totally live without the frosted hair look of that era. It looked good on no one.
6. Why was Jon not picked?
-Well, contestant "Mary" comes right out and says he was one of the three that did not really acknowledge her by shaking her hand. Which may not be fair. We don't know what Jon was told or not told to do. He may simply have been nervous. His response does seem to be born of discomfit. Now Mary does go on some bit about having a "foot fetish" but it is unclear as to her deeper meanings. Is this fetish for her own feet and having them massaged? Is it for her potential paramour's feet and massaging those? Is it both? And does it go beyond massage. If she really had a true foot fetish, wouldn't one think that she'd zero in on the fellow with the biggest dogs; perhaps via the dubious sagery that tall men usually have Big Feet and ergo, Big _______s? I think this warrants a really deep dive because I don't take lightly this business of dissecting someone's personality. Particularly someone I don't know; although you are a public figure, Jon. And also someone I do know: at least never in a public forum, in such cases. So let's get a look at our three fellahs from head to toe in repose:
-There seems to be online confusion as to whether Jon or actor Paul Rudd was named Best Looking in their shared(?) h.s. yearbook. I concur with Mr. Walberg and I would also say that the three men are equally good looking in different ways. Jon is not a clear stand-out, clearly; as he was not picked and did not move on to The Big Date. And I can totally live without the frosted hair look of that era. It looked good on no one.
6. Why was Jon not picked?
-Well, contestant "Mary" comes right out and says he was one of the three that did not really acknowledge her by shaking her hand. Which may not be fair. We don't know what Jon was told or not told to do. He may simply have been nervous. His response does seem to be born of discomfit. Now Mary does go on some bit about having a "foot fetish" but it is unclear as to her deeper meanings. Is this fetish for her own feet and having them massaged? Is it for her potential paramour's feet and massaging those? Is it both? And does it go beyond massage. If she really had a true foot fetish, wouldn't one think that she'd zero in on the fellow with the biggest dogs; perhaps via the dubious sagery that tall men usually have Big Feet and ergo, Big _______s? I think this warrants a really deep dive because I don't take lightly this business of dissecting someone's personality. Particularly someone I don't know; although you are a public figure, Jon. And also someone I do know: at least never in a public forum, in such cases. So let's get a look at our three fellahs from head to toe in repose:
Clearly Jon is the tallest and clearly has the biggest feet. He also has the God-given slenderosity of most 25 year-old men. Love that deconstructed shirt Jon is wearing (it's what Mark W. really should have had on; speaking of which: upon further inspection; Mr. Walberg's pants are not single pleated, so my bad on that score). I would and still do wear that style shirt with the sleeves rolled up. Jon seems decidedly gangly here, but they all do. Those chairs seem ill-designed; eliciting a sort of ill-at-easeness in the sitters. And Jon seems to be succumbing to the very tall person's tendency to slouch; or retract themselves. He's pushing 6 foot 2 here. Conversely, tall people (particularly men) will go the opposite way with their height in order to dominate, steal focus; or sometimes intimidate. But why is Jon doing that childish thing with his feet? It's hard to say; but my take away is that he is very self-aware.
I think we also must ponder Jon's response to the question they are all asked. This is the only time he speaks (at 1.23 mark):
I think we also must ponder Jon's response to the question they are all asked. This is the only time he speaks (at 1.23 mark):
I'm just gonna be honest here Jon. You come off a little gay. I don't know if it's the hair or the overuse of the word "fabulous"; but I can understand how Mary might've been like: "Aaaahhh, okay...this guy could be high maintenance...next..." And of course, I could be wrong, because how could she not have noticed your feet? It seems she sparked with the guy who she first physically connected with. And he does seem like the most sincere of the three of you...that he's there to actually meet a woman and not perhaps, garner a little TV exposure. I mean you were in Los Angeles pursuing acting; and here I will give you points. Most aspiring actors in Los Angeles who were making ends meet by waiting tables probably would not have told the producers of The Big Date to announce them as a waiter. Unless they were doing the "false humility" thing. But we'll put that on hold for now.
7. How can we interpret Jon's body language after he has been relegated to the back-burner for the remainder of the show?
-Well, it's difficult as his on-camera presence is practically nil for the rest of the proceedings; and believe me Jon, I can relate! All of my scenes on Wings ended up on the cutting room floor. It was like that cameraman had a vendetta against me. Like, did I have bats in the cave or something?!!? Bastards!
We can see your hands several times:
7. How can we interpret Jon's body language after he has been relegated to the back-burner for the remainder of the show?
-Well, it's difficult as his on-camera presence is practically nil for the rest of the proceedings; and believe me Jon, I can relate! All of my scenes on Wings ended up on the cutting room floor. It was like that cameraman had a vendetta against me. Like, did I have bats in the cave or something?!!? Bastards!
