 | |
List Price: $9.99 | | Label: Universal Studios
Salesrank: 24791
Released: May 16, 2006 |
| Our Price: $2.89 |
| Used Price: $0.18 |
|
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
Media: DVD |
|
Editorial Review:
Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick return to their award-winning roles in the hilariously funny film of the record-breaking Broadway smash-hit. Scheming producer Max Bialystock (Lane) and his mousy accountant, Leo Bloom (Broderick), discover that under the right circumstances they could make more money by producing a Broadway flop than they can with a hit. But what will they do when their sure-to-offend musical becomes a surprise sensation? Co-starring sexy Uma Thurman and comedy genius Will Ferrell, The Producers is a fun-filled, side-splitting comedy.
Description of The Producers:
The trend is to convert movies into stage musicals, but The Producers goes a step further: making a feature film of the smash-hit stage musical that was adapted from the 1968 film. The chief drawing card, of course, is Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick reprising their roles from the stage. Lane plays Max Bialystock, a legendary Broadway producer who hasn't had a hit show in a long time. Enter nebbish accountant Leo Bloom (Broderick), who tells Bialystock he could actually make more money with a flop than a hit. So the two set out to produce the worst Broadway musical of all time, one guaranteed to close on opening night, with the collaboration of an outrageous cast of characters: Will Ferrell as sieg heil-ing author Franz Liebkind, Uma Thurman as Swedish bombshell Ulla, Gary Beach as director Roger De Bris, and Roger Bart as his assistant, Carmen Ghia, among others.
As directed and choreographed by Susan Stroman (who did the same honors on Broadway) and co-written by Mel Brooks, The Producers is laugh-out-loud funny. It's also a relentlessly over-the-top, shamelessly bawdy, stereotype-ridden comedy that may turn off its audience just as much as its centerpiece, Springtime for Hitler, was intended to. But Broadway fans who are used to larger-than-life figures who play to the back row while showering the first row with spit, are likely to forgive and just enjoy the famous granny-walker dance, a supporting cast dotted with Broadway performers (playing a taxi driver is Brad Oscar, who originated the role of Liebkind on Broadway then later played Bialystock), or the mere spectacle of seeing Lane and Broderick memorializing the performances that millions never got a ticket to see. (For maximum laughs, stick around through the closing credits.) --David Horiuchi
The Producers Reviews:
I didn't want to like this film.... 
2009-12-06 - ...because the original Zero Mostel/Gene Wilder version was so great. I really thought this version would be a let down.
But after around 5 minutes of watching it, it became apparent that this wasn't a remake of the classic masterpiece. It was an entirely new film based on the same general script. And I was shocked to find that in a few ways, this version was better than the original. This really isn't a remake of the film, it's a film version of the Broadway musical.
First of all, the movie really is funny. And it was well acted too, despite the fact that the cast wasn't as good as the 1968 cast. But Nathan Lane, Mathew Broderick, Will Ferrell and Uma Thurman were still very good. It just may be that Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder were hard to top, or once you saw that version first, anyone else wouldn't compare to them.
The dance numbers were excellent. I'm really not a fan of musicals, but this one was good. The production was extremely well done, and it moved well enough that I didn't even realize it was a two hour film!
The bottom line is that the 1968 version was a comedy classic. Perhaps Mel Brookes very best comedy film. But this new version is also a very, very funny film, but it's a different film. This is really a musical comedy with elaborate singing and dancing. And I felt it was carried off beautifully.
I think the people who hated this movie made the mistake of comparing it directly with the classic 1968 version, and naturally they found it lacking. I think you have to judge this as a separate film. And when you do that, it's quite a good musical comedy.
I didn't want to like this movie, but I ended up loving it.
A riot! 
2009-09-13 - An absolute riot! I laughed the whole way through. Will Ferrell is at his comedic best in this. The music numbers are well choreographed and sung, overall a really fun film. This movie always brings a smile to my face.
THIS MOVIE should have closed on page four 
2009-08-24 - There is an obvious urge when reviewing this movie to compare it to the earlier version, but this is unfair. This movie is not a "remake" as such, but a different presentation of the basic story. It needs to be reviewed on its own lack of merit.
I simply cannot believe that this treatment was a hit on Broadway and received numerous awards, but people have told me that the theatre version was much better.
Don't mistake though, this movie is awful, and for a multitude of reasons. I watched it to the very end, mostly out of curiosity and hoping it would get better. It never did.
