The writer of Addams Family Values says it's a satire of Bush-era conservatism
Aux Features Addams Family
When you think of scathing political satire from the early-90s, the last thing you probably think about is the less successful sequel to the unlikely hit reboot of The Addams Family. But, according to a new oral history of the film from The Hollywood Reporter, screenwriter Paul Rudnick intended both the title and plot of Addams Family Values to be a spoof of the George H.W. Bush-era Republican idea of “traditional family values.”
“In Republican terms, ‘family values’ is always code for censorship and exclusion, and Republicans still refuse to respect or even acknowledge, for example, LGBTQ families,” Rudnick says. “I like to believe that the Addams Family is far more loving and accepting than their enemies.” This analysis seems to hold up when you reexamine the film. For all the Addams family’s quirks and morbid fascinations, they’re still objectively better people than the money-hungry black widow Debbie (Joan Cusack) or the straight-laced kids and parents at Camp Chippewa. We rejoice in seeing these more conservative characters get taken down a peg by Wednesday’s sarcastic barbs or Gomez’ blithe indifference.
Still, not everybody involved with the film agrees with Rudnick’s interpretation. “I didn’t see the film as a political commentary, but I was only 12-years-old at the time. So, you know, I might not have caught that,” Christina Ricci tells THR. Similarly, Christopher Lloyd, Carol Kane, and Carel Struycken (who plays Lurch) all admit to not seeing a satirical take in the film. The only exception being Wednesday’s violent rebellion during the Camp Chippewa Thanksgiving pageant, which Rudnick says represents the character’s “ultimate revenge, on Republicans, blondes, mean girls, and bullies.”
Anjelica Huston, however, totally gets it. “It was definitely a political commentary,” she says. “‘Family values’ was a phrase that was used by the Republicans to describe what should be normal, or what should be right in America. Which is, of course, preposterous.” While the irony at play in the film’s title is easy enough to see, calling Addams Family Values a full-on satire might be a bit of a stretch. Just to be sure though, we should probably re-watch it with our conservative relatives at Thanksgiving this year.
You can read the full oral history here.
Send Great Job, Internet tips to [email protected]
63 Comments
Anyone else think this movie is a lot better than the first one? Wednesday’s revenge on the camp REALLY awakened some things in me.
i just watched this with my kids 2 nights ago! it is weird to me that this take is in any way news or controversial. i mean the thing is literally called “Addams Family Values”. “Family Values” was a very common conservative catchphrase at the time that was code for “GAYS ARE GROSS AND UNNATURAL AND WRONG”. how is there anyone denying this, or unaware of it? The Addams don’t map specifically to LGBTQ movement, though, i think they’re more a proxy for any group marginalized or demonized by social conservatives. When Wednesday and the rest of the camp’s outcasts revolt during the play at the end of the movie, it isn’t just a lone moment of political commentary. it’s a summation of the film’s whole outlook that it’s been expressing for its entire running time. The Addamses spend the film being reviled and belittled, being subjected to various attempts to plunder and exploit them by traditionally “normal” or “good” people, who express disgust at them at every opportunity. The thanksgiving revolt is Wednesday calling out the hypocrisy of social conservatives everywhere and always — not just Thanksgiving, and not just her treatment at the camp, and not just by the people trying to steal from her family.
honestly i’m kinda surprised this went over anyone’s heads.
1992 seems a bit early for the culture wars to be focused on gays. During that Bush administration the President called out the Simpsons as lacking family values, and Dan Quayle criticized Murphy Brown for depicting the protagonist having a child without ever getting married.
Anti-Gay rhetoric was absolutely a cornerstone of the “family values” agenda, even back then. here’s an article about Bill Clinton being attacked by the GOP for (according to them) supporting gay rights in 1992: https://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/11/magazine/gay-politics-goes-mainstream.html
within 4 years, he would sign the indefensibly homophobic Defense of Marriage Act, caving in to the same “family values” groups that attacked him in ‘92, and wantonly betraying his close friends and supporters mentioned in this article.
from the article: “At the Republican convention, Clinton was repeatedly denounced as a supporter of homosexual rights and even homosexual marriages — part of a broad, hard-hitting attack on the Governor to portray him as an enemy of family values. “from the article: “It’s scary,” says [gay activist] Chris Wooten, who sells alarm systems. “I’m tired of hearing that I have no family values.”
from the article: “Vehement attacks at that convention by speakers like the Rev. Pat Robertson and Pat Buchanan — as well as the more veiled criticisms from the Bushes and the Quayles under the rubric “family values”
in ‘92, the GOP was already using homosexuality as a wedge issue, loading up ballots with referendums on the subject as a way to turn out the vote, and putting politicians in place, locally and federally, who were willing to grandstand on that issue. for example, also in 1992, my own county (fairfax, in VA) voted to *repeal* a clause that prohibited verbal abuse of gays. that’s right. they went out of their way to get rid of the rule that you can’t bully gay people, because the conservatives on the school board were afraid it promoted homosexuality.you’re right that this was only the beginning. anti-gay fearmongering by the GOP as a wedge issue didn’t peak until around 2000 – 2004 or so, but it was absolutely a lynchpin of the “family values” crusade from day one.
