Both shows are considered classics, but it seems that the Addams Family gets all the kudos. They had a cartoon, two major motion pictures (with a third on the way) a successful broadway play etc, etc. Meanwhile, The Munsters basically is reduced to cheesy made for tv movies. Why does the Addams Family translate better to Hollywood?

Frankly I like them both. I could watch both shows and never tire. That said in my lifetime I have seen more episodes of the Munsters than I have of the Addams Family.

I think the Addams Family is considered a bit more "highbrow" because it was sired by the somewhat sophisticated cartoon of the same name. Also the humor and situations were just a bit more subtle (i.e. in the Munsters you had each character being analogous to a Universal horror staple, whereas in AF the characters were less easily defined, though no less bizarre).

Personally, I'm with Mickey; I love them both. The Munsters seems to have had a bit more "heart" and less of the misanthropy of the Addams Family, which makes it a sweeter, more family friendly bit of viewing. But I think in both cases, the actors really catapulted the shows to the legendary status they have today (though neither was on the air that long).

The Munsters, in my opinion, worked mainly for three reasons: Fred Gwynne, Al Lewis and Yvonne DeCarlo. Without them playing the characters, what's the point? It'd be like reviving "I Love Lucy" with different actors playing Lucy, Ricky, Fred and Ethel.

While "The Addams Family" was good, it's something else. It can have different actors coming in and playing the characters. "The Munsters" can't. I know they've tried before and it's not really worked out so well.

I'm not good at explaining how I feel, but that's how I feel. The Munsters IS Fred Gwynne, Al Lewis and Yvonne DeCarlo. Whereas The Addams Family was a good show, but can have other actors playing the roles.

I like both the Addams Family TV show and the two movies. The cartoon was okay, though I haven't seen it in years.

Actually, there were two different Addams Family cartoon series (both
produced by Hanna-Barbera). In the first one (aired on NBC from 1973-1975),
Jackie Coogan and Ted Cassidy reprised their respective roles as Uncle Fester
and Lurch, with Lennie Weinrib as Gomez, Janet Waldo as Morticia, Jodie
Foster (yes, that Jodie Foster) as Pugsley and Cindy Henderson as
Wednesday. The second one (aired on ABC, from 1992-1993) featured John
Astin (the only surviving cast member from the original 1964 sitcom) as Gomez. Other voices included Nancy Linari (Morticia), Debi Derryberry (Wednesday), Jeannie Elias (Pugsley), Rip Taylor (Uncle Fester), Jim Cummings
(Lurch), and Carol Channing (Granny).

As someone else here has said, The Munsters--my personal favorite, by
the way--was more "lowbrow" and less sophisticated than the more subtle
humor of The Addams Family. I've always likened it to comparing the
comic styles of the Marx Brothers and the Three Stooges. I also find the
more visual, and physical, humor of the Stooges funnier (for the most part)
than the more verbal humor of the Marxes.

But, I think Al Lewis said it best, when (in a 1960s interview), he said The
Munsters was a show about weird people doing normal things while The
Addams Family was a show about normal [well, relatively normal] people
doing weird things. Aside from their ghoulish appearance, the Munsters were
almost interchangeable with the Cleavers (in fact, both Leave It to Beaver
and The Munsters were produced by Joe Connelly and Bob Mosher). But the Addamses were just plain WEIRD, in every respect. And,
in the movies (which were actually truer to Charles Addams' macabre magazine cartoons than the TV sitcom ever was), this difference is even more striking.

... why "THE ADDAMS FAMILY" is considered by some the "better" family monster comedy than "THE MUNSTERS": it was more "sophisticated" and the humor more subtle and "offbeat", as the Addamses were originally depicted in Charles Addams' NEW YORKER cartoons {i.e., Gomez reading "A Christmas Carol" to Wednesday and Pugsley: "Then good old Scrooge- bless his heart- turned to Bob Cratchit and said, 'Another word out of you, and you'll keep Christmas by losing your situation.'"; a tableau where a group of Christmas carolers are singing outside the family's mansion, while the Addamses [and Lurch], above them on a balcony, prepare to tip a cauldron of boiling oil over them: this was restaged for the opening of the 1991 movie}. Naturally, the TV series wasn't that "grotesque", but the elements were there.

