The Producers

Plot synopsis:
=== Act I ===
In New York in 1959, theatre producer Max Bialystock opens "Funny Boy", a musical version of Hamlet ("Opening Night"). It is terrible, and the show closes after one performance. Max, who was once called the King of Broadway, tells a crowd of down-and-outs of his past achievements and vows to return to form ("King of Broadway").
The next day, Leo Bloom, a mousy accountant, comes to Max's office to audit his books. When one of Max's little old lady "investors" arrives, Max tells Leo to wait in the bathroom until she leaves. She plays a sex game with Max, who eventually persuades her to give him a check to be invested in his next play, to be called "Cash". Leo reveals his lifelong dream: he's always wanted to be a Broadway producer. After a panic attack when Max touches his blue blanket, Leo tells Max that he has found an accounting error in his books: Max raised $100,000 for "Funny Boy", but the play only cost $98,000. Max begs Leo to cook the books to hide the discrepancy. Leo reluctantly agrees. After some calculations, he realizes that "under the right circumstances, a producer could actually make more money with a flop than he can with a hit. ... You could've raised a million dollars, put on your $100,000 flop, and kept the rest!" Max proposes a scheme:
However, Leo refuses to help Max with his scheme ("We Can Do It"). When he arrives at work six minutes late, Leo's horrid boss, Mr. Marks, reminds him that he is a nobody. While he and his miserable co-workers slave over accounts, Leo daydreams of becoming a Broadway producer ("I Wanna Be a Producer"). He realizes that his job is terrible, quits, and returns to Max ("We Can Do It" (reprise)). The next day, they look for the worst play ever written. Max finds a sure-fire flop that would offend people of all races, creeds and religions: Springtime for Hitler: A Gay Romp with Adolf and Eva at Berchtesgaden, written by Franz Liebkind, which Max describes as "a love letter to Hitler". They go to the playwright's home in Greenwich Village to get the rights to the play. Ex-Nazi Franz is on the roof of his tenement with his pigeons reminiscing about the grand old days ("In Old Bavaria"). The producers get him to sign their contract by joining him in singing Adolf Hitler's favourite tune ("Der Guten Tag Hop Clop") and reciting the Siegfried Oath, under penalty of death, promising never to dishonor "the spirit and the memory of Adolf Elizabeth Hitler".
Next, they go to the townhouse of flamboyant homosexual Roger De Bris, the worst director in New York. At first, Roger and his "common law-assistant" Carmen Ghia decline the offer to direct because of the serious subject matter ("Keep It Gay"). After much persuading and invoking the possibility of a Tony award, Roger agrees and tells them the second act must be rewritten so the Germans win World War II. Max and Leo return to the office to meet a Swedish bombshell who wants to audition for their next play: Ulla Inga Hansen Benson Yansen Tallen Hallen Svaden Swanson. She auditions for them ("When You've Got It, Flaunt It"). The producers are impressed, mostly by her beauty, and hire her to be their "secretary-slash-receptionist". Max leaves to raise two million dollars for "Springtime for Hitler" by calling on all the little old ladies in New York ("Along Came Bialy"), which he does ("Act I Finale").
=== Act II ===
Leo and Ulla are left alone in Max's office (redecorated by Ulla), and they start to fall in love ("That Face"). Max walks in and sees the perfect form of Ulla's covered behind ("That Face" (reprise)).
At the auditions for the title role, Hitler, one terrible actor after another is rejected by Roger in summary fashion. Finally, Franz performs his own jazzy rendition of "Haben Sie Gehört Das Deutsche Band?", at the end of which Max stands up and shouts, "That's our Hitler!". Opening night arrives ("It's Bad Luck to Say 'Good Luck' on Opening Night"), and Franz falls down the stairs and breaks his leg. Roger is the only one who knows the part of Hitler, and he rushes to the dressing room to get ready. The curtain rises, and Max and Leo watch the theatrical disaster unfold ("Springtime for Hitler"). Unfortunately, Roger's performance is so camp and outrageous, the audience mistakes it for satire, and the show becomes the talk of the town. Back at the office, Max and Leo are near-suicidal ("Where Did We Go Right?"). Roger and Carmen come to congratulate them, only to find them fighting. Franz bursts in, waving a pistol, outraged by Roger's portrayal of his beloved Führer. Cowardly Max suggests that he shoot the actors, not the producers. The police hear the commotion and arrest Franz, who breaks his other leg trying to escape. They also arrest Max and take the accounting books. Leo hides; Ulla finds him and persuades him to take the two million dollars and run off to Rio with her.
