"The Addams Family" by Tim Burton.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Finally a Tim Burton movie I can get excited about.

Tim Burton to Direct The Addams Family in Stop-Motion 3D.

The stop-motion puppets are going to be based on Charles Addams's drawings, which sounds fantastic.

 

[Kelso]

I'll be there.

 

[Skywalker]

Way to branch out, Tim.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

I'd argue that he ought to stop branching out.

 

[Starbreaker]

He did branch out. Nobody but me liked Planet of the Apes, and nobody remembers the plot of Big Fish.

 

[Christopher]

I hope he uses the same stop-motion technology he used in The Corpse Bride, with the clockwork facial "muscles" underneath flexible skin. That was a really brilliant technique and it'd be a shame if it were never used again.

I gather this is meant to be based on the original cartoons and not the TV show, but the same was alleged about the Sonnenfeld movies, and in fact those movies were a hybrid of elements from both. In the original Addams cartoons, none of the characters save Morticia even had names; Addams came up with the other character names for the sitcom at the request of its producers. Lots of the character traits and gimmicks in the movies came from the show, and Cousin Itt was purely a creation of the show.

So if Burton really bases this only on the cartoons, what does that mean? Is he not going to use the familiar names and characterizations? Will he create new names? That seems unlikely.

 

[D Man]

I saw the thread title and thought, "Of COURSE it's Tim Burton." But the stop-motion thing has me intrigued...this approach is much, much more interesting than another wacky Burton live-action film (starring Johnny Depp) would have been.

And agreed, Christopher, I hope a similar or even a further advanced technique is used a la Corpse Bride. You're definitely right that it's a waste to never see that sort of animation again, but I think Burton wouldn't be one to waste such a neat visual idea.

 

[Christopher]

^Oh, I'd say it's a given that this film will have the voices of Johnny Depp as Gomez and Helena Bonham-Carter as Morticia. I don't think Burton is physically capable of making a film without the two of them in it anymore. He hasn't directed a film without both of them in it since 2003 and hasn't directed a feature-length film without at least one of them in it since 1996.

 

[RJDiogenes]

So if Burton really bases this only on the cartoons, what does that mean? Is he not going to use the familiar names and characterizations? Will he create new names? That seems unlikely.

Well, if Addams created them, even at the request of the TV producers, it's still drawing on the original creator, so I don't see any inconsistency with that.

I love the idea of going back to the source material. Hopefully the character designs will be 3D recreations of Addams' actual art. That's really something I'd like to see pursued when it comes to CGI or stop-motion adaptations: The original artist's style brought to life. Imagine a Fantastic Four movie with living, breathing Jack Kirby artwork? Or Spirit by Will Eisner? Or work by Steve Ditko, Frank Frazetta, Jim Starlin, et cetera et cetera?

There was a hint of this in Monster House; I found a suggestion of Norman Rockwell in the animation, which I found really cool. That's another artist I'd love to see brought to life.

 

[Christopher]

^Brace yourself for blasphemy, but I don't care for Jack Kirby's art. It's too clunky and angular for me.

I'd expect that designs based on Addams' cartoons would be the sort of thing they're going for, but I'm sure they'd be filtered through Tim Burton's own trademark style. I'd assume they're also planning to go for the sensibility and humor style of the original cartoons, but the Sonnenfeld movies already did that. The first Addams Family movie had dozens of gags and moments that were based directly on the cartoons, and the films definitely embraced the darker, more macabre sensibilities of the cartoons. While they did borrow elements from the sitcom (although claiming they didn't and refusing to give due credit to the sitcom's developer), they were much closer to the cartoons. So the claim that this Burton project is doing something new by going back to the cartoons is somewhat disingenuous.

 

[Captaindemotion]

I remember reading that Burton was offered the chance to direct the pevious movie versions and declined. This sounds interesting. Wonder what he likes about this project that hedidn't like about the earlier ones.