In contrast, "THE MUNSTERS" was pure slapstick, developed and produced by writers who previously wrote "THE AMOS 'N' ANDY SHOW" (radio and TV) and "LEAVE IT TO BEAVER". Nothing about them was to be taken seriously. The joke was, they were a family of "monsters" who believed they were "a typical American family", yet no one ever quite realized what they really were....right down to the outrageous "takes" and "fast motion" sequences whenever anyone got a good look at Herman- or Grandpa's constant jokes concerning his "vampire" background (or ANY jokes about what "weird" things the family liked to eat or do), or that Marilyn was the "black sheep" of the family because she wasn't as "attractive" as the rest of them. Or the occasional "topical references" to current events, celebrities and TV shows {Herman, on his failure to apply "child psychology" on Eddie: "I just don't know what went wrong with my child psychology...it always worked on 'LEAVE IT TO BEAVER'''}. Or that Herman, for all his "Frankenstein" features, is mostly a big "kid", thus satirizing the familiar "daddy is a dope" stereotype of situation comedy, with Lily as the sensible "Peg Riley"-type, who often had the same disdain and impatience for Herman as "Peg" had with "Chester A. Riley" on "THE LIFE OF RILEY" (but Peg never referred to Riley as "you big goofball!!", or knocked him out with one punch in a fit of jealousy). Let's face it, "THE MUNSTERS" was simple exaggeration, at times a live-action cartoon.....and it was funny!!!!

{now, if the Broadway musical based on the Addamses is a success, I expect to see a similar version featuring "The Munsters"....}

:tv:

TV Knowledge Fan you said it so well and I really enjoyed your post.

I too thought the Addam's family was more textured and sophisticated. The show played true to the family's weirdness, with all the creepy props/creatures like Thing, Cleopatra, Cousin Itt, etc. I also thought John Astin was particularly playful and just loved the way he always went gaga whenever Tish spoke French.

As was said, trying to portray the Munsters as normal and laid-back didn't really work. I also thought they went a little overboard with the slapstick bits and pat formulas of earlier shows. The Munsters was pleasant to be sure, but I'll take the Addam's Family over it any day.

Both shows premiered within a week of each other, but I'm speculating, speculating, that The Munsters was contrived as a rival show and seen perhaps as a rip off of The Addams Family.

I have always preferred the Munsters over the Addams, when I was a kid they were too sophisticated for me and I liked the slapstick of the Munsters. I don't think the Munsters are a ripoff of the addams, Universal Pictures wanted to capitalize on their horror movies by putting them in a comedy.

I always preferred the Munsters over the Adams Family. I never found the AF being very funny.

While I like them both, and both were very popular in syndication when I was growing up in the '70s, I would have to give The Munsters the nod as the one that made me laugh more -- and if I could only keep watching one or the other, then The Munsters most likely.

Maybe Hollywood is more interested in The Addams Family because the lead characters are more of a romantic pair, while with The Munsters, Herman & Lily are prone to be kind of an ups-and-downs, more humdrum type of married couple... And while there were unusual props in The Munsters' home, and they had those fabulous vehicles, overall there seemed to be an endless supply of Addams periphernalia that Hollywood could extrapolate on for kinky and kooky scenes.

I've always liked the Addams' Family best. The plots are deeper and well thought out, where as the Munsters rely mostly on slapstick and SHOCK.

I know the Addams' Family gets a bad rap about NOT being funny but I strongly disagree, the AF was funny just in a different way than the Munsters. The humor on the AF comes from the way they deliver their lines and the clever little things they say, I find myself laughing my rear off, it's just the way they say things.

And even as a child I like the AF, I just thought their house was neat.

I like the Munsters but it's just so different.

And one reason I think the AF works better for Hollywood is b/c they are a TRUE family that is just bizzare, so I guess a family like that COULD really exist, where as with the Munsters, you don't see too many Frankenstein monsters and vampires walking around, so I guess the AF could be a little more true to life.

The people behind the Munsters were the first in the race. The first pilot with Joan Marshall was made in the fall of 1963. Charles Addams was approached to have his cartoons made into a TV series in early 1964.
From Steven Cox's book: "The Munsters was already in development by the fall of 1963 when David Levy of ABC decided to adapt Charles Addams's characters for a television sitcom. By February 1964, ABC had finalized a deal. ABC was originally interested in the Munsters, but for some reason was unable to acquire the property. Obviously, Addams became thier answer to CBS's upcoming Munsters."
I've said before, the Munsters didn't rely on visual gags alone. For them to be branded slapstick while The Addams Family can have Fester riding through the living room on a motorcycle, Gomez repeatedly get hit over the head or any other sight gag they did on that show and not have slapstick pinned on them is an inaccuracy.

