Cool News
Enigma Boy goose-steps along with THE PRODUCERS!!
Ahoy, squirts! Quint here with another review of THE PRODUCERS. This one has been in the mailbox for a few days... I was buried shoulders deap in my Holiday Guide and Harry and Moriarty were off making millions in the stock market. I am now somewhat recovered from that monster of an article and can give this review to the world. I am very curious to see this flick. I love Mel Brooks, despite DRACULA DEAD AND LOVING IT, however I never got to see the stage version of THE PRODUCERS. So, the movie will be my first exposure to the Ferris Bueller/Nathan Lane version of Brooks' story. Enjoy this review from someone familiar with the play!
“The Producers” review
On the 18th of April, 2001, I was celebrating the final weeks of my high school career by going from one coast to another and ending up in New York City. After seeing Gary Sinise in “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” a lackluster “Chicago,” the Alan Cumming/Dominic West/Jennifer Ehle staging of Noel Coward’s “Design for Living” and enjoying my way through “Rent” for the sixth time—out of a cumulative 12 as of now—my family was lucky enough to get our hands on four tickets to the final preview night of “The Producers,” which would go on to win a record 13 Tony Awards. The show, a bright, pretty, startlingly naughty stage version of Mel Brooks’ 1968 directorial debut, brought the house down with an offensive but loveable book and score, powered by the incendiary duo of Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick. I thought it worked the jokes of the original film much better by having them barrel at the audience at every chance, combining slapstick, unsubtle entendres and what Brooks described his original film as “rising below vulgarity.” It was a perfect show.
Two years later, I had tickets to the traveling production’s stop in San Francisco, this time with a fifth-string cast. It was still very funny, but I had noticed a major flaw in the show itself—it’s almost a one-time deal. The music is not exactly awe-inspiring, the result of Brooks humming melodies into a tape recorder and having professionals sort it out into something reasonable. (Thanks to imdb for that big of useless trivia.) Unlike my more preferred musicals—I go for something a little more “meta,” such as the transcendent “Urinetown” and “Avenue Q”—the tunes are mostly forgettable. The jokes as well don’t hold up once you already know them all. Like “Hairspray,” the show is choreographed within an inch of its life, and that can lead to an uninspired product.
Don’t get me wrong, the play was and still is a great night at the theater. But it doesn’t hold up as well as it should. Ditto goes for the movie. It’s a great, refreshing product, but I feel like I’m just watching them go through the motions. Audiences will eat it up, just like the one at the press screening tonight in Los Angeles, but critics might pick on its transparent theatrical staging. The director/choreographer Susan Stroman—who also directed the recent “Music Man” revival and the dance show “Contact” and choreographed “Center Stage”—has opted to direct the film as if she simply nailed a camera five feet from the stage and let everyone do their thing. It oddly works, but it may put off those looking for something more cinematic. Hell, Showtime’s recent “Reefer Madness: The Movie Musical” was more cinematic than this. In addition, the original cast, except for two big differences, reprise their roles, and we should be thankful for this.
(For fans of the show, I will later include a quick list of what was cut between the show and the film.)
Before jumping right into the meat of the review—sorry about the long introduction—let me just preemptively say that I am not a homosexual, so don’t try the musical theatre is gay angle in the TBs. It’s an art form, just like anything else, and I believe that tearing down a movie or a play simply because it’s a musical is incredibly closed-minded and unfair. If Tom Cruise can battle aliens, people can break out into song. And I am oddly combative tonight. Why is that? Thanksgiving weekend is here, I suppose. Old people and mashed potatoes.
And I ain’t no plant, neither.