In jail awaiting trial, Max receives a postcard from Leo and, feeling betrayed, recounts the whole show including the intermission ("Betrayed"). At his trial, Max is found "incredibly guilty"; but the now-married Leo and Ulla arrive to tell the judge that Max is a good man who has never hurt anyone despite his swindling ("'Till Him"). The judge is touched by this and decides not to separate the partners, sending both (plus Franz) to Sing Sing prison for five years. In prison, they write a new musical entitled Prisoners of Love, which goes to Broadway ("Prisoners of Love") (starring Roger and Ulla), and they are pardoned by the Governor. Leo and Max become the kings of Broadway and walk off into the sunset ("Leo & Max"). Everyone comes back for one last song, telling the audience that they have to leave ("Goodbye").
=== Differences between the 1968 film and stage musical ===
Although the musical includes many scenes and jokes taken from the film, there are many differences. The film was set in the present day of its year of release, 1968. The musical is set in 1959; consequently the character Lorenzo St. Dubois (LSD), a hippie who played Hitler, was omitted from the 2001 musical. In the original film, Max and Leo seek to procure $1,000,000; in the musical it has become $2,000,000. Ulla has a much larger role in the musical and is more than just the vapid actress of the movie. Franz Liebkind is portrayed more sympathetically and comes to a happier ending than his 1968 counterpart. Overall, the musical is more upbeat than the original film, which was a darker comedy.

Tags: entertaining, humor, murder

Review:
The Producers (2005) **** Nathan Lane, Matthew Broderick, Uma Thurman, Will Farrell, Gary Beach, Roger Bart Dir. Susan StromanI don't think the critics know what they are talking about.
Based on the 1968 film starring Zero Maestel and Gene Wilder, and the smash hit on Broadway, the story of a failing Producer named Max Bialystock who has just had the worst show in town close called Funny Boy, a musical version of Hamlet.
Step 4 Open on Broadway and before you can say step 5 they close and run off to Rio. All goes well until Springtime for Hitler becomes a success leaving Leo and Max in the dust.People have been comparing it to the original, which sure it has some of the same lines, and the story is the same, but both shows have something different to offer.
He sings "I Wanna Be A Producer" with such gusto and dances with Ms. Uma Thurman, who is amazing as Ulla, and their dance number has sheds of the old Astaire and Rogers's musicals of the 30s.Also excellent, are Will Farrell as the Nazi who speaks to his birds and Gary Beach and Roger Bart as Roger De Bris and Carmen Ghia they gay "couple" who want to put Springtime for Hitler on the stage, both stand out in the cast, and both played the roles on Broadway.
Other familiar faces you will see are Jon Lovitz as Leo's accounting firms boss, Michael McKean as one of the prisoners and Richard Kind as the Jury Foreman who took over in the Nathan Lane role on the stage.Susan Stroman doesn't make the camera cuts flashy, they are simple, which makes it more enjoyable to watch the dance numbers, from the opening number to the hilarious "Along Came Bialy" when the old ladies do a dance break with walkers, to "Keep it Gay" to the uproarious Springtime for Hitler number.
If you listen to some critics who choose to say "this film show inexperience" or "not as good as the original" you are missing a terrific movie musical that is just as good as Chicago!
This film is a sop to the musical comedy, with good performances from the leads, and Uma Thurman and Will Ferrell, who all appear to be enjoying themselves.The central (staged) number "Springtime for Hitler" is brilliantly choreographed, with suitably outrageous costumes.
