This looked good, I will be renting it.

I loved this movie!!! I can't wait until it gets announced here in the US. Although I hope they use the theatrical poster instead of this coverart, and that it's a nice 2-Disc set.

Why are they only using the surnames? People are gonna think this is a Diane Lane film!

Tony DeFrancisco wrote: How much did this make in the box office down in the UK? I thought it would make a lot down here but it never did.

Didn't do that well here. Probably because it was a steaming pile of cinematic cack.

People were walking out of the cinema I worked in.

This movie was awesome.  Funny and great tunes....

Blows the original out of the water.... (prepares to die for such a comment.)

mjeeves wrote: Why are they only using the surnames? People are gonna think this is a Diane Lane film!How would they think that? All 4 actors portrayed on the front cover are the only ones with their names on the top - I can tell the difference between Nathan Lane and Diane Lane as I am sure most people can (Although if Diane wishes to dicuss this with me in her private chambers, I will be very happy to )

I CAN'T WAIT for this dvd. I saw this show on the stage here in the U.S. 5 times, and fell in love with it, especially the musical score. While I agreed slightly with some reviewers that the direction of the film might have been better, I think it's a quality telling of the stage show, with a much bigger orchestra for the music. Irma was miscast, the role needs a real singer and she can't reach some notes let alone hold them for long in the right way.. ANY fan of the MGM musicals will love this as that's the feeling  Mel and Susan Strohman went for. The score is great and one would never believe Mel Brooks wrote an entire book musical. I'll be watching this one over and over and over and over and....

Most of the complaints about the film from citics was that Susan directed the acrots as if they were on a stage, not in a movie. I have to agree to a certain extent. The lack of changing camera angles did hurt somewhat. On the other hand, if you want to see what was on stage, this is very close.

The cover they are using in the UK is the same as poster style B, the one in the USA is using the other style, which is very different. Not sure which I like more.

I was happy to see the deleted songs were filmed and included, but sad that the director did not put the KING OF BROADWAY song back into the film, it's a very important part of the story and explains who Max is and what it's been like for him to have so many flops on Broadway. But at least it's an extra.  Nathan Lane (on tv) said he was very upset this was cut. I think it's one of the best songs.

The sad thing is that here in the U.S., it only made 18 million dollars, extremely low compared to a financial hit. When I heard they were filming this, I suspected that it would not do well because of what today's audiences are going to see (the top movies the week it came out? Date Movie and Big Momma's house 2 ...oy vey). It's really a shame because it's a good quality movie with a great musical score as well. I am afraid this and the lack of success for Rent will hurt the possibility of many more movie musicals.