The Producers (2005)

51% of critics liked it
(150 reviews)
63% of users liked it
(262,154 ratings)

After transforming his first motion picture into a smash Broadway musical, Mel Brooks brings the story of two would-be theatrical moguls turned con men back to the screen in this musical comedy. Max Bialystock (Nathan Lane) was once one of Broadway's most successful producers, but a string of flops… More After transforming his first motion picture into a smash Broadway musical, Mel Brooks brings the story of two would-be theatrical moguls turned con men back to the screen in this musical comedy. Max Bialystock (Nathan Lane) was once one of Broadway's most successful producers, but a string of flops has thrown his career into a tailspin, and now he struggles to raise the cash to stage new shows by playing gigolo to lonely old ladies. While going over his books, accountant Leo Bloom (Matthew Broderick) notices that Bialystock raised more money than he spent for one show, and points out that if one raised enough money for a show that closed in one night, you could make more off a flop than a hit. This strikes Bialystock as a brilliant scheme, and he decides to give it a try, persuading Bloom to join him in staging the world's greatest flop. After discovering a truly vile script -- "Springtime for Hitler," a musical set in the Third Reich written by neo-Nazi pigeon fancier Franz Liebkind (Will Ferrell) -- and giving a key role to the secretary Ulla (Uma Thurman), a drop-dead gorgeous blonde with only a tenuous understanding of the English language, Bialystock and Bloom are certain they have the disaster they need for their plan to work. But the scheme unexpectedly goes wrong when "Springtime for Hitler" becomes a "so bad it's good" hit. Mel Brooks co-wrote the screenplay for The Producers as well as producing it, but directorial chores were handed over to Susan Stroman, who also directed the Broadway show; Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick also repeated their roles from the Broadway production. ~ Mark Deming, Rovi

Play Trailer

Rating, Runtime: PG-13, 2 hr. 14 min.
Directed By: Susan Stroman
Genres: Musical & Performing Arts, Comedy

In Theaters: Dec 16, 2005 Wide
On DVD: May 16, 2006
Studio: Universal Pictures

Critic Reviews

Ty Burr, Boston Globe
Not so much a film as an awkwardly framed souvenir of the Broadway hit musical, The Producers needs a live audience like a candle needs oxygen.
Steven Rea, Philadelphia Inquirer
The jokes are in its tackiness, and gauchery, and raspberry-inducing send-up of Broadway traditions. On that level, the movie works fine -- and is a whole lot cheaper for the ticket buyer.
Roger Moore, Orlando Sentinel
Nathan Lane, Matthew Broderick and Gary Beach have their singing, dancing and kvetching in the Broadway smash The Producers immortalized on film.
Amy Biancolli, Houston Chronicle
... a kitschy celebration of all things Mel.
Terry Lawson, Detroit Free Press
There are bad movies, there are terrible, misguided mistakes and there are unbearable and embarrassing ordeals. The Producers: The Movie Musical is all of those.
Robert Denerstein, Denver Rocky Mountain News
On film, Lane and Broderick are stuck in manic overdrive, like a couple of guys who have been assigned the impossible task of reviving vaudeville.
Cynthia Fuchs, Common Sense Media
Long, too-faithful film of Mel Brooks' stage musical.
Anton Bitel, Eye for Film
The original was far funnier and somehow managed to cut to the chase with less of a song and dance.
Kam Williams, Upstage Magazine
Be prepared to laugh from the opening credits through the closing credits.
Kevin Lally, Film Journal International
The play is everything in this uneven movie, which is alternately groan-inducing and side-splitting.
Ethan Alter, NYC Film Critic
Confirmed my original opinion that the musical version of The Producers was a flash-in-the-pan success that won't be remembered ten years from now.
Michael A. Smith, Nolan's Pop Culture Review
Director Stroman (who also choreographed the film) has also paid tribute to the theatre by casting such stage stars as Brent Barrett, Debra Monk, Karen Ziemba and Andrea Martin.
Russ Breimeier, Christianity Today
The real reason to see this film is the addition of the musical numbers -- catchy and clever songs, written in the style of classic 1950s Broadway musicals.
James Plath, Reel.com
It's entertaining, but not as charming or rousing as its musical muse, Singin' in the Rain, nor does it completely capture the spontaneous humor of the Brooks' original.
Jim Lane, Sacramento News & Review
Stage director Susan Stroman brings it all in, including the high spirits and naughty fun, though a few more dancers in some of the musical numbers might have filled the screen better.
Matt Pais, Metromix.com
Shows such affinity for the stage that it barely qualifies as a movie.
Todd Jorgenson, Denton Record Chronicle (TX)
Is it better than the stage version? Not necessarily. But this is a faithful rendition that should succeed in bringing a delightful old-fashioned crowd-pleaser to a new audience.
Trevor Johnston, Time Out
This is extraneous for anyone who's seen the original film or show, presumably leaving everyone else to wonder what all the fuss has been about.
Bruce Bennett, Spectrum (St. George, Utah)
Arguably the funniest movie of the year.
Larry Ratliff, San Antonio Express-News
It's a broad, slightly naughty comedy in musical form from the skewed, if not a little twisted, comic genius Mel Brooks.

