To see what March's challenge looked like click here.
1. Participants suggest one film for the entire challenge. That…
After putting together another Broadway flop, down-on-his-luck producer Max Bialystock teams up with timid accountant Leo Bloom in a get-rich-quick scheme to put on the world's worst show.
The Producers isn't the best film made. Not even close. Not the best musical, not the best Broadway-to-film adaptation. Not nearly the best Mel Brooks movie. It bombed at the box office and got some pretty bad reviews. It has parts that drag on and some of the songs are boring as all hell. It doesn't hold a candle to the 1968 original.
But, for reasons I can’t put words too, I love it. So much! And I don’t know why. I saw it on a whim in a full theater, maybe that did it. There’s a real difference between watching a film alone at home and with sharing with a room full of people. The jokes are funnier, the…
This was still somewhat fun on a re-watch, but not everything worked for me. Broderick was terrible as Bloom (I believe he was a lot better in the actual musical), the acting itself was too slapstick-ey, the puns and other humor was very hit or miss as well, with a runtime with over 2 hours it was way too long, and most importantly for a musical comedy the songs were very uneven. Strange enough, I thought Will Ferrell was hilarious.
I really don't enjoy musicals. So watching this was like two hours of torture. It was crass and unfunny, I felt extremely uncomfortable watching this, spontaneous song and dance makes my skin crawl. I was grimacing every time Matthew Broderick was on screen fellating his scabby blanket. I only laughed once, it was more of a half smile and that was only at two words or dialogue. ("Heil ... me.")
The story is about two producers who intentionally make a terrible play so they can cash in on the projects surplus funding. I think the producers of this film had the same idea. They succeeded in making the worst film, the making money part not so much.
This review reportedly contains spoilers. I can handle the truth.
Hmmmmmm so very very tricky to decide here, what can I say...I enjoyed this as a stand alone film on its own, and when not compared to the original. As a stand alone farce its a great piece of comedy but of course it so difficult not to think and look back to the original material.
To be honest this is a classic example of a remake that, in terms of the movie, didn't succeed in doing anything other than show you should never try to remake a classic. Of course because of the flick there was a big renewed interest in the forgotten classic and a very popular theatre show, which is all good as its perfect for the…
The majority of the musical numbers are highly enjoyable, but the scenes in between those numbers exist between "inspired old-school shtick" and "bizzaro reanimation of a beloved friend." Will Ferrell is a real treat.
It's just not good... There isn't much else to say. As much as I would love to NOT be one of those people to say "stick with the original" I feel like in this case it's kind of a given. Mel Brooks had a hand in this film and there are moments where his greatness shines bright through the overbearing mediocrity. I am not a HUGE fan of the original or musicals in general, but this one got a lot of the musical scenes down decently enough. I found that I was having fun and tapping my toe one minute and being frustrated and bored the next. Nathan Lane no matter what…
Re-watch. Hadn't seen this in ages. Still love this film/musical so much!
I think the stage show is even more fun. Very glad I got to see it live in London once. With Reece Shearsmith as Leo. <3
No idea why this movie got poor reviews. This is exactly how Broadway shows should be made into films. Stroman's direction was spot-on and Lane and Broderick are hilarious. A must-see for musical lovers.
I had never seen the play, and didn't know the story. All I knew was that Mel Brooks had successfully resurrected his '78 film starring Gene Wilder on Broadway, and now putting back to film in a much shinier package. I liked it, though not in a big way. It passed the time nicely.
There are a few genuine laugh out loud moments, but at 130 minutes, you feel the length of the musical at times. Broderick and Lane hold your attention for the film, though. They’re great as the producers trying to scheme making a bundle of money from a flop.
They find the worst script ever "springtime for Hitler", penned by neo Nazi Will Ferrell (back in a…
A guilty pleasure of mine. This is not a good film. Oh no, this is a bad film. Boringly shot, boringly edited, and we now have Matthew Broderick instead of Gene Wilder. The songs are good though, and I like it enough for that to let it just scrape by with three stars from me. Pleasant background music while you do something else, at least.
What the actual fuck did I just watch.
When you cross the original 1968 film with the broadway musical you get a lukewarm bastardization of the two.
i fucking love this movie
Having now seen the original I now know this is a much inferior film, although I liked it the first time I watched it years ago!
Fun fun Fun... but a little slow at times.
The costume set and screenplay is beautiful and tongue in cheek. However I did feel at times i wanted to usher it along, some of the scenes do drag on a bit detracting slightly from the light hearted nature if the story.
Defiantely worth a watch but do so with patience.
I'm a hoarder. Deal with it.
Current number: 1012
Watched: 53% (540 out of 1012)
Shamelessly ripped off from Adam Cook's list. 100 films that aren't necessarily bad, but which I hate. With a passion.