My Favorite Version


I prefer this version of The Producers the newer version. Don't get me wrong; I enjoy both immensely, but this one just has that extra special "something". I've thought about it, and have come up with the reasons I prefer this one.


* Leo Bloom. I think Gene Wilder did a much better job at portraying Leo's hysterics. The line of "you're going to jump on me like Nero jumped on Popeiia" makes me laugh every time. Then, of course, the jumping that Max does makes more sense. I found Matthew Broderick's acting to be a little wooden in the role, albeit his singing was excellent.

* Roger de Bris. Forgive me that I do not recall the actors' names who portrayed this character. I found that the character of Roger de Bris is great when he is underplayed. The newer version seemed to make him more flamboyant, so the big reveal of the character is less shocking.

* Lorenzo St. Dubois. This character made the movie, in my opinion. His auditioning song was so bizarre and weird, that he made a perfect character. His forgetting his own name was priceless as well. Of course, when he becomes the lead character, his insanity leaks out, and makes the play a freakish comedy. When I first watched this movie, I got a headache from laughing so hard. I didn't find the new version to be as funny without this character.

* Springtime for Hitler. I found the few clips of the play worked very well, and were very funny, primarily because of LSD. The new version, because it's a musical, added more scenes and choreographed it more, but seems to have been watered down a little. It feels like this version was still so close to the events in question, that there's a little more tension in it than in the newer version, where more liberties could be taken.

All in all, I enjoy both versions, but this one is my personal favorite.

Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.

reply

I'd say you're right, anything with Gene Wilder (and Zero Mostel, like did you ever see him in 'The Front'?), has got to be better than the re-make, w/ Matthew Broderick. Not that he's a bad actor, but, can you imagine anybody but Gene Wilder doing Willie Wonka? I can't! Gene just has a timeless aura about him; sadly, he may be retired or in his mid-70's and may not be with us much longer.



http://www.amazon.com/shops/AYDW214JE6WE6

reply

Well, he had 6 more good years. Oh, and Johnny Depp.

reply

There's something a little more... positive about the musical that waters down the original film's vulgar edge in my opinion. I enjoyed the musical much more on stage than on the screen. I can't really explain why. There was something static and lifeless about the musical numbers that made them seem boring. I guess if your first exposure to the musical was the movie you might not have had this problem. I think they might as well have just filmed the stage musical and released it in theaters, like they recently did with Stephen Sondheim's Company. Hardly anybody laughed at my screening of the movie and some people even walked out. The film was also about thirty minutes too long. The play had this problem too, but at least there was an intermission.

The Indians are coming! Quick, put your scalp in your pocket! -Groucho Marx

reply

on Boxing day, I found its 2-disc collectors edition in a pile of DVDs for only $4.99
I picked it up, as if it were a holy scroll of some sort. I recall a man looking over at me, possibly wondering what he failed to recognize in the pile.

I found there were too many songs in the remake - this version was just fine. Gene Wilder is hilarious, and for those who like him I recommend 'Stir Crazy'.

Treat each day as if it were your last. Please be a child sponsor for World Vision.

reply

While I enjoyed the musical remake, the original was better imo.

- Gene Wilder is a superior actor than Matthew Broderick. Broderick's overacting often didn't work that well.
- Lee Meredith had more sex appeal than Uma Thurman.
- Kenneth Mars played the Nazi as more angry compared to Will Ferrell. This was more appropriate. Ferrell seemed too sympathetic.

As for the story, in the original, the "Springtime for Hitler" play gradually wins over the audience in the second act. In the remake the gay Hitler almost instantly gets the audience back in their seats. This felt unnatural and wasn't as funny.
- The Rio sequence with Matthew and Uma was unnecessary.
- The end of the remake needed to be edited down. It was too long. Possibly the songs or the dance numbers could've been cut down, especially towards the end.

BB ;-)

it's just in my opinion - imo -

reply

I much prefer this version too. I remember this being one of my parents' favorite movies when I was little. I was finally able to watch it with them while visiting them a while back, before the remake. Dick Shawn's audition number had me in tears. I caught that scene again recently and I still love it.

reply

I wouldn't even bother seeing the remake. No disrespect to Lane and Broderick, but they're no Mostel and Wilder.






"Joey, have you ever been in a Turkish prison?"

reply

I agree completely about Lorenzo. Some people have said to me that it makes more sense for Liebekin to play Hitler as he's German, blah-blah-blah. That completely misses the point. The casting isn't supposed to make sense. I admit whenever I saw this film the first time I kind of grimaced when he started singing that song, felt it was a nod to the zeitgeist which dated the film. Even as a parody of "flower-power" is teeth-curlingly cringeworthy. It's not until Bialystock screams "THAT'S OUR HITLER" at the end did I get the joke and promptly fell about laughing. The rest of the time after that I was wondering what this loonball was going to do to bring Adolf to life. He didn't disappoint.

Heil Baby!!.



@Twitzkrieg - Glasgow's FOREMOST authority

reply

Gene Wilder was much better than Matthew Broderick

Zero Mostel was better than Nathan Lane (both are excellent however)

Kenneth Mars was way way way way better than Will Ferrell

Gary Beach (2005) a slight nod over Christopher Hewett (1967)

Pretty much a wash between Uma Thurman and Lee Meredith


Definitely 1967 had the better cast.

reply

I also prefer the original to the broadway version. The thing about Zero Mostel was that he was believable as the type of crazy guy who would come up with the get rich quick scheme while Nathan Lane wasn't. Broderick just didn't do it for me as a neurotic, either.

---
Emojis=💩 Emoticons=

reply