Read all 21 critic reviews

Critic ratings and reviews powered by RottenTomatoes.com

Fresh (60% or more critics rated the movie positively)

Rotten (59% or fewer critics rated the movie positively)

Featured Audience Ratings

Jim H

A Broadway producer and his accountant team up to make a flop as part of a get-rich-quick scheme ... set to music. All the problems - the over-acting, the kitsch - that plagued the original production are on full display here, and added to those is some really bad music. I highly… More
A Broadway producer and his accountant team up to make a flop as part of a get-rich-quick scheme ... set to music. All the problems - the over-acting, the kitsch - that plagued the original production are on full display here, and added to those is some really bad music. I highly doubt that the discerning viewer will be singing "Unhappy" and "We Can Do It" in the shower the next day, even though some of the original music is kinda catchy. There are moments when it seems like Matthew Broderick is doing a Gene Wilder impersonation, but I was impressed by his voice; I knew he was on Broadway and could sing, but he's much better than an actor who can act through a song. He's actually got some pipes. I also liked the changes in the third act, which give the story a more cohesive structure. Overall, this is a poor effort, a film that should not have been made.
Chris W

This is a movie based on a play based on a movie about a play. Also, this film, like the play within it, and the play it was based on, is a musical. This is probably the greatest difference between this and the 1968 film. There are other differences sure, but this being a musical is… More
This is a movie based on a play based on a movie about a play. Also, this film, like the play within it, and the play it was based on, is a musical. This is probably the greatest difference between this and the 1968 film. There are other differences sure, but this being a musical is the most noticable change. It has its moments, and the musical numbers are well done, but, and I hate comparing it, but it's just not as good as the original. For one thing, the tone is all wrong. The entire film is done as camp. Sure, while that can be fun, it lessens the impact of the material, and it's also not shocking like it should be. Also, I think that, at 135 minutes, this could have been tightened up just a bit. At least it's not 3+ hours like many musicals. Some of the performances are actually not too bad though. Lane is pretty good, Thurman and Ferrell are entertaining, and I liked the brief appearances of Lovitz and Huddleston. Broderick has his moments, but he's rather underwhelming. I didn't hate this, but it does have some issues like I've addressed. It's not boring, but it just feels rather draggy at times. I'm a little torn on the rating. On one hand it's not totally worth recommending overall, but on the other, it's got some good moments, so take it or leave it, and see it if you want or feel you need to. As for that tricky rating: how about 3.25. I think that works okay, or "thumbs sideways".
Phil H