I went to an advance screening and left with my jaw aching from all the laughing and grinning.At first, it felt the film was just the play in front of the camera, but the style eventually worked, turning the movie audience into a Broadway audience.
During the credits, it felt like a curtain call with applauds for each actor.So much fun and very deserving of the name Mel Brooks this film is great for the holidays (with the more adult jokes being concealed in song, and only minor swearing) older children and teenagers should get a kick out of this fast paced, fun, and very memorable film.Also, just a bit of advice: stay until the end of the credits..
Unfortunately it didn't live-up to my expectations on a number of fronts.Most fundamentally, it seemed more of a cinematic rendering of the stage show than a remake of the movie - the problem is that it utterly lacks the charm of the 1968 film, and fails to capture the excitement and energy of the show.
Though, I wonder if it was a good idea to keep the leads from Broadway - playing a part on stage is very different from doing the same thing in a movie.
This is at the heart of what is wrong with this movie - it is trying to be cinematic and theatrical at the same time.Also, they have cut some of the funniest scenes and changed some of the best lines from the original.
It was a fun time from beginning to end.While his portrayal of Leo Bloom was too much like Gene Wilder's, Matthew Broderick was simply divine when dancing.
First, there was Mel Brooks' clever movie "The Producers." That got adapted into a Tony-winning stage musical.
When I first saw Mel Brooks 'The Producers' I thought it was a stage play adapted into a movie not the other way round that it became.
If you have seen the original, then you notice just how little effort the actors made other than giving pale imitation of the Zero Mostel/Gene Wilder blue print that makes the 2005 version look like an overacted summer pantomime.
The same can be said for Nathan Lane - a pretty good impression of Zero Mostel - as if these actors viewed the tape of this movie a hundred times until they got it down.
Comparing the work of Nathan Lane, Matthew Broderick and Will Ferrell in this film to the brilliantly hysterical performances of Zero Mostel, Gene Wilder and Kenneth Mars in the original movie is like saying that apples are an apropos metaphor for describing elephants.
This movie doesn't work and its existence in the theaters (hopefully not for too long) is a masochistic slap in the face at the very best film that Mel Brooks ever crafted.
This is one of the few films I have tossed in the trash after I finished watching it.If you like over-acting, flamboyance, Broadway on the silver screen, and people trying hard to be funny, but coming off as obnoxious, desperate, and overall plain stupid, then you will like this.I honestly do not see what humor people are finding in this, and it's not that I don't get it.
I like musicals; I love Nathan Lane and like pretty much every other actor in this; I thought the original movie was funny but didn't remember it that well.
I couldn't get to the end of this movie.The musical aspect of this play was perhaps the biggest spoiler, while the songs were clearly supposed to be entertaining they were instead irritating and the lyrics seemed to resemble something along the lines of particularly unoriginal.And as someone else stated: "the Hitler scenes are, as the initial "audience" said, tasteless.".
Overall, I think I smiled twice, hence the two stars.In short, "The Producers: The Movie Based on the Play" gets no points for comic or musical accomplishment.
A lot of critics said they thought this movie was not so good because they remembered the original movie or had seen the play, but I've not done either, so I'm just judging this specific film.It's overacted, the songs aren't memorable, the way too cheesy-easy joke lines are tedious, and etc.
We painfully sat through 3/4 of the movie and absolutely could not finish it.We had high-hopes for this film, thinking a Mel Brooks comedy is always good.
I had heard rave reviews of the original from 1968 by Mel Brooks.This movie gives musical films a bad name.
And in modern extreme closeups, this kind of extravagant mugging looks amateurish and clownish - or like having some kind of seizure.Perhaps the success of the Broadway show so great that no-one had the guts to say that this pathetic filmization just is not funny.But it is wheezy, clumsy, tedious and v-e-r-y v-e-r-y l-o-n-g with even more of the sub-adolescent crudities that have stained much of Mel Brooks's later work.Maybe it's my problem but repeated erection gags ceased to be hilarious when I was about 12.I really wanted (and expected) to love this film (as I do the Mostel/Wilder original); I hated it and still find it hard to believe that I considered walking out after about 10 hair-raisingly awful minutes..