Well stated Laugh30. You also can't say the AF was better just because they had two movies since The Munsters hadn't not sure why at least the two made for tv movies were better than nothing,

Well stated Laugh30. You also can't say the AF was better just because they had two movies since The Munsters hadn't not sure why at least the two made for tv movies were better than nothing,

Actually, the Munsters were featured in a theatrical movie ("Munster, Go Home," in 1966, starring Fred Gwynne, Yvonne DeCarlo, Al Lewis, and Butch
Patrick) and three made-for-TV movies ("The Munsters' Revenge," in 1981,
with Fred Gwynne, Yvonne DeCarlo and Al Lewis; "Here Come the Munsters,"
in 1995, with Edward Herrman as Herman and cameos by Yvonne DeCarlo and
Al Lewis; and "The Munsters' Scary Little Christmas," in 1998, with Sam Mc-
Murray as Herman, Ann Magnuson as Lily, and Sandy Baron as Grandpa).

The original cast of The Addams Family returned in the 1977 made-for-TV movie "Halloween with the Addams Family." Both series were later revived as sitcoms (with all-new casts); and both
got the animation treatment (the pilot "Mini-Munsters" on ABC's Saturday Superstar Movie and
two Hanna-Barbera series based on The Addams Family, which I described in an earlier post).

Both the theatrical movie "Munster, Go Home" and the TV-movie "The Munsters' Revenge" benefited
from some great guest stars (Terry-Thomas and Hermione Gingold in the former, and Sid Caesar and
Howard Morris in the latter). The last two TV-movies were disappointing because, as someone else
has stated, Fred Gwynne, Yvonne DeCarlo and Al Lewis made those roles of Herman, Lily and Grandpa
their own. NO ONE ELSE can touch those performances they created. The Addams family, on the other hand, can always be recast because they were based on cartoon characters to begin with.

I think reasons why the remakes of the Munsters didn't live up to the original was because the time the original was made. It was during a wave of fantasy sitcoms that had never been tried before.
The innocence that were in these shows was genuine because it was made during a more innocent time. It was just done with more style and satirical wit. And of course, I agree, Gwynne, Lewis, DeCarlo and all involved in the show.

Actually, the Munsters were featured in a theatrical movie ("Munster, Go Home," in 1966, starring Fred Gwynne, Yvonne DeCarlo, Al Lewis, and Butch
Patrick)

In fact, the publicity shot in the OP (with Debbie Watson at far right) is from said movie, not the TV series.

I have to go with the Munsters myself for being the funnier of the 2. The Adams family were rich sophisticated wierd people. They didn't work for a living, but they didn't need to. Herman Munster did work for a living. He had to support his family and don't forget to feed spot. I guess I could indentify with Herman more as a working man. And the rediculous things that happen to Herman made me laugh so hard that I almost had to go to the hospital. The Adams Family never made me laugh that hard. Oh and one more thing. As far as the munster being ugllier than the Adams Family, I know that Morticia (Carolyn Jones) Was very pretty in and out of makeup. Lilly munster was not that pretty in makeup. But if you removed Yvonnes makeup, she would have bown Carolyn Jones away. See for yourself

I think "The Munsters" has done better in syndication. "The Munsters" was a fantasy show and it played that well. They understood it was silly and goofy and had fun with. "The Addams Family", based on characters in the New Yorker magazine, was suppose to be "sophisticated" because they believed the same people who saw the cartoons in the New Yorker would watch the show. I think that was a miss, really.

TV Knowledge Fan you said it so well and I really enjoyed your post.

I too thought the Addam's family was more textured and sophisticated. The show played true to the family's weirdness, with all the creepy props/creatures like Thing, Cleopatra, Cousin Itt, etc. I also thought John Astin was particularly playful and just loved the way he always went gaga whenever Tish spoke French.

As was said, trying to portray the Munsters as normal and laid-back didn't really work. I also thought they went a little overboard with the slapstick bits and pat formulas of earlier shows. The Munsters was pleasant to be sure, but I'll take the Addam's Family over it any day.

Took the words right out of my mouth. I'll just state for the record that (obviously) I am an Addams Fan but,......I love both shows! ;) Both were really good in their own right (although they were/are very similar).

