“Are you trying to trick me?”

An understandable assumption given that the man asking this question, John Slattery, is in the enviable position of knowing all sorts of delicious details about season five of AMC’s “Mad Men.” Sunday’s two-hour premiere (starting at 9pm ET/PT) will be the first new episode seen on TV since October 2010 — or to get even more specific, it will be first original “Mad Men” in 525 days.

The fans are thirsty for answers to all of the questions with which the season four finale left us, and other much more basic information. For example, what year will it be when the drama returns? We’re not saying because we’ve been asked not to.

As always, AMC and the show’s creator, Matthew Weiner, have issued a strict omerta to anyone involved with the production, as well as any members of the press fortunate enough to preview the premiere. Everybody’s lips are sealed, including those of the man who plays the suave and egotistical Roger Sterling.

“It’s the usual dilemma, which is talking about the show without saying anything about the actual show,” he explained during a recent phone chat.

What Slattery was happy to talk about, however, is one of the season’s major themes: change.  Granted, change might as well be a secondary character on “Mad Men”; through the years, some of the show’s most distinct and beloved personalities have proved to be far more adaptable than others. But this season, as women’s lib and the Civil Rights movement are spilling into the streets and taking over televisions, life at Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce is bound to transform along with the rest of the country.

And Roger, who’s almost always the wittiest guy in the ad agency’s board room, could at last find himself at a lack for words.

Even so, Slattery said, “(Matthew Weiner) gives you not what you’d expect, but he gives you a specific, peripheral angle or a different take on something momentous.

“…It isn’t a text book,” he continued, “it’s a conversation.”

Keep reading for the rest of our conversation with Slattery.

What were the highlights among the things you did during “Mad Men’s” very long hiatus?

Slattery: I did a couple of films, one called Return, which did pretty well at Cannes and is in release now, and I did another one called In Our Nature which just premiered at SXSW. And I was writing something that I’m hoping to direct someday when I can get the right people to do it. And, you know, stayed home. Didn’t do “Mad Men.”

Was it kind of a relief to leave Roger Sterling behind for a while?

Slattery: Well, yeah, for a while. We do 13 shows, and that takes about five months to shoot, obviously longer to produce from start to finish. The actual acting commitment is about five months. So it’s pretty ideal in that sense. But you know, if you get restless, you can go and do something: a play, a film, or just nothing.

But it’s probably great to have been back on the set, too. After that long amount of time, was it difficult to step back into Roger Sterling’s shoes?

Slattery: It takes a day or two to get comfortable again…yeah. You’re a little tight in the beginning. But at this point, I’m so used to that. It seems to happen every year. You get back into it, and you try to walk and talk at the same time… it’s a little disorienting at the beginning. And then it all falls into place.

One of the most endearing qualities about Roger is that he’s always there with a ready quip, he’s both purposefully and inadvertently hilarious. But one of the first jokes (of the season) really backfires in a meaningful way, so much that it looks like an indicator of major changes ahead.

That was one of the things that I found most interesting, and it made me a little bit fearful that your sense of humor might not strike us as so funny anymore.

Slattery: It’s a pretty astute observation. When (Matt) says it’s about change, that’s what change is. Some change willingly, and some go kicking and screaming. Or they don’t change at all, and the world changes around them. Without being specific to Roger, what’s interesting is to see the people who are willing to change, or welcoming the change that the world is going through. Can’t wait to reinvent themselves. Can’t wait to try to change their appearance. It’s not the people you expect that are going to change.

It really is an interesting time in the history of this country. The generation gap, the sexual revolution, all the cultural changes that happen to these people. It’s always unpredictable.

But you’re right, the things that worked before don’t necessarily work anymore. Things that were funny aren’t funny anymore. Things that are taken for granted shouldn’t be. And Roger’s had the rug pulled out from him already at the beginning of last season, losing the Lucky Strike account. There was an imbalance where we left off in Roger’s life. Whether he regains that balance remains to be seen.

So I take it you’re not going to say of which camp Roger is, the kicking and screaming camp or going gracefully?

Slattery: No, I’m not. (Laughs.)

It also looks like we’re going to see a major shift in the office that was hinted at last season between the younger employees and the old guard.