Will Ferrell is really funny, Uma shines through and Broderick and Lane make a great pair for this movie there's even 20 minutes of hilarious outtakes on the DVD..
Now on to Nathan Lane, who really really is the star of this movie and he proves it, with a great comedic performance, great singing, he too was good enough for the Oscar nomination at least i feel.Apart from some camera problems, the music is catchy and fun, the movie is a laughing riot, everyone performed very well.
While the Producers stage show did get much critical acclaim, and this could be a good sign for this great film!After a year of pure crap, finally some light at the end of the tunnel...
As a fan of Mel Brooks, the original film and the Chicago & NY productions, I went into the screening with the mindset of comparing/contrasting it to the other experiences that I enjoyed so much.
but Uma & Will did a good job and definitely have more Hollywood power.After leaving the theater I realized that maybe what I just experienced was a genuinely fun musical movie, the likes of which I had never experienced growing up...
I just adore Uma Thurman, but she can't sing and is going to waste here.The musical numbers go on and on ad nauseum and are dead-boring other than "Springtime for Hitler in Germany".If you've not seen the original, then go find it and watch it instead of this uninspired drivel.
This version is based on the multi-award-winning Broadway musical, which was based on the original movie starring Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder.
The numbers "I Wanna Be A Producer" and "That Face" show that she really does rank up there with the great choreographers of movie and Broadway history.Many people ask why film this version?
Matthew Broderick, let me tell you, is not as bad as the critics would have you believe, Leo Bloom is actually quite a difficult character to play with all his neurosis es and such like and Gene Wilder did a great job, but, so did Broderick, especially in the musical numbers.
"I want to be a Producer" is fabulous, the choreography is outstanding and Broderick is awesome and best of all he looks like he's having a real fun time, his expression throughout that number is just a joy, completely genuine.
Having watched the mess that was "Moulin Rouge" this was, in my personal view, entertainment at it's best, not pretentious or big and clever but an excellent transferring of Lane/Broderick/Beach and Bart's stage performances.
I saw the stage musical in London and just seen the screen musical and it is a pale copy of the original Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder movie.
Both Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick are good but no where near as good as the originals.The songs are totally forgettable (except Springtime for Hitler)and the direction looked small when a musical should be BIG!One can get away with a lot on stage because of the set constraints but in a movie one has no such restriction.Uma Thurman was however a bright star in this movie.
I feel that the song Betrayed worked so well on stage, but here is not as good, and I think audiences might get bored with it, should have been shortened and King of Broadway should have been Nathan's big number, especially for the film version.
In any case, I had them thrown out (not the the specific remarks, but I hate people talking during movies, especially annoying teenagers who can't respect others).Eileen Essell, who played the hilarious tenant in Duplex and is in many movies these days, was brilliant as "Hold Me, Touch Me." She's one great actress in demand.I feel some of the good numbers were really opened up, especially the old lady number, and I don't agree with those who say everything was done exactly like the stage.
I sure wish this type of treatment was done to more stage musicals (like Miss Saigon or La Cage Aux Folles).The Producers is a great movie and I will buy the DVD and I know it will be played often.
Not having been able to afford to pay the exorbitant prices being asked by the producers of "The Producers", now running for a few years at the St. James theater on Broadway, we waited for the release of the film based on the musical that is based on the original 1968 film written and directed by Mel Brooks.
The film, while not a total failure, could have used a different treatment as it plays flat at times.In theory, "The Producers" was the right candidate for making the transfer to the screen since it involved the same director, Susan Stroman, and the two principals, Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick, who were paid a cool million each to come back to the show, last winter, when sales were lagging because the substitute actors weren't pulling in the crowds the original stars did.
