Producers Trailer Here, Seriously- Page 5
Producers Trailer Here, Seriously
King of Broadway?#100
Posted: 9/21/05 at 5:10pmI cannot wait for this movie, and Uma Thurman looks fabulous!
King of Broadway?#101
Posted: 9/21/05 at 5:15pm
I think that King of Broadway is IN because of the dancing...there's no way you could dance with out the "WHO DO YOU HAVE TO F**K TO GET A BREAK IN THIS TOWN" first.
Also, is that Gary Beach who falls into the couch?
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/15/04
King of Broadway?#102
Posted: 9/21/05 at 5:30pm
i think its matthew falling into the couch, i know in the tv spot (broadway) with roger and brad roger does that same move.
also someone conjectured that "when you got it flaunt it" was replaced... i believe the underscoring of that scene, much like other parts of the credits sequence are underscored with a variation on "duetche band" since it blends right into when they say "and will ferrell" and her starts singing
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/15/04
King of Broadway?#103
Posted: 9/21/05 at 5:30pm
i think its matthew falling into the couch, i know in the tv spot (broadway) with roger and brad roger does that same move.
also someone conjectured that "when you got it flaunt it" was replaced... i believe the underscoring of that scene, much like other parts of the credits sequence are underscored with a variation on "duetche band" since it blends right into when they say "and will ferrell" and her starts singing
King of Broadway?#104
Posted: 9/21/05 at 5:38pmWait a minute! Is "When You've Got It..." not in the movie?
King of Broadway?#105
Posted: 9/21/05 at 5:40pmI think Uma looks fabulous! Am I the only one who thinks that her face when Nathan says "a standing ovation" is priceless? The way she goes "oooOOOhh!" I laughed so hard! I'm excited.
ulla#106
Posted: 9/21/05 at 5:41pm
WHEN YOU'VE GOT IT. is DEFINITELY in the movie.
People who saw the first preview said the song is in, including "Ulla Belt." 
I doubt they would cut it.
ulla#107
Posted: 9/21/05 at 5:42pm
Am I the only one who thinks that her face when Nathan says "a standing ovation" is priceless?
I thought her faces were hysterical. She looks lighter than air in this role.
Thanks, ljay! Have you heard any thoughts on her singing voice?
ulla#108
Posted: 9/21/05 at 6:06pm
Well this person said her singing was good. But they thought it seemed unrealistic that it was her singing on the belt parts. But if she was dubbed on the belty parts, I'm sure we would find out soon.
I am actually more concerned how she would handle her little parts in the ALONG CAME BIALLY (Act 1 finale) Because I don't consider Ulla an alto role. And she sings pretty high on that song, well it seems like it would be high for a "non singer."
Updated On: 9/21/05 at 06:06 PM
Broadway Star Joined: 1/8/05
ulla#109
Posted: 9/21/05 at 6:52pmwho in god's name is jai rodriguez playing? i have yet to see the show....
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/20/04
ulla#111
Posted: 9/21/05 at 6:54pmSabu, one of Roger Debris' many servants. He is in a very revealing Arabian costume. There is a line with his name in it during the song "Keep it Gay"- (In rhythm)"Sabu!!! Champagne!! Ahhhhhh!" Not a large part, not even a minor supporting role. He's pretty much just a cameo, same with Jon Lovitz, Andrea Martin, and Debra Monk.
ulla#112
Posted: 9/21/05 at 9:11pm
But if she was dubbed on the belty parts, I'm sure we would find out soon.
Hmmm... I hope that she is not dubbed. If Nicole Kidman can squeak out a high E, than I imagine that Uma can. *crosses figners*
ulla#113
Posted: 9/21/05 at 9:41pm
I was only moderately excited for this film until now...
Will Ferrell already had me peeing my pants.
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/20/04
ulla#114
Posted: 9/21/05 at 9:44pm
i think its interesting that the credits went from
Nathan Lane Matthew Broderick
The Producers the new Mel Brooks Musical
to
Nathan Lane Matthew Broderick
Uma Therman Will Ferrel
The Producers
Gary Beach Roger Bart and Jon Lovitz
Didn't someone say it seems theyre touting it as a non-musical?
Broadway Star Joined: 10/11/04
ulla#115
Posted: 9/21/05 at 10:10pmI feel like they are trying to downplay the "musical" of this movie. The total opposite approach to the marketing of the RENT film, I might add. I wonder which one is the better road to take?
ulla#116
Posted: 9/22/05 at 12:20amWell, at least we know The King of Broadway was shot! As for downplaying that it's a musical, at least you know there are musical numbers in it. There were a lot of complaints about Chicago not being advertised as a musical (all that jazz played at the end). And that was very successful. I was talking to mmy friend about this earlier. I really hope that they don't plan to rely on the stage show's popularity. Look at how the Phantom film flopped, despite being consistantly sold out for the past 17 years. The Producers doesn't even fill the St. James and is usually on TKTS. and it will be competing more with King Kong (which I don't think will be as big as everyone else thinks it will be)than with RENT. I'm looking forward to seeing it, but I think the studios are afraid to market musicals, period! We shoiuld have seen this trailer in July.