We can see your hands several times:
The above is a shot of your hands as you belatedly join in for the applause once Mary picks Marc "the Stuntman." But while the crowd goes as nuts as though a new crowned head of Europe is chosen; you, Jon, engage in the super-slow clap which has come to be shorthand for disdain. You seem to be already checking out of the proceedings. You're also jiggling your right knee to beat the band, which I think is a sort of Universally accepted sign of anxiety and/or boredom and/or impatience. It's clear you are not happy about the way things are going. IMHO. You did however, I must mention, exchange some interesting interactions with the blonde guy.
After Mary pretty much chastises you and Marcus for not shaking her hand, you turn to Marcus and nudge him and pull a face. You're blaming him for what happened, in other words. Yes, in a lighthearted bro-bro way; but placing blame on the other guy is there on a base level:
After Mary pretty much chastises you and Marcus for not shaking her hand, you turn to Marcus and nudge him and pull a face. You're blaming him for what happened, in other words. Yes, in a lighthearted bro-bro way; but placing blame on the other guy is there on a base level:
Perhaps feeling guilty for this when Marcus is chosen by the next lady player "Shonia," you offer a bro-bro low-high-five-kinda-fist-bump thing which Marcus accepts perhaps somewhat grudgingly...? This can be seen at the 8:40 mark.
And can I just say here that the more I look at Marcus, frosted tips or not; that he is truly handsome in that kind of 100 year-storm way? He's like early Zac Efron: and somehow even prettier! He's like the Magic Earring Ken Doll come to life!
He may not have an earring; but he sure has uber-nibble-able ear lobes!
So then, Shonia has to pick someone...right? Let me revisit...please hold...
There is discussion about whether Marcus has described Shonia as being either "sparkly" or "twinkly." It's twinkly. But then it seems Mark W. makes a sly dig at Jon's masculinity by wondering if Mr. Hamm may not himself be "twinkly." He's already used the "fabulous" thing a couple of times ("weaponized" the word against Jon, that is) and the more I watch, the more of a douche I think Mr. W. is being. In any event, by this time, Jon is doing everything he can to hide a scowl:
I know I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of this death glare, just sayin.'
In any event, by the end of the whole mess, you're smiling...I'm guessing because you're simply glad the whole mess is finished and behind you. I mean, how could you have known that 30 years later the entire "episode" would be being analyzed on some guy from Boston's MySpace page. Even though MySpace was still eight years away.
So overall, what's my vibe from this? Well, nobody likes losing. Weknowdis. But I get the retroactive groove that Jon Hamm really doesn't like losing. I get the feeling he's not used to it.
Which brings us to the Fall of 1990. Or should that be "back to" that time? We haven't really talked about that. You certainly haven't Jon. No one has, really; because if I, a fan, who somewhat follows your career didn't find out until now; then somebody has been doing their damndest to keep it under the rug. And successfully too. Quite.
I found out about it via this woman; one Ms. Maureen Callahan:
In any event, by the end of the whole mess, you're smiling...I'm guessing because you're simply glad the whole mess is finished and behind you. I mean, how could you have known that 30 years later the entire "episode" would be being analyzed on some guy from Boston's MySpace page. Even though MySpace was still eight years away.
So overall, what's my vibe from this? Well, nobody likes losing. Weknowdis. But I get the retroactive groove that Jon Hamm really doesn't like losing. I get the feeling he's not used to it.
Which brings us to the Fall of 1990. Or should that be "back to" that time? We haven't really talked about that. You certainly haven't Jon. No one has, really; because if I, a fan, who somewhat follows your career didn't find out until now; then somebody has been doing their damndest to keep it under the rug. And successfully too. Quite.
I found out about it via this woman; one Ms. Maureen Callahan:
Jon...
This lady really does not like you. It seems that if she had her druthers, she'd have your balls in a Mason jar Or perhaps a Minute Maid Zero Sugar bottle...
This lady really does not like you. It seems that if she had her druthers, she'd have your balls in a Mason jar Or perhaps a Minute Maid Zero Sugar bottle...
I am not here to give Ms. Callahan Free Publicity; but I will say I admire her outspokenness. I came across her quite accidentally and I'm guessing some bespoke algorithmming (algorimming(?(!!)) by my pal and yours, HAL 9000. You see I was doing some "research/hate-watching" of her boss; one Ms. Megyn Kelly and thus the computer put her in front of my eyeballs (that is, Ms. C.) and then her expose on you, Jon. I like that she unapologetically "goes after" those who do not "sit well" with her; but might I suggest for Ms. Callahan a "physician heal thyself" style scenario; and propose that she perhaps look in the mirror and produce an at least three-episode "journalistic investigation" into her own employer, Ms. Kelly.
Why does the above remind me of the following...?
That aside. Ms. Callahan recently went off on a video interview you did for W.
Let me see if I can find that. Please hold...
Let me see if I can find that. Please hold...
Okay, I found it. But this blog is getting kinda long (that's what they said (about Jon Hamm!). So, please see: WILL THE REAL JON HAMM PLEASE STAND UP / PART 2 for the next entry in this vein(!).
CFR 6/29/26
CFR 6/29/26