• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

I forgot how genuinely funny the two Addams Family films were.

I don't know... the Addams Family siding with the outsiders, the ones rejected by the mainstream of society, seems perfectly in character for them.

That's actually part of why, to me, it didn't work.

The Addamses are kind of parodies of old money bluebloods and part of their humor is that they don't see themselves as outsiders rejected by the mainstream, but as perfectly normal people. If anything, they see themselves as above the mainstream.

I'm not saying they see it that way consciously, I'm just saying that, from a metatextual perspective, it's a logical position to place them in.

Like I said, I don't for a second believe that Wednesday was trying to make a political or ethical statement about the repression of Native Americans, because, let's face it, that kid is hardcore evil. She'd probably consider the Trail of Tears to be a laugh riot, if she ever laughed. It was the camp counselors who chose to cast Wednesday and the other social outcasts as racist caricatures of Indians. The revolt Wednesday led used that iconography because it was what was already imposed on them, but the purpose behind it was to rebel against marginalization. As you say, the Addamses consider themselves not only normal, but entitled by their wealth and family traditions to do pretty much whatever they want, without giving a damn about external standards of normality or acceptability. The counselors tried to restrict Wednesday and the other "unpopular" kids within a cage of such standards, for which the Pilgrims-and-Indians iconography of the play was symbolic on the filmmakers' part, and Wednesday refused to submit to that. She wasn't standing up for anyone's rights but her own, Pugsley's, and Joel's. She was making a stand on behalf of the Addamses themselves and those they liked, period.
 
[I found] the two movies seemed too Fester-centric when watched so close together. I wish that the second film had focused on a different character for their A-Plot.

The other characters come across as a bit too brash & confident to really be the center of a plotline. Fester, especially as played by Christopher Lloyd, has a sweet vulnerability that makes him more maleable and easier to fall victim to the schemes of others.

"I'm sure you have women following you around everywhere."
"Store detectives."

I'm so-so on the 1st movie. However, once they found their footing, the 2nd movie was perfect. I particularly like how they exagerate the insufferable sticky-ness of the white bread people, and they find some perfect actors for it in Joan Cusack, Peter MacNicol, Christine Baranski, and a very young Mercedes McNabb (who would later go on to play blonde ditz Harmony on Buffy/Angel). My favorite scene is towards the end when Debbie has everyone else tied up and goes on this insane rant about why all of her murders were completely justified.

Reunion did have two cast members from the theatrical feature films, Carel Struycken as Lurch and Christopher Hart('s hand) as Thing.

Well, Struycken was born to play the role. Even Mr. Homm is basically the same guy.
 
I particularly like how they exagerate the insufferable sticky-ness of the white bread people, and they find some perfect actors for it in Joan Cusack, Peter MacNicol, Christine Baranski, and a very young Mercedes McNabb (who would later go on to play blonde ditz Harmony on Buffy/Angel).

Mercedes McNab was in the first Addams Family film too -- she was the girl scout who asked if Wednesday's lemonade was made from real lemons. I'm not sure if she was meant to be the same character in both movies, but there's no indication that she wasn't.


Well, Struycken was born to play the role. Even Mr. Homm is basically the same guy.

I dunno... the Lurch of the Addams cartoons is a pretty intimidating fellow, and Struycken's always struck me as more of a "gentle giant" type. Not many others at the time would've had the stature for the role, but Struycken wasn't as ideal for the part as Ted Cassidy.
 
Yeah, the one character where the TV show unquestionably outshone the movie was Ted Cassidy's Lurch
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top