This pair of charismatic actors are seen in the film doing their own shtick.Uma Thurman is fine as the long limbed Swedish secretary in a fun role that seems to be the only thing right in the movie.
after 10 minutes i couldn't take it.i have only walked out of 2 movies my whole life the cat in the hat remake, and this me and my sister went to see "The Ringer" after leaving "The Producers", because it was playing in the next theater and remarkably i found a person pretending to be mentally challeneged so he can win his gambling uncle enough money to stay alive and get his friends thumb back much more humorous and enlightening then this pathetic excuse for a movie/musical/whatever you want to call it i wish i could cuss in this comment because this thing deserves every negative comment given 2 it.
I can picture both Matthew Broderick and Nathan Lane intently studying the reels of Gene Wilder and Zero Mostel to get pinpoint accuracy.If it's so true to the original then why, you ask, would anyone bother watching the remake?For the same reason we rush out to buy the digitally remastered versions of our favorites.
It has some great dance numbers with nice moves had by all.All of this has the effect of making "The Producers" (2005) more like the extravagant musical comedies that made Mel famous in the 70s.
Any person with a half a brain can see that isn't true.Also to the people who are mad that Nathan Lane & Matthew Broderick are (in your opinions) inferior to Zero Mostel & Gene Wilder, therefore this is a "pointless remake"....Newsflash You Old Farts: its SUPPOSE to be different from the '68 version!
Nathan Lane & Matthew Broderick both have beautiful singing voices & you empathize for their down-&-out neurotics, Max & Leo.If you're a more macho Mel Brooks fan I could understand if you don't like this version...
the stage is an important part of a musical, so it only makes sense that like a time honored actor, that the stage makes an appearance on film as well.i think it was great- and if you haven't seen it and plan to go see it, i recommend you stay through the entire credits--- ALL the way through to the end.
Originally a film made in 1968 and starring Zero Mostel, The Producers was later adapted into an incredibly successful Broadway musical.
The Broadway version of The Producers is one of the funniest and most refreshing stage musicals to date, bringing together some excellent and memorable songs, entertaining dance numbers and some witty lines that only Mel Brooks could write.
The music, the lyrics, watching Nathan Lane play a straight guy, and Matthew Broderick's incredible performance has lifted this to the top of my Mel Brooks' favorite movie list.I've seen them all, and can quote most, but the music from the 2005 version just can't be beat.
When we went on a plane trip, I was listening to the soundtrack mouthing the lyrics and hoped no one could tell what I was doing.Everyone who knows Mel Brooks is familiar with the Springtime for Hitler song, but I can't stop laughing when it goes into "Heil to Me..." As a terrible student of German and the granddaughter of Holocaust survivors, one wouldn't think this to be politically correct.However, I saw the original movie before high school, and knew that the remake had to be at least as good.
I thought the stage musical adapted from Mel Brooks' classic 1968 film was terrific and if anything even more outrageous than the movie.
Uma, God love her, doesn't have the chops or the dancing skills to put over Ulla's big number, though the film makers do use her height to humorous advantage.I love the original film, but I don't worship it like some others, so I'm not as averse to playing with the material, and I didn't feel the need to compare Nathan Lane's and Matthew Broderick's performances to those of Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder.
I felt like I was actually watching an old movie musical with Mel Brooks's politically incorrect humor inserted everywhere.
if you love musicals and love Mel Brooks and love good old fashioned comedy, go see this movie!
I haven't heard audiences laugh out loud in a movie theatre like that in a long time.I don't believe these critics who don't see it as a filmed valentine.
This new version of the film is just the same, Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick are fantastic in the lead roles.Uma Thurman is also up there with a great performance, if this is the first time she has danced and sung in a film lets have more, great legs!
Ask me to name my favourite movie of all time, and Mel Brook's 1968 film "The Producers" will be right there at the top of my list.
Matthew Broderick, whose face is frozen in terror during his dance moves, shows the weakness of casting movie stars in Broadway musicals but he faithfully recreates his stage performance here.Of the supporting roles cast with film stars, Will Ferrell holds his own against even Lane in his scene chewing performance as Nazi playwright Franz Liebkind.
I had great expectations of this movie; after all, I had watched the original 1968 version and enjoyed it very much.