Then there is the scathing commentary on yuppyism (sp?) with the Uncle Fester story.
Agreed, the first was fun and would have been fine on it’s own, but now I treat it like exposition for Family Values. Plus Joan Cusack was an amazing villain.An oldy, but a goody. From the 1:10 mark.
I love the ending when Joan Cusack is going through her homicide slideshow and the family takes her side.
“Malibu Barbie?”
“The nightmare.”
“The nerve.”
i really like this movie, but there are about 3 or 4 things that have aged very very poorly, and date it as DISTINCTLY 1993. the closing credits are set to to “WHOOMP ADDAMS FAMILY THERE IT IS”. there’s an Amy Fisher gag, and a Michael Jackson child molesting joke in there too.
the Michael Jackson poster gag in the camp cabin is mostly a meta joke considering Jackson was going to do a song for the first film but bailed out and was quickly filled by MC Hammer
Michael Jackson was “quickly filled by MC Hammer” was a twist I did not see coming.
It may be dated, but the gag when they’re showing that “America’s Most Wanted”/“Unsolved Mysteries” style segment on Debbie, showing pictures of her various disguises, and one is of Kathy Lee Gifford, it cracks me up every time. It’s also great cameo by Peter Graves .
“For all of these reasons we have decided to scalp you and burn your village to the ground” just got an involuntary fist bump from me now, sitting at my desk. I know the internet throws this word around a lot but Christina Ricci in this film = iconic.
It’s loads better than the first one. Slightly surprised to read that it was less successful, actually.
Exactly! And when I think of the Addams Family films, it’s always this great moment from Values…
It’s one of the best comedy sequels ever made, and it flummoxes me that it did so poorly at the box office when compared to the first one (which is not a bad film, just not a very good one). I re-watch Family Values every year and love every minute of it. It’s absolutely perfectly cast, and the chemistry between Gomez and Morticia is always delightful. Raul Julia’s death still affects me so much. He was just an absolute delight.
It’s perfect for the first 2/3. But the perfect ending was right there and they botched it. Debbie has her whole speech about being being a psychopath before being killed by Deus ex Pubert, when what everyone should realize is that, pastels aside, she’s a perfect addition to the family. Her last monologue just needs one small tweak:“So I’ve killed, so I’ve maimed. So I’ve destroyed one innocent life after another. Don’t I yearn and ache? And shop? Don’t I deserve love? And jewelry? I may be a murderess. But I am a human being. I am a woman. I am…”Morticia: “An Addams!”
I really enjoy both, always have. The only thing that ever bothered me about the second was that light window over Morticia’s eyes.
That’ll show him!
Given that the title was Addams Family Values, I didn’t find this surprising in the least. It may have been less successful financially, but there were so many classic lines in this sequel. And given that it came about a decade before gay conversion therapy became widely covered (see the summer camp subplot), it definitely was a movie that was ahead of its time.
Yeah, it’s right there in the title.Also, how is this an “oral history” when it is literally written?
It’s an oral history because it’s compiled from interviews and personal accounts rather than the study of pre-existing written texts or documents. The term refers to the sources the historical study is based on, not the format of the study itself.
Thanks for the clarification. Did not know that.
It’s ‘internet’ for ‘an interview about something’
Fester is also trying to be changed by the Joan Cusack character to become more mainstream and palatable. It’s absolutely a response to changing your own values to match those of the (then) conservative majority.
But most importantly…
“And in the morning, they’d all grown back their old noses!”
YYes! Yes! All the stars for this,
I believe they own…GOMEZ, NO!…A BUICK!!!
pls write about how we need to cancel addams family values because of the misappropriation of the american indian. happy thanksgiving errybody!
Congratulations on having the worst take.
I don’t think you’ve seen the movie…
(moved to a reply to someone else, better chance of being noticed since i’m grey)
I liked this movie just fine! Time for a rewatch in fact. I guess it might not be a full on “satire”, but certainly the whole movie, not just the title is a commentary on Republican values. Paul Rudnick is a good writer, if you ask me.**get it?
“We gladly feast upon those who would subdue us” -Addams Family Motto. Checks out, their motto makes even more sense as a stand against the monolithic “family values” of that era.
That’d make an interesting tramp stamp.
The Addams Family was always subversive. In the sitcom, it was the “weirdos” scorned by society who were the loving, happy, well-adjusted ones while the “normal” people looking down on them were petty, neurotic jerks. They also pushed the envelope — Gomez and Morticia were the first sitcom couple to show open physical desire for each other and sleep in the same bed.