Slattery: Well, being that I lost the Lucky Strike account and I’m the senior partner in the place, someone has to bring in business. Pete Campbell isn’t shy about wanted to it for himself, or elbowing me out of the way to get what he wants – elbowing anybody out of the way to get what he wants. So yeah, people’s power positions change… and the young guys want what they feel like they have coming to them.

There was also an aspect of Roger than has always been a creature of emulation, but it also seems very blatant this time around. Is that part of the character going to be coming out more during season five?

Slattery: I think that’s part of it…that’s what culture change is, when you look at people who are your shining examples of position and power and wealth, and then all of a sudden you look up and those things don’t mean what they used to mean, and they’re not desirable any longer, and now they’re looked at as, ‘You’re overfed and greedy and selfish.’ What was the example prior isn’t necessarily the shining example any longer. And what do you do about it? Do you change yourself? Do you disregard what’s going on around you? Or do you look inward and realize that maybe there’s something to this?

Recently there’s been a lot of conversation about the controversy surrounding the show’s key art (the image of the falling man ) but one thing that people haven’t necessarily returned to discussing is that the show has gotten some heat for putting  the burgeoning Civil Rights movement on the sidelines — referring to it, and having some storylines involve the movement somewhat. But now it seems to be front and center.

Slattery: Yeah, but what’s front and center can’t stay front and center…It’s not a show about the Civil Rights movement. It’s not a show about the ‘60s. It’s not even a show about advertising. It’s a show about these characters that happen to live in this period in which the Civil Rights movement was, and is growing.

Yes, it was touched upon earlier, and is touched upon again, but a lot went on in a lot of different areas. And it really isn’t about those events, per se, it’s about how the people in the show lived that day, or get through that day.  The Kennedy assassination, someone gets married… It’s about the people the people who watched those events in that time period. It isn’t about the people who created those events, you know what I mean? It isn’t about the movie stars of that time, it’s about the people who, like us, watched the movies of that time.

It was still a Tuesday, and on Tuesdays, the trash went out. Just because a riot happened or someone was killed, do you not take the trash out? Do you not go to school? It’s interesting how much of one’s life gets put on hold during these things, and how much you have to live through.

So, are we going to see you direct any more episodes this season?

Slattery:  Yes, I did the fifth episode, which is an amazing script.

Can you give us any hints about anything that happens in that episode?

Slattery: No. No. I’m in it… which was easier. The acting and the directing at the same time got a little easier.  You know, it’s a great story. Vincent Kartheiser… has some amazing stuff in it. I’m such a fan of his, and I got to work with him.

His character has developed so beautifully through these seasons.

Slattery:  I agree, and I’m always amazed when the (awards season) accolades start, and I don’t want to bring attention to the fact any more than I do every year, that he seems to get overlooked. I don’t think people think he’s acting.

Why do you say that?

Slattery: Because this show gets nominations for all kinds of stuff, and he hasn’t gotten the attention I think he deserves. I think people just say, ‘Oh, he plays that weaselly guy,’ but I don’t think that’s the character at all. Pete’s the most forward thinking, and he’s certainly right more times than most of the other characters about what’s going on around him. He’s good at what he does. (Pete’s) a family man, he’s a really interesting character. And that character has a great season.

Last question: It hasn’t been written yet, but where would you like the story to end for Roger?

Slattery: Somewhere above ground, that’s where I’d like to be. I’d like to remain above ground.

So, no more heart attacks, you’re hoping.

Slattery: Yeah.  I’d like to not be in a box and six feet under. Beyond that, I don’t care.

AMC’s “The Walking Dead” returns tonight at 9 pm with a lot more on the line than the simple question of whether Rick and his group will be able to stay on Hershel’s farm.

There’s the question of how much of a ratings hit the show might take, considering its long midwinter hiatus. AMC split the second season into two parts, and tonight’s episode, “Nebraska,” will be the first new hour that has aired since November 27. The show’s extended absence from the schedule may be less of a concern than the deep divide among fans about the first half of the second season’s storyline. Read a few critical analyses and fan posts about the survivors’ extended camp-out on a farm run by a veterinarian with a no-kill policy towards his zombified kin, and it becomes apparent that people are either loving season two or loathing it.