Broadway Legend Joined: 2/20/04
ulla#117
Posted: 9/22/05 at 1:22amThe trailer for Phantom of the Opera also contsained NO SINGING whatsoever. The Producers trailer at least shows some of the musical numbers.
ulla#118
Posted: 9/22/05 at 7:24am
What on earth? Just because all of the underscoring didn't consist of singing, it doesn't mean they're trying to underplay the musical aspect of the movie. I'm not going to wait half an hour for the trailer to download again, but I remember the "King of Broadway" choreography coming early on, and clips of both Broderick and Ferrel singing, the former complete with a cane, chorus girls, and red curtain.
Very strictly speaking, the material of Rent is more Oscar-catching (note I didn't say Oscar-worthy) stuff than that of The Producers. Comedies have been almost completely ignored by the Academy over the past few...is it decades? Well, as long as I remember, in any case. However, the stage production of The Producers handles its material much, much better than does that of Rent. I don't know if the same will be true of the movies, but my instinct is that it will be.
But really, why even have this argument? I doubt either movie will even be nominated for anything except minor Oscars. More importantly, while the Academy has questionable taste in its beloved dramas, its preferences when you go outside that genre are even more distorted and untrustworthy. Don't act like awards are any measure of quality, especially in the ignored and misunderstood area of musicals.
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/18/04
Musings#119
Posted: 9/22/05 at 10:16am
King of Broadway is in the movie. Remember, the people who saw the previews were chosen specifically because they had not seen the stage show and were not big fans of musicals. The guy simply left it out of his write-up.
As for the trailer not being musical enough, there is certainly enough music and dancing to let you know it's a musical AND they are trying to attract an audience for the comedy. You can't compare this to RENT because RENT is just that...a musical...whereas The Producers is trying to attract a musical audience AND a comedic audience so they have to get in plenty of sight gags and one liners. Stroman and Brooks have also said that they do not want to do the techno, hybrid version of musicals these days (ala Moulin Rouge and Chicago) but rather revert to the old-fashioned way of filming a musical. So the trailer will seem old-fashioned to some. I think it represents the stage show well and since the stage show was based on the old movie, you will see echoes of both throughout this new version. I'm anxious to see the U.S. version of the trailer, to see if they've edited it to attract the U.S. versus international audience tastes.
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/12/03
Musings#120
Posted: 9/22/05 at 11:05am
Old-movie-musical geek that I am, I couldn't help hoping that the trailer would have been more like one from the classic years: glowing with phosphorescent Technicolor and bursting with song and dance from the start (hence my first post oin this thread). But those trailers (and the films they trumpeted) date from a time when songs from Broadway and Hollywood dominated the Hit Parade (when did the "Hit Parade" stop, anyway?), and the music from them was something to be celebrated and marketed (I won't get into the whole story of eviscerated Broadway scores in Hollywood transfers...)
For all the talk about the "revival of the film musical", the fact remains that the core audience of films (18-35 year old males) LOATHE musicals. Changing times call for sneakier marketing. CHICAGO'S trailer emphasized the films sex-and-violence. The PRODUCERS trailer emphasize the comedy. The fact that it has as much music as it does is actually fairly surprising, even radical.
Broadway Legend Joined: 2/4/04
Musings#121
Posted: 9/22/05 at 12:50pm
"The fact that it has as much music as it does is actually fairly surprising, even radical."
I was suprised too Master, and overjoyed!
There was something really "right" about the trailer for me, it brought back that giddy feeling I had when I first saw the show during it's first few previews.
Musings#122
Posted: 9/22/05 at 3:19pm
I love the trailer -its aesthetics are very reminscent of the original film and I don't think that it downplays its musical qualities at all -they show singing and dancing and it seems very clear to me that the show is a MUSICAL.
I don't like Will Ferrell much, but he is pretty good for this role.
I'm so excited!
Musings#123
Posted: 9/23/05 at 12:28amI dont think it down plays the musical side of the who at all. But I do believe they have augmented the goofy aspect of the show. It would seem it has a slightly Austin Powers/Deuce Bigalow appeal to lure a younger crowd.
Musings#124
Posted: 9/23/05 at 12:28amI dont think it down plays the musical side of the who at all. But I do believe they have augmented the goofy aspect of the show. It would seem it has a slightly Austin Powers/Deuce Bigalow appeal to lure a younger crowd.
Videos