“The Producers” tells the story of the slimy schmoe Max Bialystock (Lane), a down-on-his-luck Broadway producer who has just flopped with “Funny Boy,” a musical comedy version of “Hamlet.” Distraught, he comes up with a scheme with his nebbish, neurotic accountant Leo Bloom (Broderick)—they can raise $2 million and lightly finance a theatrical disaster that will without question flop and run off to Rio with the additional money. Their thinking is that nobody, not even the IRS, would be interested in perusing the accounting books for a failed play. So they decide to find the worst play imaginable, one belonging to Nazi Franz Liebkind (Will Ferrell). The play, “Springtime for Hitler: A Gay Romp with Eva and Adolf Through the German Countryside.” They also hire the worst director in town, the marvelously gay Roger DeBris (Gary Beach) and his common law assistant Carmen Ghia (Roger Bart). Their financial backing comes from Max’s tried-and-true process of providing his “services” to little old ladies. They also hire a buxom blonde Swedish goddess Miss Ulla Inga Hansen Bensen Yonsen Tallen-Hallen Svaden-Svanson (Uma Thurman) to be their receptionist-slash-secretary—her response? “Okey-slash-dokey!” When they finally get their show onto the Shubert stage, everything is set for a financial and critical disaster. Or is it?
The first thing anybody is going to notice about the film is how noisy it all is. With all the blaring trumpets, obnoxious old women and Lane-Broderick trying to constantly one-up each other, it’s probably the loudest movie since “The Rock.” If you are not a fan of wacky comedy, this is not the one for you. Brooks has always gone for cheap jokes, and since this, while an adaptation, is still written by the man—book, music and lyrics—it is still very much his style.
By cutting the big opening number “King of Broadway”—it was recorded but cut--Max’s intro, we are left in the first 20 minutes with a cipher of a character. His entire backstory and ideology lies in this song, my favorite from the show and by far the best choreographed, and so after “Opening Night,” another 15 minutes pass by somewhat awkwardly until the duet “We Can Do It.” With Lane left with less of a character, it’s no challenge for Broderick to swoop in and steal every one of their scenes together.
It must be commended that onstage and in this film, Lane and Broderick never really try to do impressions of the original film’s Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder. These are their characters, and we should be grateful for them.
Uma as Ula is given a much bigger role than in the 1968 version to present a love triangle situation, although it becomes clear very early she has her sights on Bloom. She is a vastly better choice than the original choice, Nicole Kidman. Her freakishly tall Swede is sensual in a way that only those huge fans of “Kill Bill” know.
The biggest surprise, at least to me, is how well Will Ferrell works as the loud, nutty and insane Franz. In summer of 2004 when everybody was sucking Ferrell’s stupid “Anchorman” dick, I was sitting in the theater repeatedly mumbling, “Not funny. Not funny. Except for Carrell, not funny.” So imagine my surprise when a comedian who I dislike—yelling is not necessarily talent—gets a great role that is ripe for his style. Listen during the end credits to a reprise of his marching song “Guten Tag Hop Clop” done in a soft modern contemporary version. ([Whispers] “Buy Mein Komph. Available at your local bookstore. And Borders. And Amazon.com.”)
Gary Beach and Roger Bart reprise their over-the-top homosexual roles, but just like the original stage production, Bart threatens to run away with the entire show. It’s a glorious performance from a man rising in the character roles in Hollywood movies and TV shows.
The film is also chock-full of special cameos, such as Jon Lovitz, Michael McKean, Andrea Martin, Debra Monk, Jai Rodriguez, Richard Kind and Brad Oscar—the original show’s Franz and first replacement for Max Bialystock when Lane’s contract ran out. Stay through the credits, in addition to Ferrell’s song, to an original sung by Lane and Broderick and a final curtain call with a very special appearance by Brooks himself.
The film has its share of lagging moments, especially during “We Can Do It” and the borderline-tedious love duet “That Face,” which could benefit from over a minute of cuts, simply moving into the bright dance number. “I Wanna Be A Producer,” as well, goes on for about a minute too long and becomes overly gaudy. It’s fun to have three times as many showgirls for this number and old women for the sex number “Along Came Bialy,” but sometimes it comes across as just a little too much.
That said, this is a very fun show that all should see if they are not familiar with the show. I wouldn’t put the soundtrack in my CD player often, but the show and the film are a part of musical history and should not be ignored. The most offensive aspects of the show have been cut, so this is more of a jolly vulgarity, but it is still worth your Christmas time when it is released.