Maintaining a high level of fan loyalty through the six remaining episodes won’t just be a test for AMC. It’s also a trial for Glen Mazzara, the executive producer who assumed showrunner duties on the series after executive producer Frank Darabont was fired. From the moment he took the reins, Mazzara has been in a tough spot,  made tougher recently when details about Darabont’s scrapped  Black Hawk Down-inspired prequel episode (starring “Being Human‘s” Sam Witwer) was revealed in various media reports.

Mazzara, whose previous producer credits include FX’s widely-acclaimed drama “The Shield” as well as lower-rated titles such as “Hawthorne” and “Crash,” seems to be taking it all in stride. “I was just telling someone, this is the first time I’m working on a show that people are actually watching,” Mazzara joked. “So I feel very lucky.”

During the recent Television Critics Association Winter Press Tour, IMDb’s TV Editor had a conversation with Mazzara about where the second half of “The Walking Dead” is headed creatively, during which he revealed some details about upcoming episodes and discussed how a lesson that he learned in the writer’s room for “The Shield” will influence the show’s pacing from this point on.

My first question is a point of clarification: How much creative input did you have in the first seven episodes of the second season?

A tremendous amount of creative input. This is a Darabont question, I guess? I wrote an episode during the first season, and I was brought on before any of the other writers. I helped hire them. I was Frank’s number two. But  we broke these stories, we were locked in a room for weeks and developed these stories.

When things went down with Frank and I was asked to become the showrunner, we were shooting… I think it was our fourth episode. Our fifth episode came out. Our sixth episode I made changes to — just things where, you know, that script needed a pass. The (midseason) finale was written while Frank was there, but he had never given notes on that. That was a script that I polished and put into production. And then these episodes that are coming out are episodes that I broke with the writers. So I think that’s pretty clean.

But I will say, I went back and I had to re-cut these episodes. I cut these episodes, I’m responsible for all of the editing, post-work, music, I was responsible for all of the usual showrunner duties. So that was a tremendous amount of influence.

… Listen, I respect Frank and I’m happy that he wanted me as his number two. …I wouldn’t say we were partners, but it was a collaborative effort. Frank collaborated with us. But there came a point where the material was drying up in the pipeline, so I had to get in and do some polishing. That’s just normal business. But I will say that the overall arc of, a girl goes missing and then she’s in the barn, that was developed under Frank. The overall arc of the back half of the season, that’s all mine.

I will say that, (regarding) the script for the midseason finale, I think I was lucky that we had a great writer and a great director on that episode. That was sort of me coming out of the gate. Does that make sense?

It makes perfect sense.

What I didn’t want to do was my version of a Frank Darabont show. I wanted to follow, and I wanted to honor the world that he’s created because that’s a world that I love. But I didn’t feel an obligation to try to become Frank Darabont. That isn’t fair to Frank and it isn’t fair to me.

…The voice of the show became different with the midseason premiere. Did you see it yet? That’s my voice.

There are a number of articles and blog posts that have voiced strong opinions about this season. There are people who are kind to it, and there are a number of people who haven’t been so kind.

Well, what are your thoughts?

I enjoy the show. There was never a week that I wasn’t looking forward to a new episode. But I do think there were a number of issues that just seemed to be endlessly cycling and never quite resolved, so that the characters couldn’t move on. I don’t think the issue was being at the farm – that, for me, was not a problem. I know for some people it felt like a bottle episode and their thoughts were along the lines of, “Obviously, it was because the budget was cut.”

That is not accurate.

Yes… for me, there were some characters that were developed quite a bit. I enjoyed Daryl’s character development. But the love triangle between Lori, Rick and Shane… there became a point at which the characters seemed very static, there was very little development or evidence that they were moving forward.

Fine. Okay.  So how did you feel after watching the midseason premiere?

The thought that went through my head was, “OK, Rick has put his hat back on. Things are going to change now. Let’s go.”

That’s right. I think Rick got a little lost in the first few episodes. Since I have become showrunner, I have pushed Rick front and center. You can see that in the midseason finale. Rick is the guy who steps forward and puts the bullet into Sophia. Rick’s humanity is his flaw. And Rick is now very much the central character, as he should be, of “The Walking Dead.” And he’s a more compelling character, I think.

There’s a very, very interesting scene, written by Evan Reilly, coming up.

The scene in the bar? There’s a lot of tension there.