Gomez and Morticia were the first sitcom couple to show open physical desire for each other and sleep in the same bed.The first sitcom couple to sleep in the same bed was Mary Kay and Johnny. (It was also the first sitcom at all.)
Correction noted. Still, the Addamses broke with the sexless conventions of the sitcom couples of their day.
“Cara mia!”
If I’m not mistaken, I believe Mary Kay and Johnny shared a bed before The Addams Family aired.
I always love the opening where the other family in the delivery room is spieling about their baby sibling coming from some convoluted stork-like fairy tale and then pan over to Wednesday “our parents are having a baby too. They had sex”
That is something I always enjoyed about Gomez and Morticia, they are super open about their passion for one another and don’t let weird, bloodless, WASP social conventions get in the way of it. Like, obviously they aren’t getting it on in front of Wednesday/Pugsly but they know their kids are mature enough to grasp/understand about sex and love ad babies etc.
Well, duh. How is it not obvious?
Awesome movie. Better than the first. The satire was and is super obvious and welcome. This exchange from Addams Family is the best:Sally Jessie Raphael (apparently Geraldo in the original version of the screenplay): So you claim your son was brainwashed by voodoo witch doctors and forced to recruit
others. Let’s take a call.Gomez: Hello, Sally!Sally: Mr. Addams, please stop calling! We do not know where they meet.
Well done Dan! looking forward to your next article “ Water is actually kinda Wet”
Trump family values are “kick and they slap a friend”.
I thought everyone knew this. “Family Values” was the political buzzword of that era.
Honestlyi did know that and I love the movie, but I never thought to put 2 and 2 together. I understood the themes of celebrating uniqueness and chosen values, but equating it to the Bush era ‘family values’ dog whistle never occurred to me I am 32 now though, so probably just a matter of me being too young at the time and not deeply thinking about it after I got old enough
it’s really, really obvious. I thought everyone knew it too, surprised if anyone at all is surprised.
“Is that your bathing suit?”“Is that your overbite?”One of my all-time favorite exchanges.
I like to imagine that Mercedes McNab’s character is actually Harmony Kendall before she moved to Sunnydale.
It is a family tradition to watch this movie as we prepare Thanksgiving dinner every year and then belt out “We won’t stay fresh for very long, so eat us before we finish this song!” Still my favorite holiday movie. Sorry, Die Hard.
https://olds.avclub.com/the-writer-of-citizen-kane-says-hes-based-on-hearst
At the time they denied it (partly because Hearst was really upset about it) and said it was based on multiple tycoons.
“Tommy Carcetti is Martin O’Malley”
In this world of reboots, I’d actually love to see a version of this with Christina Ricci playing an older Wednesday Addams as the head of a new Addams Family.
That’d be cool. Or a Morticia to bring it full circle. Though with the popularity of the “Adult Wednesday Addams” nowadays, I think your idea could get traction. I know I would watch the hell out of the Addams family if they make a new one. Come to think of it, I heard something about Oscar Isaac being the new Gomez and I love it.
You sold it with Oscar Issac.
Yeah I just looked it up again and it is a voice acting role, so here’s hoping animated Oscar Isaac is half as charming as the real guy.
My boss and I were talking about this movie the other day (we dressed up as the Addams Family at work for Halloween) and he brought up something I’d never noticed. There’s all the Rube Goldberg zaniness to get Pubert to the cords of the electric chair, which he somehow reversed the polarity of to electrocute Debbie instead of the Addamses. But the cord has already been cut. If Pubert hadn’t rejoined the cords it wouldn’t have electrocuted the Addamses, it would’ve just not worked at all. Is there a part I don’t remember when the cord gets cut, or is it a deleted scene, or just a gaffe? Any ideas?
I would include this movie in that rarefied category of sequels that are better than the original. It is indeed full of wicked satire, which is probably why it didn’t do as well as the first (playing at the same time as the more broad comedy of Mrs. Doubtfire probably didn’t help). As to what is being satirized, I’d certainly say this movie is a statement against conformity. Whether it’s also a rebuke of early 1990’s conservative values in particular you could debate. The Addams family certainly weren’t born again Christians…
The Addamses are definitely “old money,” so I’d argue what’s most being parodied during the Camp Chippewa and Debbie & Fester’s pastel nightmare home scenes are the values and mores of the nouveau riche. If there’s a flaw in the Addams Family’s satire, that is it: It’s a heck of a lot easier to be a non-conformist when you’re rich. On the other hand, in 60’s T.V. land you also had The Munsters, in which the patriarch Herman was (bad pun warning) a working stiff. A satirical update of that property for the Trump/MAGA era would present some interesting possibilities.