The acting is either over the top, or wooden. Matthew Broderick is particularly bad, there's no life in his character- and Nathan Lane seems to be unable to make up his mind between taking the part of Max for his own or doing a lousy imitation of Zero Mostel. Uma Thurman was a questionable choice for Ulla. Her accent is inconsistent, she towers over her co-stars- neither of which are tall men, and when you boil it down, she is somewhat gangley and strange looking. Don't even get me started on how bad Will Ferrell is. His take on Franz is pathetic. He tries to give his character the wild-eyed fanaticism that it requires, but you get the overall impression that he's just camping it up and actually making fun of it. He's no Kenneth Mars. The sequence on the roof where Max and Leo have him sign the contract- one of the funniest parts of the original movie- is probably the worst part of this one.
The supporting cast is lousy too. The character of "Carmen Ghia" comes to mind. Originally the effeminate partner of Roger Debris, he comes off as a drill sergeant in a lousy haircut and tight clothes.
Even the jokes that were lifted from the original movie have been stepped on or rearranged to where they aren't funny. I think I may have laughed twice during the whole movie, and that was at the goofy show posters in Max's office.
This movie is also a rather strange "musical." When I saw "Chicago" for the first time, I found myself humming the tunes. I cannot recall one from this movie.
I also have many problems with the needless revisions in the original plot.
Everyone who watched the original movie knew that Max "went right" when he selected LSD as his Hitler. His portrayal of Hitler was hilarious, and Franz Liebkind's reaction to it convinced the audience that the play was a comedy. However, LSD is absent from this movie. The Hitler part goes- eventually- to Debris! There is nothing really funny about the Hitler portrayed by him, or his material. Actually, it's somewhat boring. How did people interpret this to be comedic?
Having Leo married and off to Rio with Ulla did nothing either. Apparently it was just another device to work more unmemorable music into the movie.
Finally, there is the length of this thing- OVER TWO HOURS! It's a marathon. In the original movie they blew up the theatre. They should have done it here too- and much sooner.
However, I didn't hate the whole thing- the "pearl" girls were quite attractive. I've watched their dance sequence several times- with the sound off.
This movie was a box office flop, disappearing from theatres and going to DVD almost instantly. I wonder how much money Mel Brooks managed to raise to produce it?
Where did we go....right? 
2009-08-23 - The answer is, not many places. The film of the musical of the original movie brings back a bunch of the stage's stars, notably Matthew Broderick and Nathan Lane, to try and recapture what brought Broadway ticket holders out in droves. However, this looks like the old fashioned musical-to-film style where the movie often looks like the stage play simply acted out for the cameras. Mel Brooks even inserts a joke about it at one point, when Uma Thurman coos to Broderick, "Why did you move away from me stage left?"
Which is what ultimately makes "The Producers" an average movie. Everything is played out as broadly as possible and the opening sequence is so shrilly overbearing as to almost put you off the rest of the film. Patience is rewarded by some of Brooks' trademark humor and sight-gags, with the old-lady walker dance enough to give the movie a boost in the ratings. Then there's the ultimate; the hideous play the two decide to use for the scam; "Springtime For Hitler." Given that this ruse was pivotal to the original Producers, it's virtually intact from the first. naturally, it's also the film's highlight.
Even with that classic set piece, "The Producers" fails to catch fire. The bits are strung out and uneven, and never meet the heights of the original. Matthew Broderick in particular seems out of his league here, playing Leo as a wooden nebbish, while Nathan Lane channels Zero Mostel adequately. Will Ferrell is his usual mad-manboy self, which is good, and Gary Beach is an outrage as the flamboyant director DeBris, who takes the role of Hitler...and wrecks Leo and Max's plans. Even with all this going for it, "The Producers" can't seem to maintain the timing it needs to be a flat out success. For Mel Brooks fans only, with a few musical buffs that might life to see the skewer Brooks and the cast drive into the heart of the great white way.
Metaphors and dreams
2009-07-06 - This movie is not only funny, but great fun. It can be enjoyed on the surface as a comedy or musical. Or, one can delve deeper and look at Max Bialystock as a metaphor of desire and frustration. One HAS to watch the unfortunately-deleted King of Broadway in the deleted scenes. This shows Max as a deposed king trying to gain back former glory, rather than a simple wannabe. This scene is a reprise/sendup of Fiddler, complete with Jewish lament and incredibly energetic street dancing. Only then do we understand Maxes plight, and his striving to get back. Nathan Lane is brilliant and hold center stage no matter who else is there, but Matthew Broderick is a great straight man, Uma Thurman is dazzling, Roger Bart is hilarious. The story is not only fun, but all of us can share the aspiration to a dream.