Yes. I’m very proud of that scene. Evan Reilly wrote that scene, and Clark Johnson directed it. I think that we are doing a much better job in the second half of the season of progressing the story. There’s a very, very interesting scene in the next episode, at the end of the next episode, between Rick and Lori. All of a sudden you are seeing new sides of characters that you weren’t seeing before, and that’s something that’s coming out in the back half of this season.

I do agree that we can push deeper into our characters, and that’s what we do. But we also amp up the tension. We amp up the action. We amp up the zombies. Everything is on full boil.  Again, it’s the back half of the season. So over the course of 13 episodes, you’re going to mark things out.  I’m lucky in that I’ve got all the characters established, so we can push things a little bit. I have a good example. You want an example?

Please.

There’s a scene in an episode that you already saw, where Lori confesses the affair (with Shane) to Rick. That is something Frank did not want to do. He did not want that to come out. I felt that that was important to progress the personal stories as well as the plot of finding Sophia.

One of my early jobs was “The Shield.” I did “The Shield” for a long time. We had a rule on “The Shield”: “Move it up. Move it up, burn the bridge right now, we’ll figure out how to get across the river later.” That is very much the motto I am using for “The Walking Dead” from now on. So if people felt like we were stalling, I’ll give it to you. But no more stalls.

In the midseason premiere, I think it’s denser storytelling. And yet, there’s not a lot of zombie stuff. It’s all character stuff.

But people do want the zombies, you know.
I love the zombie stuff! You know what? If you think about it, it’s only been a few hours after the barn…

And there are other survivors to contend with, too.

Yes. Couple of things. One is, the farm is no longer safe. The outside world will come crashing in. Two, the midseason premiere is taking place in a few hours after a HUGE zombie massacre. If we have another HUGE zombie massacre right then and there, it’s not going to feel real. It’s not going to feel plausible. It’s going to feel like a video game.

What’s interesting about this show is, if we do zombie attacks, some people say, “Ugh, it’s just the zombie attack of the week.” When we don’t do zombies, people say, “Where are the zombies?!” You can’t win!

(laughs)

But we’re trying. I’m very proud of the (midseason premiere). That episode is indicative of the type of storytelling  I want to do in the back half of the season, and I really think our best material is in these next six episodes.

Looking forward to it. Please develop T-Dog more.

You know what? I’ll tell you the truth: T-Dog is a character that has suffered because there are so many other characters. He has some great stuff coming up, some really great scenes. I think IronE Singleton did a terrific job, and it’s a matter of making room for him. That’s a character, if you really look at him, that character’s on borrowed time because he’s not tied into any major story. And yet, he keeps earning his place. T-Dog just gets through it, he’s becoming very interesting.

Sometimes those minor characters are on a slow burn. The Ronnie character was like that in “The Shield.” …We’re learning how to write for that character.

As FX’s critically-acclaimed drama “Justified” returns for a third season, it will be very difficult for some fans to imagine the world of Harlan County, Kentucky, without its beloved and feared crime matriarch Mags Bennett. Margo Martindale‘s Emmy-winning role was so emotionally affecting that to call Mags a tough act to follow is beyond an understatement.

To meet that challenge this season, “Justified’s” executive producer Graham Yost is serving up not one, but two new crime bosses. Neal McDonough plays one of those heavies, a smooth-talking Detroit criminal named Robert Quarles. Quarles wears expensive suits and has a glaring white smile, and between that and his go-getter attitude, he is utterly frightening.

But he’s also a very different kind of villain than the ones we’re used to seeing Raylan Givens (Timothy Olyphant) face on his home turf.  Raylan knew Mags, just as he knows the reputation of the third season’s other great antagonist Ellstin Limehouse (Mykelti Williamson, who previously co-starred with McDonough in Yost’s “Boomtown“).

Limehouse, who lords over an African-American community known as Nobles Holler, has a long history in Harlan and is a hospitable man, offering barbecue to his visitors before he doles out threats. Quarles, on the other hand, is unerringly polite but uninterested in pleasantries.

We sat down with McDonough at the recent Television Critics Association Winter Press Tour to get more details about his work on this season of “Justified,”* which kicks off tonight at 10pm ET/PT on FX, and to find out about his upcoming appearances as  Timothy “Dum Dum” Dugan, one of the Marvel Universe’s better-known good guys.

(WARNING: This interview contains a minor spoiler about a subplot in an upcoming episode of “Justified.”)