Hmmmmmm so very very tricky to decide here, what can I say.....I enjoyed this film as a 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… More
Hmmmmmm so very very tricky to decide here, what can I say.....I enjoyed this film as a 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 theatre in every sense but the actual film is a poor imitation. There are certain parts in this film I loved, mainly anything to do with Nathan Lane who is a superb comedy actor with fantastic ability in facial and physical comedy, some of his leers and chubby prat falls are brilliant and really compete with Mostels first performance. On the other hand there are some truly awful moments of...plagiarism basically where the same funny lines or sequence has been attempted from the original and it just bombs hard :( some scenes simply cannot be replicated from the genius of Wilder and Mostel. A huge issue with me was the casting of Broderick who is so so so so weak an actor I just don't understand how he gets work, is it all simply down to 'Ferris Bueller'!!? Terrible actor and he really shows it here with a dreadful performance that lets the whole film down badly. Sure he can sing alittle, move well and he does look the part but he just isn't a strong enough character for comedy, he's too shy and reserved and a bad partner to Lanes terrific comb over sleaze. To be honest some of the casting is poor in this film accept for Lane, Beach and Bart all of which were inspired choices. Thurman and Ferrell were totally out of place and show why it can be a bad decision to cast big names when lesser known folk would work so much better, also Lovitz could of been used in a better role instead of the extra unneeded sequence he was in. Where was Dom Deluise that's what I wanna know, the perfect film for him. The film looks fantastic I gotta say, well it basically looks like a stage performance that's just been filmed really, not a bad thing as the colour and razzle dazzle is all very well directed and comes up peachy on your screen. Lots of musical numbers and extra padding to fill out the length which is again nice but also loses some of the originals charm, the charm of 'less is more' and this new film really does go overboard when it didn't have to. Obviously the film was meant to be a precursor to the real theatre production (a prequel hehe to see how it would fare) which is fine but I don't know why they went down the musical route with the film instead of sticking to the better farcical comedic angle, I just felt allot of the essence was lost trying to craft the film into something else when they still could of done the theatre show and kept the film like the original. Last thoughts are positive for the film as its nice to see musicals back on the big screen looking as lush as this but as a remake its nowhere near as good as its forebearer, quite a poor copy in places but it does have its highlights which can make you forgive. If your seeing this for the first time then I strongly recommend the original of course.
Bethany M

Quite funny!
Lucas M

A good entertaining, full of great effects and coreography, but is better the original The Producers.
Megan S

This movie was a lot weirder than I expected it. It was a little too much for me. It was entirely too long, that's for sure.
Jennifer D

"Wait, that's not my life. Somebody else's life is flashing before my eyes." Hah! I'm sorry, I was thoroughly entertained. Matthew Broderick's expression kept me laughing the whole time and of course the lyrics were phenomenal, the choreography was pretty… More
"Wait, that's not my life. Somebody else's life is flashing before my eyes." Hah! I'm sorry, I was thoroughly entertained. Matthew Broderick's expression kept me laughing the whole time and of course the lyrics were phenomenal, the choreography was pretty good (I thought!) and I loved the acting although Ms. Uma Thurman's accent slipped a few times, but oh well. The main thing is that Lane and Broderick were fantastic together. Such great stage presence.
Jay H

Odd, to say the least. Though clocking in at a reasonable 129 minutes, this film felt like it took an eternity to complete. I have few problems with this film, but those problems are big enough that I can't bear to give it more than 2 1/2 stars.
Richard C

C+
Ken S

Unnecessary
Randy T

I'm usually anti-remake but this one isn't bad. Still, not nearly as good as the original.
Lorenzo v

Leo Bloom: "I'm not going to the toilet, I'm going to showbiz!" After transforming his first motion picture into a smash Broadway musical, Mel Brooks brings the story of two would-be theatrical moguls turned con men back to the screen in this… More
Leo Bloom: "I'm not going to the toilet, I'm going to showbiz!" After transforming his first motion picture into a smash Broadway musical, Mel Brooks brings the story of two would-be theatrical moguls turned con men back to the screen in this musical comedy. Max Bialystock (Nathan Lane) was once one of Broadway's most successful producers, but a string of flops has thrown his career into a tailspin, and now he struggles to raise the cash to stage new shows by playing gigolo to lonely old ladies. While going over his books, accountant Leo Bloom (Matthew Broderick) notices that Bialystock raised more money than he spent for one show, and points out that if one raised enough money for a show that closed in one night, you could make more off a flop than a hit. This strikes Bialystock as a brilliant scheme, and he decides to give it a try, persuading Bloom to join him in staging the world's greatest flop. After discovering a truly vile script -- "Springtime for Hitler," a musical set in the Third Reich written by neo-Nazi pigeon fancier Franz Liebkind (Will Ferrell) -- and giving a key role to the secretary Ulla (Uma Thurman), a drop-dead gorgeous blonde with only a tenuous understanding of the English language, Bialystock and Bloom are certain they have the disaster they need for their plan to work. But the scheme unexpectedly goes wrong when "Springtime for Hitler" becomes a "so bad it's good" hit. Mel Brooks co-wrote the screenplay for The Producers as well as producing it, but directorial chores were handed over to Susan Stroman, who also directed the Broadway show; Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick also repeated their roles from the Broadway production. Review Having now seen both versions of this, I have to give a slight nod to the original, only because Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder were absolutely perfect together. Nathan Lane was terrific, no doubt about it, but Matthew Broderick paled in comparison to Wilder. Will Ferrell, on the other hand, proved a worthy complement to Kenneth Mars. Both were outstanding in their own way as Franz Liebkind. The new material and many of the musical numbers were great additions. The whole "Heil Myself" number is a stitch. And Uma Thurman works for me. Boy, does she. The only negatives I can say about the original is that Dick Shawn's hippie-like character and Lee Meredith's scenes are definitely dated. But those are pretty small nits to pick. The main weak spot in the new film is that Broderick can't hold a candle to Gene Wilder.
Jani H

