Susan Stroman directed the show on Broadway and what she has done here is photograph that show -- no more, no less. This is good news for anyone who couldn't afford a trip to New York and $100 tickets, but it's a fairly odd approach to cinema.Read Full Review »
70
Time: Richard Schickel
There's no attempt to address the show's endemic weak spots--a slow start and a contrived end. Mostly Stroman just lets it rip. But in some respects the movie is an improvement on the show.Read Full Review »
70
Village Voice: J. Hoberman
Broderick is a genuine trouper, hoofing his way through his big numbers, while Lane's antics are difficult to resist.Read Full Review »
70
Washington Post: Stephen Hunter
It's too long to be great and it's too square to be great and it's too loud to be great and it finds homosexual effeminacy too funny to ever be called great, but I can't imagine anyone coming out sadder than they went in.Read Full Review »
63
USA Today: Claudia Puig
Enough is enough. Somebody should just stop remaking The Producers.Read Full Review »
50
ROLLING STONE: Peter Travers
Stroman should have studied the original Producers that Brooks directed in 1968, with Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder. It answers the question "Where did they go right?"Read Full Review »
50
NewsWeek: David Ansen
The theatricality is off the charts. Lane aims for the balconies; Broderick tones it down for the camera a bit.Read Full Review »
50
ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: Lisa Schwarzbaum
The accountant in Bloom would probably approve of the new Producers: It's an efficient extension of a popular brand. In theory, what's not to like? In reality, the whole schmear.Read Full Review »
50
ReelViews: James Berardinelli
The Producers is a movie based on a play based on a movie about a play. And that's probably the funniest thing about it.Read Full Review »
Hotmail
