So I saw the Producers last night..

[Cutielyricist]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 12:45pm

I ignored the bad reviews and the not so great word of mouth and headed down to downtown Disney to see this movie, looking for a well-adapted movie musical. I was really excited to see all the Broadway names and cameos. The theatre was about a quarter full when I got there...and at the end of the movie..perhaps 9 people remained. 9. And we were two of them...did they walk out because of all the singing? Did they walk out because it was too stagy? maybe they didn’t get some of the theatrically based jokes?

I don’t think so.

I think they walked out because they were bored.

Seriously, I almost walked out because I was bored.

What the hell was that? I went in there wanting to like it. I really wanted to like it. I wanted this to be a continuation of the movement that would save the "movie musical". I thought, well Phantom, and Rent couldn’t do it. However, here is a musical comedy. People will come to a musical comedy. Wrong.

Afterwards, I felt the same way I felt when I saw Phantom of the Opera, last year. "wow, that show had some great production values but I think they forgot they were making a movie" With stage based laugh pauses (that didn’t get much laughter) to the never realistic set pieces (were there any locations that were REAL in the movie? Everything LOOKED like a set. Everything felt like a play. In fact, it was so much like a play, that I actually felt BAD when nobody laughed during the pauses. It was just awkward, as if Matthew and Nathan were really there, hearing us not laughing...I wanted to yell, "pick up your cues and move on"

Not to say the performances weren’t wonderful. OMG there were some wonderful performances. Matthew and Nathan were great, Uma thurman, Will Ferrel, Roger Bart, and Gary Beach were amazing...so what was wrong with it?

they never got over their old joke. Every scene was played like "hey guys...look this is a movie, based on a play, based on a movie. wink wink, I'm gonna sing to you now. " Never was there a realistic element at all that made me care about the characters...

I'm going to regret saying this because people will think I’m just comparing..but I cared about the characters of Rent..here this will make my stance clearer..I cared about the characters of Phantom of the Opera (and I hated that movie) more than I cared about the characters in the Producers. The only reason I didn’t walk out, as most of the theatre did..is because I wanted to see the number "springtime for Hitler" after that..I spent the night playing "name that Broadway celeb" as they past by..and hoping it would all be over soon.

Certain sequences were AWESOME. Der Guten Tag Hop Clop, Keep it Gay, When you got it Flaunt it. Along Came Bialy (somewhat) and Springtime for Hitler. Between that.. awkward slapstick that didn’t really do much, forced humor with laugh pauses that were met with awkward silence..and my absolute favorite..GAPING HOLES of silence after each number...for applause maybe? Even if the 9 people that were left at this point had applauded, it would have sounded awkward and sad. Did I mention it was awkward?

The Producers was not a Movie.

Case in point. Look at RENT's streets. Realistic. CHICAGO's Jail. Realistic. PHANTOM's Theatre. Realistic. REEFER MADNESS neighborhood and locations. REALISTIC. HEDWIG's tour....even MOULIN ROUGE in all its extravagance had REAL locations.. It was very Rare during those movies that we felt..oh..thats a SET. Unless its intended.

Now look at PRODUCERS. Look at the cinematography. It was filmed like a sitcom. The same angle shots, never changing. Like a three camera sitcom. The same three shots on Will Farrell’s roof, the same right sweep in the producers office. The same angles, facing the judge and left wall mostly in the courtroom. The rooms were never complete rooms; the shots were never 360 locations. It was never a MOVIE.

So lets put that aside. As a show..wow....okay..all that stagy set style makes sense...Oh and those nervous twitches Matthew Broderick and Nathan Lane had were FUNNY cause those dramatic pauses in between allowed a person to laugh..and the show stopping numbers that were sold to the audience. they all made sense..take away that movie screen, the popcorn and put real people back in..that Makes sense..

I totally get it..this was supposed to be a movie, based on a show, based on a movie...but..like the few funny jokes, didn’t I already get that from the preview?

I love theatre..and Musicals are my life.. and I will gladly fork over the double-digit cash to see a live theatrical show. I will gladly pay the overpriced movie ticket prices for a good movie..

I went the the movie, really wanted to like it. I REALLY wanted to like it.

But last night, The Producers, wasn’t a movie. It was just cheap theatre.

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 12:51pm

well i'm not excited to see this movie anymore...
Updated On: 12/29/05 at 12:51 PM

[xxnewgirlxx]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 12:52pm

Interesting. I adored it. It was remnicient of old-time musicals. My friend and I had a great time in the audience.
Updated On: 12/29/05 at 12:52 PM

[sanda]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 12:55pm

you absolutely said it.