"There's more to you than there is to you." I usually don't watch remakes, but this I had to watch because of its talented comedians, Nathan Lane and Will Ferrell. Well, there's nothing much more to say than "Guten Tag clap clap"! "The… More
"There's more to you than there is to you." I usually don't watch remakes, but this I had to watch because of its talented comedians, Nathan Lane and Will Ferrell. Well, there's nothing much more to say than "Guten Tag clap clap"! "The Producers" is full of very lousy acting. Only the above mentioned actors and Roger Bart really do a nice job. The major mistake of this film was to give one of the leads to Matthew Broderick. He fails in every possible way to give a funny performance. Sometimes, "The Producers" surprises the viewer by witty dialogue like: "Quick darling, back in the closet!" but in the end it's just not that funny. The films highlight is the scenes of the premiere of "Springtime for Hitler". "Elizabeth? - Ja. Not many people know this, but the fuhrer was descended from a long line of English queens."
Ginny

Pretty kewl for a musical comedy movie. Fun to watch, the first singing scene had pretty shoddy actors but once you get past that its all good and easy to sink into. Mixes old style type of musical tv shows with broadway. Wowowee have a load full of Uma Thurmans legs! She is… More
Pretty kewl for a musical comedy movie. Fun to watch, the first singing scene had pretty shoddy actors but once you get past that its all good and easy to sink into. Mixes old style type of musical tv shows with broadway. Wowowee have a load full of Uma Thurmans legs! She is absolutely stunning! (Im not bi, I just have an eye for beauty!) Oh and, I loved the "the Fab 6", (minus the 6th!) lol!! "Spring time for Hitler and Germanyyyy!!" "Make it Gay! Make it Gay! Make it Gaaayy!" -- Yeah, found it quite catchy, now I cant get the songs outta my head! --that scene where they were showing deuchland, reminded me of the nursery rhyme jack and jill?? Just saw clips of the 1968 - The Producers too, not bad either, but ofcourse I think this one is more suited for todays generation.
Jens S

I've never been a big fan of Broadway musicals, but wanted to see this for the funny sounding premise. And although the introduction to the story turns out to be a little long, once the plot thickens it's definitely having its really funny, satirical and outrageously wrong… More
I've never been a big fan of Broadway musicals, but wanted to see this for the funny sounding premise. And although the introduction to the story turns out to be a little long, once the plot thickens it's definitely having its really funny, satirical and outrageously wrong moments. Especially Will Ferrell as Nazi and Uma Thurman as talent-free Swedish newcomer are pretty funny. Everything's fast, loud, colorful and hopelessly over the top. I am sure a lot of people really like that, but for me it always feels like the songs, while being catchy, get somewhat repetitive in Broadway musicals, and there are a LOT of songs in this. So, in the end I wasn't entirely satisfied but didn't regret the two hours either. For fans, I suppose.
Candy R

Excellent adaptation of the Broadway show. All the characters are very funny.
Wildaly M

Genuinely fun movie. I love musicals and the songs in this one are hilarious!
Cindy I

Doesn't feel like a movie, but rather like someone video-taped the Broadway show. I'll stick with the original.
Red L

I have now watched three versions of this play -- Broadway, the 1968 version and this one. The movie is typical of Mel Brooks fare, and I don't find his work that entertaining. Between the two movie versions, I preferred this one.
Lanning :

Uma Thurman never looked so good, but you really must see the original. Mostel, Wilder, Mars, and Shawn can't be topped.