Now, if only Killer Films can get moving on their film version of “Urinetown.” I guarantee a good time.
Songs cut from the show:
-The opening number “King of Broadway” (“It’s good to be the king.”)
-The slave accountant in “Unhappy” (“Oh I debits all the mawnin’/and I credits all the ebenin’/until them ledgers be riiiiiiiiiiight.”)
-Franz’s intro song “In Old Bavaria”
-A portion of “Along Came Bialy” (“How about we play a game that doesn’t involve any sex?” “Like what?” “The Jewish American Princess, and her husband.”)
-A middle segment of “Springtime for Hitler” (when he kicks FDR)
-Max and Leo’s “Where Did We Go Right?” (“There was no way we could lose/Half the audience were Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeews.”)
-
+ Expand All
-
gene wilder...sighs
-
you're watching a MUSICAL for Christsakes.
-
Likewise, I am not a bank robber, despite my carrying a gun into a bank along with a note demanding money. It was a postmodern ironic art piece for christ's sake. Oh well my prison internet time is over, back to being butt-fucked by gang members... Of course that doesn't make me gay...
-
right? mel brooks isn't funny, his funniest moments were gene wilder written, he's an absolute hack that resorts to fart/jew jokes at almost every turn. baaarf.
-
You road tripped to NYC and saw 4 musicals...and you've seen rent 12 times? Dude, it's cool (despite the judgemental fucks that tend to populate talkbacks), you can be open. Gay, straight, whatever...thanks for the review. Personally, I'm looking forward to The Producers because (1) it's got Uma Thurman looking smoking hot; (2) Bueller...Bueller; (3) Uma Thurman looking smoking hot; (4) Nathan Lane is one talented, funny guy; (5) Uma Thurman looks incredibly hot; (6) it's supposed to be a great show, so it oughta make a good movie (one would think).
-
Nov 27, 2005 7:26:50 AM CST
There's nothing wrong with being teh ghey, if that's who
by citizen arcane
But anyone who takes in that many musicals, taketh in the cock. As for Brooks, I can't remember his last funny film. Spaceballs was hilarious when I was a kid but I'm guessing I wouldn't laugh at it quite so much today. His Robin Hood and Dracula movies were horrendous. But we'll always have Blazing Saddles. Where the white women at, indeed.
-
Apparently he's currently in 'The Producers' on Broadway. At least that's what they said as he was going down the street during the Macy's parade.
-
So all you fanboys of South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut...you're all gay then?
-
Of course macho straight men can't be into musical theatre. No, they do manly things like reading comic books full of over-muscled men in spandex. No homoerotic overtones there, no siree. Nitwits.
-
Nov 27, 2005 9:13:33 AM CST
Years ago, on a very special episode of "Sneak Previews"
by drunken rage
Siskel and Ebert tried to explain why they preferred, respectively, Woody Allen to Mel Brooks, and Mel Brooks to Woody Allen. I haven't seen a Brooks movie I enjoyed since "Young Frankenstein" and although the play got terrific reviews (and made a boatload of $$), I have no desire to see it. I'd rather see the Zero Mostel/Gene Wilder version.
-
Nov 27, 2005 9:50:50 AM CST
Actually, it was a trip to NYC and FIVE musicals. I forgot about
by enigma boy
Kind of a mess. But then again, so is the movie. And if that doesn't make me gay, then what does?!!! My God! Have I been living a lie?! AGGGGH!
-
...they cut out all those "ohholyshitdidhejustSAYthat?!?" lines. Geez, it's Mel Brooks, who are they afraid of offending?
-
He hasnt made a funny movie since 1977 (High anxiety) thats nearly 30 years ago. But how many other people have won an Oscar, an Emmy, a Grammy and a Tony?
-
It's not a German speaking issue either...its' just common knowledge.
-
Unreadable review by an asshole.
-
(Which I wasn't anyway) I can remark that there is absolutely NO reason to make this movie. The original producers was a comedy classic. If you want to make that into a musical ....fine. But then to make it back into a movie is just one too many xeroxes. As far as musical making you gay, let us remember that Clint Eastwood once starred in a musical movie and actually sung, along with Lee Marvin of all people. If they're gay, then we're all in the boat.
