Still from ‘The Addams Family’/Image © 1964 Twentieth Century Fox
Editor’s Note: The Addams Family caught our attention today, as did The New Yorker, Matthew McConaughey, and skepticism in news, all in our daily roundup.
“The Addams Family” has appeared in practically every medium imaginable, including two beloved movies (plus one not-so-beloved one) and a Broadway show. MGM has announced that the Addamses are returning to the movie theaters in a new animated feature film, an inspired choice considering their origin as a series of cartoons for The New Yorker. Unfortunately it sounds like Tim Burton is out of the picture once and for all — he had hoped to direct it.
Speaking of The New Yorker, the magazine has an incredible essay about the perils of having a precocious reader in the house, inspired by the author’s discovery that his six-year-old daughter was reading Robert Caro‘s Lyndon Johnson bio The Path to Power over his shoulder. Does having kids change what books you keep around the house, or does it just change the way you talk about those books? (Stephen King’s children are welcome to chime in here.)
Who could have predicted that Matthew McConaughey would have a career renaissance of such range and depth? Between “Killer Joe” and “Magic Mike” (two titles that look deceptively similar when you read them side by side) and now “Dealing in Dallas,” it looks like we’re going to start taking him very seriously. The latter is adapted from a news article about a homophobic drug addict in the eighties whose life is changed by an AIDS diagnosis. Jared Leto costars as a transgender woman who helps him smuggle life-prolonging drugs into the U.S. Here’s a Q&A with Leto about the film, which opens this weekend.
We’ve all heard how the 1938 radio broadcast of H.G. Welles’ War of the Worlds incited mass hysteria. Slate insists this is actually completely untrue, and that the widespread misinformation can be traced back to a campaign by the newspaper industry to discredit radio as a credible news source. The irony of papers spreading erroneous info about the Welles broadcast in order to remain America’s most trusted news source is just too delicious. I’ll take this as a reminder to approach archival news articles with just as much skepticism as anything I might read online.