I'm amazed Brooks' can make this style of material funny after all these years to younger audiences who are more excited by TV sitcom style comedies.

The story is about how Max Bialystock, a grimy Broadway producer, and his accountant Leo Bloom devise a plan to raise two million dollars and put on the worst musical in Broadway history, so they can write off their losses and take the money they've raised for themselves.

Along the way, Bialystock and Bloom run into a myriad of outlandish characters in the unemployed theatre industry who keep the laughs rolling in this picture. The duo eventually produces "Springtime for Hitler," but after the press and audiences see it as a comedic satire, Bialystock and Bloom find themselves with a hit and a direct ticket into federal prison, unless they can devise a backup plan.

The fact that this Mel Brooks mentality is from beginning to end makes the picture consistent and highly laughable; however, I'm wondering who may all take offense to this kind of humor. It's not the 1970s anymore, and people are far more offended at getting laughs out of race and sexual preference issue.

The opening scene between Bialystock, played by Nathan Lane (The Birdcage), and Bloom, played by Matthew Broderick (Election), is outright hilarious once you get to see the 'character' performances both these actors have for their audience. From then on, the picture becomes Character Performance City, so when they break into song…why not? The film becomes THAT weird. Why not break into song?

I couldn't stop laughing at this movie. At points, I was in tears, and it was mostly at the performances, rather than Brooks' brand of prat falls and situational comedy. The picture reminded me of one of Charlie Chaplan's early films directed by Max Senate, almost a keystone cops quality. It was precious, cause many producers see this as a risk. It's nice to see Brooks' still has a pair in his old age.

Personally, I always heard Broderick was a trained dancer to better his Broadway career, but it was nice to finally see him tap, soft shoe and whatever else in some of his musical numbers. I thought the dance numbers were very well shot and choreographed. I loved the number with the walkers and Bialystock's backers.

The only thing bad I could say about the movie was in Act Three, the story seemed to slow down. The picture overall ran 2 hours and 15 minutes. The last 15 minutes feel long, but otherwise, the picture is awesome.

Overall, this is a barrel of laughs, and if you want a high quality, simple minded riot to see with a loved one, "The Producers" should be on the top of your list. I may go as far as to say, this is Mel Brooks' best production yet, rivaling "Blazing Saddles."

Benn - Where's the Humanity?

I am not a big fan of movie musicals but in this case I will make an exception because it was f*cking hilarious. As my good friend Tony told me, it is a great mixture of 1950's musicals and a good Mel Brooks movie.

Matthew Broderick and Nathan Lane were amazing as the two lead actors. I fell out of my chair laughing when Broderick was screaming that Lane had taken his blanket, the scene is in the first ten minutes of the movie. I was surprised how well both of them can sing and dance. Unfortunately I wasn't so impressed with the third love of my life Uma Thurman. I was shocked at how well she could sing, but I didn't like her accent. I did like Will Ferrell as Franz Liebkind, he does Mel Brooks comedy well.

This is not what I would call a modern musical movie like say Chicago or Rent but more like a Fred Astaire movie with lots of dancing as well as singing. It was staged in that style in which every scene comes from a point of view as if you were sitting in the audience of a stage theater. If you don't like this kind of musical or a Mel Brooks comedy then I suggest that you skip this movie. However, if you do like that style or enjoy Mel Brooks then you will be adding it to your collection.