-
not that there's anything wrong with that
-
Cutting "King of Broadway" seems like a bad idea, but I haven't seen the movie, so I can't say that for certain. "Where Did We Go Right" is amusing, but it can be spared. Anyway, seeing those dance routines writ large should really be fun.
-
Nov 27, 2005 6:35:45 PM CST
someone beat me to it, a friggin movie based on a play based on
by peven
..now THATS milking an idea for every penny. for all the complaints about remakes and sequels i'm suprised this seems to be getting a free pass from most. High Anxiety and Blazing Saddles are great(Harvey Corman doing the wolfman/rubberband-snapping gets me rolling every time), Young Frankenstein is just ok and over-rated imo, and Spaceballs just plain sucked.
-
Theres no question that Mel Brooks is a funny guy but he has one major problem. The majority of his best films, even though he might have directed, had many writers involved. In fact as many of you might know that Gene Wilder wrote Young Frankenstein. Just as in Your Show of Shows, Mel works well with a team of writers throwing in their best ideas in a pool. I have had a bootleg copy of one of the early performances of the Producers and found it amusing and even with a few changes in the plot kept true to the original film. One scene in the trailer I found disapointing is to see they copied the water fountain shot per shot and even camera angle. This wasn't even in the play. If the play revisioned the original film, could't someone have had a fresh vision for this film to separate it from the original? I'm surprised that many talkbackers didn't comment on History of the World Pt. 1. Time does take its toll on this film if you watch it to many times, but I know watching it the first several times had me aching from laughter. Worst Brooks films...Life Stinks, Dracula , Dead and Loving It. Best Brooks films..Blazing Saddles, High Anxiety & History of the World. The rest mediocre or better.
-
What is "meta" supposed to mean? I know what it actually means, but I don't know what they think it means.
-
it's so obvious.
-
Nov 28, 2005 3:32:55 AM CST
Yeah, a plant. Too bad I've written for this site sporadical
by enigma boy
And I apologize for the "Kampf" misspelling. I was just typing too fast, I guess.
And when did I become an asshole? Or should I ignore that post? -
Nov 28, 2005 3:36:13 AM CST
And a horribly, horribly broad definition of "meta-theatre" is a
by enigma boy
"Meta-Theater: A genre of theater made popular with mostly modern audiences, although it did start back in the Elizabethan Era. Meta-Theater is when a play often completely demolishes the so called "fourth wall" and completely engages the audience. Often times about a group of actors, a director, writer and so on. It usually blurs the line between what is scripted and what goes on by accident."
-
I want to see a movie version of wicked with Idina Menzel and Kristen Chenowith! Who's with me?! Well, I want to see it anyway.
-
As someone who is among the gazillion people who were extra's in the "Springtime For Hitler" audience filming, I'm anxiously awaiting this film. I was *desparate* to see the show, and had phone in hand and computer in other when tix for the "reunion" of Lane/Broderick went on sale. I ended up getting GREAT seats for a Saturday matinee in January (during one of the most bitter cold snaps in east coast history). My fam and I make a weekend of it, staying just over the bridge in NJ, taking the train into the city. It's 1:30 - the show goes up at 2 - we're crossing the street to where the theater is - I'm looking ahead to the theater to see if there's a long line outside so I know if my little daughter will be out in the cold for too long - I suddenly slip on a patch of ice - go down hard, and break my arm.