I would have to disagree with someone that gave their opinion that The Addams Family's cast could have been re-cast with other actors and worked - That I don't agree on, I think maybe the kids were the only 2 that could have been changed and would not have affected the show (no offense to Lisa and Ken though cause they were fantastic in their parts). But other than that, the rest of the cast were irreplaceable IMO.

yONktWfZ9cU

Tommy "Throwback" Kovac chats it up with writer/author/historian Steve Cox, we discuss the legacy & fandom for "The Munsters" & "The Addams Family". Totally radical!.

I have to go with the Munsters myself for being the funnier of the 2. The Adams family were rich sophisticated wierd people. They didn't work for a living, but they didn't need to. Herman Munster did work for a living. He had to support his family and don't forget to feed spot. I guess I could indentify with Herman more as a working man. And the rediculous things that happen to Herman made me laugh so hard that I almost had to go to the hospital. The Adams Family never made me laugh that hard. Oh and one more thing. As far as the munster being ugllier than the Adams Family, I know that Morticia (Carolyn Jones) Was very pretty in and out of makeup. Lilly munster was not that pretty in makeup. But if you removed Yvonnes makeup, she would have bown Carolyn Jones away. See for yourself

I have one word:WOW!

Yeah, the irony was the Yvonne DeCarlo had been a hot femme fatale for decades prior to the Munsters but she covered herself in the garish makeup to hide it while Carolyn Jones was pretty enough but had never been in her league yet Morticia was more outwardly attractive than Lily.

Also, since Lily was a homemaker while Morticia had Lurch do all the household chores, this also encouraged typical home viewers ( homemakers and their families) identify more with the former.

Lastly, while Grandpa Dracula considered himself an exiled aristocrat but still was happy to hobnob with the other citizens of his new community, the REST of the Munsters considered themselves to be 'a typical American family' who were puzzled that they didn't fit right in while the Addamses definitely felt content to look down upon the others in their suburban city.

While the Addams Family generated a lot more stuff... It seems the Munsters have always been shown on TV more.... I'm 40 and I literally don't remember a time when the Munsters were not airing on SOME station or another. But it always seems like it was a rare treat to get to see an episode of the Addams Family. I remember the Addams Family showing in my childhood when I was like 7 or 8 and it was one of my fave shows.... then it just went away while the Munsters continued to show.... I remember just very rare halloween occasions would they show an episode of the Addams' Family, and it was like a trip back to childhood. It wasn't until I was in my 20s that I was able to order the complete series and got reacquainted with my fave show


It's hard for me to picture a Munster's movie.... I mean with the Addams' Family they always went more into the dark side and focused less on comedy in the 90s movies.... I wonder if a Munsters' movie would be flat out comedy?

"The Munsters" have always been my favorite of the two but I like "The Addams Family" as well. I think "The Munsters" was more laugh out loud funny.

I think "The Munsters" has done better in syndication. "The Munsters" was a fantasy show and it played that well. They understood it was silly and goofy and had fun with. "The Addams Family", based on characters in the New Yorker magazine, was suppose to be "sophisticated" because they believed the same people who saw the cartoons in the New Yorker would watch the show. I think that was a miss, really.

Exactly. It's just like Bewitched versus I Dream of Jeannie. The Addams Family is to Bewitched while The Munsters is to I Dream of Jeannie. The former is more sophisticated while the latter is silly and involves slapstick.

Exactly. It's just like Bewitched versus I Dream of Jeannie. The Addams Family is to Bewitched while The Munsters is to I Dream of Jeannie. The former is more sophisticated while the latter is silly and involves slapstick.

I can see that, but it seems as with the Munsters, Bewitched was shown all the time, it was more rare to see IDOJ, for me any way... just like it seems like th Munsters was on every time you turned on the TV, but it was rare to see the Addams' Family

I can see that, but it seems as with the Munsters, Bewitched was shown all the time, it was more rare to see IDOJ, for me any way... just like it seems like th Munsters was on every time you turned on the TV, but it was rare to see the Addams' Family

I think The Munsters did well in syndication because, like Gilligan's Island, it had a lot of kid appeal even though it wasn't really directed toward kids.

I think The Munsters did well in syndication because, like Gilligan's Island, it had a lot of kid appeal even though it wasn't really directed toward kids.

I liked both as a kid.... I was really interested in Thing and his boxes when I was little, so I copied them and made them out of shoe boxes and set them throughout the house lol

When watching these series now I'm mainly taking in the beauty of Pat Priest and Carolyn Jones:

273338273339

I like the Munsters Better :)