julian-32145 ...I didn't even manage 10mins before switching this movie off. The original 1967 version is one of my favourite movies, & I consistently watch it approx six times per year. The 2005 version is terrible, forced acting, bad casting especially Matthew Broderick, he just isn't convincing nor is he funny, may be he did it for the paycheck! (for that I can't blame him). I'm sorry but 2005 was a total unwatchable mistake. For me this movie is an insult on the original! How on earth can the pairing of Zero and Gene Wilder be bettered (improved) upon... It's truly amazing how some ratings are so high with up to ten star ratings!! I must be living in a different world from these people.To conclude for utter brilliance in comedy you MUST watch the 1967 Original. (especially You younger people who often don't give 'oldie movies' a chance)p.s. when you're in the mood for a good comedy also watch 'The Twelve Chairs' of 1970 by Mel brooks....

petertainanmission Really this is much better than one would expect. Of course the original is better/different. Are there flaws in this version? Of course there are. What could benefit by comparison? But yet this is a very very entertaining movie. It's funny in different places. The music is just as good. The concept still amuses greatly. Where is Gene Wilder who made the whole movie? He isn't there. But the screenplay is, by Mel Brooks who was probably completing that which he hadn't. It is very enjoyable and entertaining and very out of character for Hollywood, so just sit back and enjoy - and don't think.

studioAT What a weird journey 'The Producers' has had. First a film, then a musical, then this, a film based on the musical.At the centre though is the ultimate bad taste musical, with some very catchy songs and some sharp lines.Are Broderick and Lane a good team on screen? Of course. They more than carry some of the slower points of the film/musical and play their parts with apparent ease.I wasn't as keen on Will Ferrell (at the peak of his powers when this was made) or Uma Thurman, but they are really just two in a long line of oddballs that pop up in this film.I enjoyed it, probably when I shouldn't.

adill22337 They must have sat on this script until after Mel Brooks died. Its very messed up that they got rid of the best character L.S.D from the movie. As far as classics go this obvious attempt for a studio to make money off of a masterpiece. I hope they failed miserably. They took a work of art and tore it while using the original script as toilet paper. It was a completely horrible waste of time. Not a new take on a Mel Brooks classic but a horrible watered down version. The spirit of Mel Brooks was that he was edgy and controversial. They got rid of that and what was left is a horrible movie with no spirit of the author or life in it.