I spend the rest of the day in the hospital (Bellview hospital to be precise - and yes, there were a few nutcases there during my stay), and NEVER got to see the show. The theater wouldn't refund, or allow us to reschedule until AFTER the Lane/Broderick run was OVER (bastards!!). So being an extra sort of made up for this a BIT. I did get to see Lane, Broderick AND Brooks during the filming (Matthew has a habit of breaking Nathan up between takes, VERY fun to observe). And there's a chance in hell of seeing myself in the final cut - as I'm one row (and two people to the left) behind Michael McKean during the "Broadway" version of "Prisioners of Love". If I'm lucky, I'll get to see my big Jewish nose... -
I always thought of meta-theater as theater which is aware that it's theater, in such a manner that it deliberately alerts the audience to that fact. And I'm not sure the Elizabethans started it so much as made it explicit. But THE PRODUCERS is a prime example, definitely: the musical-within-a-musical, the choreographic references to Bugsby Berkley and Gene Kelley, the names of Max's failed shows- they're all the kind of semi-ironic references that make you all the more alert to the fact that this is a SHOW you're watching, and one that's very firmly in the tradition of the 40-50s musicals even as it mocks them. It has to use the meta for its humor.
-
There's something wrong here. A musical about Hitler is now so popular it's been made back into a movie. I'm going to get working on "Young Adolf".
-
Nov 28, 2005 2:43:10 PM CST
And Wicked is a travesty, but I will admit I've only heard i
by enigma boy
I'll probably appreciate the grandeur of the show when I see it, but I feel like Stephen Schwartz is still stuck in 70s mode.
-
Saw it tonight at Arclight. LOVE the musical. Love musical movies in general. This film was almost a litteral filming of the stage show. Where is the BIG, BIG Marpy Poppins STEP IN TIME number? Ms. Stroman, you needed to get the caemra out of the small sets and into the streets more. Monty Pythons "Every Sperm is Sacred" number had more punch.
ALl the roles were fine. Uma a bit awkward; weak voice. Ferrel is fine, but, Brad Oscar from Broadway woulv'de been better.
ANd, Enigma, man, you need to learn how to write a review. You give away too much stuff. Just say, "there is a funny Will Ferrel thing at the end of the movie". "THat there is a cool cameo at the end of the film">
Instead, you tell us that the surprise cameo is Mel Brooks. THat Ferrel recreates one of the songs in the movie.
SIgn me, the last time I EVER read an Enigma review.
Good film. Grade B. Not good enough to be incredible classic, like OLIVER, POPPINS. -
Nov 29, 2005 2:05:46 AM CST
I would rather people see the movie than a couple things people
by enigma boy
How much of a regular audience stays after the credits start? Maybe 15%. At least in L.A. And you know that, being an L.A. person. The surprise isn't what made it fun to me. I expected Brooks to show up. It's the respect I give him. So Michael, I'm not sure you want from me. A review just like every other asshole on the internet?
-
Nov 29, 2005 2:09:51 AM CST
And since when is a review defined by how much you can ADVERTISE
by enigma boy
I'd rather anaylze it. If Quint didn't put a spoiler emblem on the review, it ain't my fault. Ever read The New Yorker? They can't discuss a film WITHOUT giving away most of the plot. No, I'm not at New Yorker level by any means, but get out of Rotten Tomatoes just for a little bit.
-
Fist, LA audiences, more than ANY audience I have ever grown up with, stay around the longest for credits, as alot of the peeps in the audience are crew members who want to see their name in the credits. Secondly, why tell us SPECIFICALLY what the surprise were? Just say to the audience to hang aroud the creds for something cool. Bet you're the type who like to "guess" what's going to happen in a movie to the person sitting next to you, because you think it's cool to do (when, acutally, it's pretty damn annoying). Why tell us SPECIFICALLY about the Ferrell song? You spoiled the great joke for all. Thank GOD I saw the movie first and didnt read your review.
Any critic who gives away too much in a reiview simply suck at writing a review. Saw, if this is what NEW YOORKER does, they suck.
You think the audinece would KNOW Mel would be making a cameo? Come on. That was a great surpise. Spolied by your "review". -
Nov 29, 2005 3:05:13 AM CST
Nobody, NOBODY, other than the crew, really stays for the credit
by enigma boy
The remaining percentage are just respectful people. And I maintain that's the stuff isn't a surprise, because these people will now stay for the new song, the Will Ferrell song (how would "surprise" make this better?) and the cameo, which is for the fans EXCLUSIVELY. You are a fan. Others are not. I have a fuckin' degree in writing and have won awards for my reviews (just not here), and so far your only complaint is in giving away something, which I still believe is not necessarily a bad thing. Can you not enjoy a movie unless you blindly go into it?