The shooting is unbearable. It is so amature. Susan Stronman has no idea how to direct a movie.

Rent is so much better.

[YankeeGal#24]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 12:56pm

I absolutely LOVED it, and so did the entire audience here (CT) at a Monday matinee! All ages. There was laughter, applause, and cheers THROUGHOUT the movie and NO ONE left until it was over. Even then, three "groups" stayed until the very very end of the credits. If you like Mel Brooks, you'll love it.

[Pippin]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 12:57pm

I thought the exact opposite about the set and location. when they wanted to make it look like it was a very artificial set, they did, and I loved the look. but what about "the we can do it" scene? they filmed that entire part in locations around central park. seemed pretty realistic to me...

[YankeeGal#24]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 12:59pm

"I thought the exact opposite about the set and location. when they wanted to make it look like it was a very artificial set, they did, and I loved the look. but what about "the we can do it" scene? they filmed that entire part in locations around central park. seemed pretty realistic to me..."

I agree with you Pippin. It's Mel Brooks! Its not supposed to be realistic or subdued or subtle. Its farce, cartoon-ish, different than "regular" comedies. Gotta just lighten up and get in the spirit of it. When you do, it's alot of fun!

[sanda]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 1:01pm

I watched the movie on 12/26. God knows how crazy the theatre was in that day. My room is half full and a lot of people left during the show. I have never seen so many ppl left before. (Maybe I only watch hot movies normally). There is very little laugh except one guy laughed histerically during every minute.

And I love the stage version and I really want to love the movie before I saw it.

I am not a Rent fan but I like the rent movie a lot more than this movie.

God knows I am really not picky. I enjoyed POTO movie very much. Updated On: 12/29/05 at 01:01 PM

[Danielm]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 1:20pm

Updated On: 12/29/05 at 01:20 PM

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 1:31pm

After seeing the movie Chicago a few years ago, I had such high hopes for both Rent and The Producers. I haven't seen either of these yet, but after reading such write-ups like yours, Cutielyricist, I'm having second thoughts.

[YankeeGal#24]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 1:32pm

I can understand having second thoughts, but see for yourself Dottie. There are plenty of people on this board, myself included, and not on this board, who LOVED the movie and plan to see it again!

Updated On: 12/29/05 at 01:32 PM

[broadway86]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 1:34pm

I really liked The Producers. I thought it was hysterical. While The Producers is more faithful to the source material, I think Rent is better because the actors and the filmmakers knew how to reign in the show to fit the screen. The numbers were, for the most part, beautifully realized.

[ToBeingAnUsForOnce]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 1:35pm

Well, I saw this movie yesterday, and the audience I was in (in Montreal) loved it! They laughed at all of the jokes and not one person left. Unfortunately, I never got the chance to see this on Broadway, so I thought that it was hilarious. My friend saw the play about two years ago and he said that it was funnier on stage.

I did notice that it looked more like a stage musical with a camera pointing at it. There were barely any movie-like camera angles. It felt like I was watching it on stage without really watching it on stage. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing for this movie.

[YankeeGal#24]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 1:36pm

"I did notice that it looked more like a stage musical with a camera pointing at it. There were barely any movie-like camera angles. It felt like I was watching it on stage without really watching it on stage. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing for this movie."

I think it takes some getting used to because its so unusual to have it shot that way, but personally, I liked it. Felt like having a really good orchestra seat in the theater!

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 1:38pm

Thanks, YankeeGal!

From what people are saying in terms of the camera angles, it seems very similar to the televised Gypsy production with Bette Midler. I love that show, but while viewing it, it seemed kind of flat.

[directorkid]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 1:39pm

I completely agree with Cutelyricist! I loved Moulin Rouge, Chicago, Rent, and Phantom (to a degree). Now i'm one of the few people who don't like the producers as a show (i think it's bland w/out Matthew and Nathan). But i was willing to go see the movie with a clean slate. I was completely bored by it! Matthew and Nathan look like they belong in an insane asylum (as did Gary and Roger) and whoever told Uma she could sing and dance should be shot! Will Ferrel was tolerable but still wasn't amazing. 'Springtime' was by far the best number! I would be shocked if this movie gets any nominations other than Song and Sound (just because it's a musical). 'Rent' has a talented cast, well defined characters, and when it really comes down to it Columbus had better material to work with than Stroman did. I though The Producers just took one step backwards from the budding genre of musical movies. Let's hope 'Dreamgirls' is good!