 

[RJDiogenes]

^Brace yourself for blasphemy, but I don't care for Jack Kirby's art. It's too clunky and angular for me.

Eh, nobody is universally liked, not even the King. I'm sure you have your own list of artists whose style you'd like to see brought to 3D animation life.

 

[Christopher]

I'm sure you have your own list of artists whose style you'd like to see brought to 3D animation life.

Not really. If an artist's style is 2D line art, then that's the way to render it. 3D is a very different artistic style, and what works in 2D doesn't necessarily translate well.

 

[Gojira]

He did branch out. Nobody but me liked Planet of the Apes, and nobody remembers the plot of Big Fish.

I actually like his version of Planet of the Apes. While its not better than the original it isn't as bad as people seem to think. I also liked Big Fish. This Addams Family with stop motion puppets actually sounds pretty good.

 

[Checkmate]

Big Fish was a wonderful movie. He did a perfect job with it.

Planet of the Apes was beyond stupid, especially the "twist" ending that, to this day, doesn't make even the slightest bit of fucking sense.

 

[Christopher]

What bugs me most about Burton's Planet of the Apes -- and that's saying a lot, since it's a mess -- is the way they tried to make the female apes "pretty" by giving them more humanlike faces, complete with eyebrows. The result was intensely creepy and wrong.

 

[Gojira]

What bugs me most about Burton's Planet of the Apes -- and that's saying a lot, since it's a mess -- is the way they tried to make the female apes "pretty" by giving them more humanlike faces, complete with eyebrows. The result was intensely creepy and wrong.

I agree with you there! It does have a strange and creepy result.

 

[Too Much Fun]

"Big Fish" was the last movie of his that I liked. I find it lame that he keeps just making his own spin on properties that weren't that bad in the first place. I'd side with those saying he's not branching out and just being lazy and self-indulgent. The other versions of "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" and "Alice in Wonderland" had their flaws (mostly with not fully capturing everything great about their source material), but the way he keeps changing these stories to fit his own aesthetic is ill-advised.

I was excited by his take on Dahl anticipating an improvement on the original, but the end result just made me appreciate the original more. I look at it and think, yeah it could have been worse, but Burton's take makes it look like a flawless masterpiece. We've already got two good Addams Family movies (I actually think the second one is excellent and it's one of the movies I remember most fondly as one enjoyed in a theatre during childhood). If it a'int broke, don't fix it.

I'm going to continue ignoring Burton's work until he does something that's actually original again. His two best movies are "Pee-Wee's Big Adventure" and "Ed Wood", which leads me to believe he just sucks at adapting other people's work (I don't count Pee-Wee as an adaptation even though it was spun off from a TV show).

 

[Christopher]

Well, Ed Wood was "adapted" from real life.

 

[Lapis Exilis]

^Brace yourself for blasphemy, but I don't care for Jack Kirby's art. It's too clunky and angular for me.

I'd expect that designs based on Addams' cartoons would be the sort of thing they're going for, but I'm sure they'd be filtered through Tim Burton's own trademark style. I'd assume they're also planning to go for the sensibility and humor style of the original cartoons, but the Sonnenfeld movies already did that. The first Addams Family movie had dozens of gags and moments that were based directly on the cartoons, and the films definitely embraced the darker, more macabre sensibilities of the cartoons. While they did borrow elements from the sitcom (although claiming they didn't and refusing to give due credit to the sitcom's developer), they were much closer to the cartoons. So the claim that this Burton project is doing something new by going back to the cartoons is somewhat disingenuous.

Indeed. And the Sonnenfeld movies were so delightful in terms of pulling the best from both the comics and the series, as well as adding fantastic developments of their own, I'm dubious as to what exactly Burton is bringing to the table here. His track record of adaptations is beyond poor, and while the Addams Family, at first glance, seems to be his sort of material, I'm not sure that's true. I don't follow why he's doing all this adapted work anyway. He's a tremendously original creator whose strongest work has always been of his own invention.