Why do people think The Producers movie is so bad?? — Page 2

Hi NLS! I loved this movie. It was intentionally directed "over-the-top". A throw-back to the old MGM musicals. Even the original film is "stagey", so none of that bothered me in the film. Everyone I've shown it to has also loved it. It still makes me laugh and everyone looks like they are having a great time. It was not a surprise to anyone that it wasn't a hit. They shot it quickly and cheaply and had a great time doing it!

Even with its faults, its better to have something than nothing.

(in my humble opinion...)

---

"They would have just been better off taping the shows (like Piazza) and putting it on TV"

FWIW, rentboy, Piazza was not taped and shown, but rather broadcast live, with no intention of it's ever being shown again.

Didn't care much for the musical The Producers so no suprise I didn't care for the movie. What little charm the live version held for me was completely lost in the translation.

Love the Broadway version of Chicago, but really disliked the movie. Chicago without Fosse choreography? No thanks.

I thought this movie was horrible because of the overacting. And I might get jumped on for saying this but I am not the biggest fan of Matthew Brodrick however I do like Nathan Lane. It took me awhile to even watch it all the way through to be honest. Its weird, because this is the only one that has come out recently that I didn't fall in love with. Loved Chicago, Rent (of course), and Phantom.

---

One plus:

You get to see Brent Barrett all ripped with his jacked open and wearing some kick-a$$ leather pants. *swoon*

I really liked it but for me, the weak links were Broderick and Thurman. Broderick didn't bother toning down his stage-acting for the cinema, which made him look far too OTT, and while Thurman certainly acted the hell out of the role and was undeniably adorable, her singing voice wasn't exactly right for the songs.

Also, I wish they'd left in 'The King Of Broadway'. ;_;

---

I loved the film.

I'm tired of all the criticism over it being a filmed representation of the stage show. That's one of the things I loved about it. Isn't that the point? When movie musicals go their own direction, they get flack for not being true to the show or "like the original." Now that a musical was finally filmed in a way that completely honored the stage production that inspired it, the critics and many fans are unhappy.

Again, I loved the film.

I enjoyed The Producers movie. I thought it was hilarious, although I haven't seen the stage show, so I can't compare. The movie did have its flaws, though. I thought that the way some of the songs were done was strange. That Face, where Matthew sings staring at the camera, comes to mind. I know that during the commentary Susan Stroman said that the idea behind this was that Leo is speaking directly to the audience. That kind of stuff is great for live theatre, where you have that intimate connection with the audience, but I don't think it works in a movie.

Also some of the pauses were strange. The one that really sticks out for me is at the end of Betrayed, before it cuts to the courtroom scene. I also agree that they should have kept the the extra scenes in Along Came Bialy to give a sense of what really happened.

---

We have been down this road before, but since you asked.

1. Brooks wanted to film a faithful adaptation of the stage musical for people who never got to see it. While those of us who have seen the stage show may have already known all the punch lines etc., this movie was made to capture the performances of the actors who did the original roles on Broadway(only wish Cady Huffman and Brad Oscar had captured theirs).

2. In the genre of the old fashioned musical movies, the film was done with a lot of closeups, rich color and over the top performances (again this was what Brooks wanted - not the mark of poor direction by Stroman). You may not agree with his choices, but then it is HIS money AND Universal's money (who by the way was very happy with the returns.

3. The movie is still opening in a few selected countries but in U.S. and international release and with DVD rental returns alone (WITHOUT including DVD sales) it has already made back its investment. It was never intended to be a huge movie and god knows movie musicals will probably never bring in the big bucks again. But it didn't TANK, as people are prone to report. It did quite well considering Universal didn't do much to promote it.

---

Brad Oscar was originally signed to play Franz but he chose to stay with the show as Max on broadway so they got Will (Smart move!) Don't get me wrong! I LOVE Brad but Will brought in other people besides broadway fans!

And Nicole Kidman was originally going to play Ulla but droped it for some HUGE flop movie in Austrailia!

---

I read it from an interview with Mel Brooks! He said Brad was going to be in it as Franz but Brad chose to stay out so he could play Max on broadway! He did make a cameo as the Taxi driver!

---

Just an observation: People use the "!" way too much. One will suffice, and even then, you don't need to use it in every sentence.

"The cinematography is a little too made-for-TV"
---> I think that's why I didn't like it. It just didn't "feel" like a movie. The sets looked too much like "sets" and not a real place. It didn't seemed to be set in reality, I didn't like that. If they should have cut anything, they should have cut the old lady number or at least done it like a "fantasy." Although, my parents loved it, but I didn't think it was as funny as the stage show.

Well, that's what I meant but I thought it was HIS choice to stay with the show on broadway!

---