To sum it up, those who are Brooks fans won't read this review, but for the nerds, this is just cementing their place during the considerably long closing credits. I am honestly very curious. My synopsis brings everyone up to speed on what the nearly 40-year-old film tells us already, and any comedy fan knows. So where in MY REVIEW is this a problem outside of what you say? I tell you what I like, what I don't like, and what in my knowledge works, with subjectivity working against objectivity. -
Nov 29, 2005 7:17:33 AM CST
So why do asshole reviewers insist on listing all the cameos?
by minderbinder
Fucking cut it out already.
-
I guess that makes me an asshole. I'll just blindly get fucked now.
-
That's the beauty of it. The fact that Will Ferrell sings a funny song we did not expect, the fact that it's in the credits is a great surprise. Only now you gave away the surprise, so, it's not much of a surprise anymore. Which sucks.
"You are a fan. Others are not."
WHAT? You are kidding me on this, right? Come on, dude. There are thousand of PRODUCERS fans out there, if not for the great Mel Brooks movie or the stage show, just the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of Mel Brooks fans out there makes them a fan of this movie.
"I have a fuckin' degree in writing and have won awards for my reviews (just not here), and so far your only complaint is in giving away something, which I still believe is not necessarily a bad thing."
Well, it's always very sad when someone has to justify themselves by screaming they have awards. For what? Free local newspaper writing contest?
"To sum it up, those who are Brooks fans won't read this review, but for the nerds, this is just cementing their place during the considerably long closing credits."
Wow. I stopped reading beyond this note. Thanks for cutting down many, many, many very cool Aint it Cool fans. Dude, you really need to leanr how to communicate, because, as of November 29, 2005, your commuincation skills truly bites ass.
-
...well said. This doe-doe loves to spoil it for all of you out there. THe beauty of a camoe is the surprise. A GOOD reviewer would have simply said, "And, there are some really cool cameos in this film!" Enigma decides to blow the wad for everyone by telling you who those cameos are.
Sucks. -
"Hey, let's go see THE PRODUCERS." "I don't think so. It looks like crap. I don't like that kind of movie." "But _____ is in it?" "_____? I love _____, especially on _____. Maybe that's indicative of the talent involved."
You don't have to agree, but I don't think cameos are defined by their surprise, but by who they are. Jesus. You don't have to go attacking. It. Is. Not. My. Fault. That. Quint. Didn't. Put. A. Spoiler. Warning. On. The. Article. -
I did not scream about my accomplishments, but I did simply because of the ad hominem attacks. I'm lame, so I don't have anything better to do than be on these boards, but do you?
That's the beauty of cameos FOR YOU. Don't represent everybody, because that's unfair.
It's like you'd rather people miss the final moments. -
You have a right to complain, and I should just shut up and let things end. Outside of my mention of cameos, you didn't complain about much, so I'll just leave it at that.
-
...puh-lease with the excuses already!
-
Pretty sad when a troll can even tell when a person cannot even write a decent, coherent review.
-
Nov 30, 2005 2:41:45 AM CST
Please, tell me, after my apology above, what is wrong with the
by enigma boy
Intro, set-up of critic's knowledge/personality, brief synopsis of opinion, detailed synopsis, more detail of likes and dislikes in short paragraph form that introduces a mixture of subjectivity and objectivity, conclusion. Or would you rather I write like Harry?
-
thanks a lot.. it's very good article.
Oyun | Okey | Oyunlar | Okey Oyna
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 439 total posts 159 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 144 total posts 142 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 155 total posts 140 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 55 total posts 45 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 196 total posts 45 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 35 total posts 35 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 34 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 127 total posts 32 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 513 total posts 29 posts
- The Sensorties Revisit The Friday Docback (And Still Smell)!! DOCTOR WHO Story #7 Again, The Coming Of Season/Series 7, And More!! -- 118 total posts 27 posts