Max Bialystock, a seedy Broadway producer, is persuaded by his accountant Leo Bloom, that he can make more money from a flop than from a hit. They come up with what they believe will be a sure money-making scheme. They take far more money from investors than they can repay and then look around for a play certain to close on its first night, their logic being that the investors will not be looking for a return from a play known to be a failure. (A similar dishonest scheme was featured in an earlier film "New Faces of 1937"). They find an unpublished script by a half- mad Neo-Nazi German playwright, Franz Liebkind, who wants to show the world "the Hitler with a song in his heart", and persuade him to let them produce it. They hire the ultra-camp Roger De Bris, a director whose plays "close on the first day of rehearsal" and cast Liebkind himself in the leading role, although after he breaks his leg in an accident he is replaced by De Bris. Of course, the show turns out to be an improbable and unexpected hit, which leaves Max and Leo with one problem; how do they find the money to repay all their investors?

Sitting down to watch the film, I asked myself whether the world really needed a remake of the 1967 "The Producers". This is, however, more than just a simple remake. In 2001 Mel Brooks, the writer and director of the original film, and the writer Thomas Meehan had turned it into a stage musical, and this version is the film of the play of the film. It generally follows the plot of the original, although there are several changes, most of which were also made in the stage play. (It omits, for example, the hippie actor who takes the part of Hitler in Liebkind's play, perhaps because jokes at the expense of hippies were not as topical in 2001 as they were in 1967).

The original film owed its status as a cult classic to the nature of the play which Max and Bloom put on, an all-singing, all-dancing musical comedy extravaganza about Nazi Germany and Adolf Hitler, entitled "Springtime for Hitler". The crazed Liebkind's script, as interpreted by de Bris, comes complete with a high-kicking chorus line of girls dressed as storm-troopers and unforgettable lines like "Don't be stoopid, be a smardy, come and join the Nazzy Pardy". The first night audience in the theatre are initially repelled by what they see as bad taste but later decide that the play is in fact a brilliant satire which will run on Broadway for years.

Seen as a comedy about a dishonest producer and a crooked accountant, however, the 1967 film was no more than moderately amusing, and it had its weaknesses. Some of its scenes, notably the ones in which Max is romancing the lecherous old ladies who constitute most of his investors, were frankly embarrassing, the character of Ulla struck me as unnecessary, unless Brooks assumed that a pretty girl who regularly takes her clothes off is necessary for the success of any film, and the ending was rather weak.

The 2005 version, however, overcomes most of these problems. Ulla takes on a more important role, becoming Leo's love-interest. The relationship between Max and Leo is also subtly altered. What was originally just a story about two partners in crime here becomes a study of male friendship. Max finds in Leo the first person with whom he can have a relationship based on something other than financial self-interest. The once neurotic, put-upon Leo finds that Max has given him the courage and self-confidence to embrace life. (I could never, for example, imagine Gene Wilder's character in the original film as the lover of the beautiful Ulla). Even the old ladies (who get a song and dance routine of their own) seem less annoying here.

One thing which both versions have in common is the acting is deliriously over the top, but this of course is deliberate; a story like this could not be played in any other way. As played by Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick, Max and Leo are a comedy duo with two zanies and no straight man. (The same could be said of the way in which they were played by Zero Mostel and Wilder). The changes made to the plot mean that Franz and Roger take on bigger roles here than they did in the original, and Will Ferrell and Gary Beach take full advantage by overacting outrageously. The songs, while none of them (apart from "Springtime for Hitler") are particularly memorable musically, are all very witty as far as the lyrics are concerned, and all are performed with gusto.

Like the 1967 film, everything here is done in the worst possible taste, but then this was all part of Brooks's intention. This is tastelessness with a purpose. Brooks's idea was that dictators like Hitler are much more afraid of satire than they are of the polemical arguments of their enemies. To be effective, such satire must be as outrageous as possible to make the dictator seem ridiculous and cut him down to size. And nobody could cut HItler down to size in the way Gary Beach does. Chaplin had done something similar in "The Great Dictator"; Brooks and Beach took Chaplin's idea and exaggerated it even further.

So, to answer my question, did the world need a new screen version of "The Producers"? The answer (perhaps surprisingly) turned out to be "Yes, it did!" The musical version keeps the crazy logic of the original film, but manages to overcome some of its weaknesses. I enjoyed this version even more than I did its predecessor. 9/10

First, there was Mel Brooks' clever movie "The Producers." That got adapted into a Tony-winning stage musical. Then the musical became adapted into a movie. This hilarious spectacle is sure to please! Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick return as Max Bialystock and Leo Bloom, the same roles they made famous on Broadway. Lane is a riot, channeling Zero Mostel's bombastic character. Meanwhile, Broderick surprises as he does a decent take on Gene Wilder's original hysterical act. Will Ferrell scores laughs as Nazi playwright Franz Liebkind, and Uma Thurman puts in a good song and dance as Swedish sexpot Ulla. The movie perfectly catches the style of the old-fashioned musical, with a large serving of slapstick. This snappy production is sure to be a hit with everyone!

As a big fan of the original, and as a lifelong lover of movie musicals, I saw this 2005 version The Producers. I didn't think it was bad, but I was disappointed. It certainly looks stylish and glamorous, and the music is great. I also thought the choreography was delightfully kitsch, and that Nathan Lane and Gary Beech were wonderful and Matthew Broderick surprisingly good. On the other hand, Uma Thurman despite looking sensational is in my opinion miscast(I just couldn't get her performances from Kill Bill and Pulp Fiction out of my mind) and Will Ferrell overdoes it. The story is rather rushed, and the script is disjointed, some of the dialogue and jokes are very funny but some fall flat. Overall, not bad but didn't do much for me. 5/10 Bethany Cox