[sanda]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 1:40pm

After watching this movie, I realized how important a live audience is to some show. Without the laugh, the applause, the connection between the actors and the audience, this show is like going on without the orchestra.

[YankeeGal#24]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 1:43pm

"After watching this movie, I realized how important a live audience is to some show. Without the laugh, the applause, the connection between the actors and the audience, this show is like going on without the orchestra."

Then see it with another crowd, because at the one I attended, the audience was laughing and cheering and applauding THROUGHOUT!

ps You're welcome Dottie.

Updated On: 12/29/05 at 01:43 PM

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 1:48pm

I saw the film on Tuesday, and I loved it. And believe me, my expectations were low going in. I thought it was a well crafted, well performed, and genuinely fun film. Miles better than the Rent film. It was nice to see a film not take itself so seriously.
Updated On: 12/29/05 at 01:48 PM

[sanda]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 1:48pm

You misunderstand me. cutelyrics said it the best:

"So lets put that aside. As a show..wow....okay..all that stagy set style makes sense...Oh and those nervous twitches Matthew Broderick and Nathan Lane had were FUNNY cause those dramatic pauses in between allowed a person to laugh..and the show stopping numbers that were sold to the audience. they all made sense..take away that movie screen, the popcorn and put real people back in..that Makes sense.. "

PS:ditto, I love the TV version of Gypsy too. I love its faithful reflection of the stage version. But now I think it will look terrible in the big screen. To looked at the detail of Roger Bart's face is a miserable experience.

Maybe the Producers will be more suitable to DVD.

[Danielm]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 2:20pm

My experience was completely different than cutielyricist, I saw it on 12/24 at a 10:30 AM matinee. The theatre was about half full and nobody left. The audience laughed almost nonstop and applauded after the numbers. This was a very mixed (although urban) audience. We had a great time and most people stayed throught the credits.

Interestly, my brother-in-law and his wife went on the day after Christmas and loved it--and these are people who don't really go to the theatre that much.

I liked Rent although I don't think it was good. They HATED it feeling that it was about whiny people who think they shouldn't have to pay their rent.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but mine, and apparently most of the people I saw this movie with is that it was great fun.

Also, it seems like there is a sort of Rent vs. Producers thing happening on this board. It's like all these Rent people want Producers to flop even bigger than Rent did. I know cutielyricist says he's not a Rent fan but it seems like there is some schadenfreude or envy going on here.

Updated On: 12/29/05 at 02:20 PM

[kelly0ann]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 2:34pm

I LOVED it! I loved it for the exact reasons you didn't. I thought the staginess of it is what made it wonderful! It felt like you were watching a play on screen....what's wrong with that? Like newgirl said- It was reminicent of the old movie musicals, like Guys and Dolls, and Singin in the Rain. If you watch those, they are very stagey as well. Anyways, I guess that is why they make a lot of different kinds of movies...you can't always please everyone!

For what it's worth, everyone else in the theater loved it too. There were roars of laughter throughout the whole thing!

[stylinbohemian]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 2:39pm

I thought it was really well done! It was a fun movie that I loved it was campy, and everyone was laughing it was just a fun time

[Cutielyricist]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 4:15pm

i didnt say I wasnt a rent fan. I am very much a Rent fan. And a PRODUCERS fan. I have both cast albums and movie sountracks of both movies. I know both scores very well..I an a fan of both...And when Rent flopped I turned all my hopes to the Producers. I PUSHED to see the Producers last night when we were going to see other movies...and seriously regretted it. I didnt want the producers to flop. I REALLY wanted it to succeed.. But what ended up on screen really shouldnt have....and Im not using this forum to compare rent and producers..they are two differnt movies..and their only real similarity is that they are musicals..though different musicals. I used rent as a comparison because it succeeded in making believe the location they were in was REAL. The Producers just felt like a stage show.

[Cutielyricist]

Posted: 12/29/05 at 4:19pm

Its not a comparison. Rent had it's share of problems too. Rent was awesome. But it could have been AMAZING. Look at musicals like Chicago, or Hedwig. or even Moulin Rouge. Look at the artistry behind them. There were moments that screamed out.."now this is a movie musical!" Like the over the top Magic of Moulin Rouge, or the Staging Vs Realism of chicago. or Hedwigs use of music as in internal monologue...it was artisic...Rent had those moments..for me..it was Tango Maureen, or Without You.....but Rent could have taken it to the next level also..yes I feel Rent was a better MOVIE when it came to moviemaking..but it was by no means perfect.