IMDbTV: Your character is amazingly creepy.

McDonough: Yes,  and I didn’t realize how creepy he was until I saw the first episode the other night.  But it’s not so much that he’s creepy as much as he’s… I keep on saying this with the “Ds”: He’s despicable, he’s delectable, he’s delightful, he’s dastardly, he’s everything you would want as a character to play as a villain.

But I’m playing him as a hero. And in his mind, all of these other people are villains in the show, and I have to get rid of these bad guys.

Interesting.

The first time I introduce myself to these other actors in the show, I’ll just start giggling at them for no apparent reason. I can see, in their minds, that it puts them off, and it kind of stays with the character throughout the piece. It’s a lot of fun playing this guy.

The other thing that’s interesting about “Justified” is that, even though the story has protagonists and antagonists going at each other, in the preface to any conflict, there’s almost a Southern politeness about it. Your character is also very polite, but in a specific Northern way. Can you talk about the “carpetbagger” aspect of Quarles?

It’s great because I think that I’m the king. I graduated summa cum laude from Michigan, enjoy all of the great things – fine wines, foods – I’ve been bred really well. But I just have this horrible anger inside me, this temper and this rage that builds inside me and once in a while, it comes out. And when it does come out, it’s just deplorable.

It’s tough playing a guy like this, because I always want to infuse so much emotion into it. Before I do this horrible thing, my eyes just start to well up. There’s this really tight close-up of my face where I look really remorseful about what I’m about to do.

On that note, can you give any hints as to what’s to come for your character? (WARNING: Minor spoiler ahead!)

The things I do to this one boy in the series… I read the script and it says, “Quarles opens the door and sees pretty boy handcuffed to the head post.”  So I called (executive producer Graham Yost) immediately  and I asked, “So how pretty does this boy have to be?”  And he starts laughing. Then I asked, “Are you going to answer why this boy is here?” And he goes, “I’m not sure yet. I might not.” I said, “OK, great.”

Well, he actually did answer it and… it’s just awful.

(END SPOILER ALERT.)

Wow. You look like you feel awful about it right now.

I do! You know, when I do this I can always just say, “Well, it’s just fun, it’s entertainment.” But when I want to do it right, I really have to do it right. If you don’t have that remorse in a villain, it doesn’t work. You can’t play it like an android and not have any emotions. I think that’s what makes this role so chilling to play.

Is that something that Graham and (executive producer and author Elmore Leonard) inspired in you to do?

Graham doesn’t say boo. He’s come by the set once, maybe twice this year. He lets me just play… “In Graham I trust” has basically been my slogan for years. The stuff he wrote for me in “Boomtown” was just phenomenal, and the stuff he’s writing here is fantastic. I would love to see Graham write me another David McNorris, because I miss playing that guy…When you get to see the insides of a man’s soul, then you’ve got great television.

It seems that the villains from the first couple of seasons on this series, um, don’t come back.

Oh, I’m going end up in a slaughterhouse, or whatever, at the end of the season. I just heard, what is it called, “American Horror Story”? What a genius approach to have the whole cast gone after the first year and recast it for the second year. That’s genius, because you get to watch a whole new story. Like Graham has alluded to, if you have the same villain and he keeps staying around, he loses his shine. Even if they wanted to keep me around for another year or so, it wouldn’t make sense for the show. I don’t think they will. I think Graham is figuring out a beautiful way for my demise as we speak.

I understand that you’re going to reprise your Captain America role.

Yeah, they’re planning (to go into production for) Captain America 2 for the end of this year, because Marvel does one film at a time. So they’re going to do Thor 2 and as soon as Thor has wrapped, they’ll do Cap 2. Hopefully right after that, we’ll jump into Nick Fury because that’s the one I’m looking forward to more than anything.

Why is that?

Because it’ll be me and Sam Jackson. In the real Marvel universe, Dum Dum Dugan is Nick Fury’s right hand man.

…And  I just pray that they have a 1970s setting, because I want to see Sam Jackson with lambchops kicking people’s asses for Marvel universe. It would just be awesome. And to work with Sam would be a treat. We’ve become friendly over the years.

It sounds like you were a fan of the comic beforehand.

Absolutely.  I’m very well aware of the Marvel universe, and to be part of it is such a blessing. To go back to London and shoot there for four months, that was just a great year.