The Super Mario Bros. Movie Feels Like It Was Designed In A Lab
The Super Mario Bros. Movie Feels Like It Was Designed In A Lab
by BronzeHeart92
14 Comments
jawsomesauce
The author does not like fun things.
WEEGEMAN
Critics are really jaded about this movie.
It feels like because they know it’ll be profitable it’s easy canon fodder for their built up angst.
Not like that matters to me a whole lot.
Reminds me of when I was in my 20s and studying media. “Suits” ruined everything and no fun was allowed.
I still get like that occasionally
TurkTurkle
Kotaku has **NEVER** been a trustworthy news outlet
LylatInvader
Its a mario movie, did you really expect a deep plot
LylatInvader
Its a mario movie, did you really expect a deep plot
And ill add this, illumination’s other films feel more lab grown than this one
blackthorn_orion
I mean, it’s Nintendo. It’s no secret that maintaining control of their IP and image is important to them. They were always gonna keep a tight leash on this one and not want it to go too crazy, especially after the “mad science experiment” that was the *last* Mario movie.
Emptyking101
This is why I don’t listen to the critics. Seldom are they correct about movies.
GunnerRocket
Lump this into the “Joker” category of movies that critics tried to drown and the audience told them to get fucked.
ssslitchey
Usually I hate kotaku and think they’re kind of a joke but honestly this person has a point. This is exactly how I feel about the movie. There is no substance. The plot if so barebones and feels like it’s just stringing setpices together to barely qualify as a “movie”. The characters have no real depth to them. They don’t feel like people with their own agency and goals. It just feels like they spent so much time crafting this world and then forgot to make a movie surrounding it.
This movie fails at being a good movie and makes so many mistakes that aren’t acceptable. I hate seeing people say that this is OK just because the movie has tons of fanservice and references. Problem is that’s all there is and there’s nothing to go along with it.
Mayor_P
>This is not a film that feels like it came into being because Nintendo or its creative partner, animation studio Illumination, finally hit upon a Super Mario tale worth telling. It feels like it came into being because some suits determined (rightly, no doubt) that now was the time to expand Mario’s media profile well beyond games, to get more people coming to the theme parks, buying the consoles, seeing the movies, snagging the official merch, and generating revenue in any number of other ways.
I’ve seen the movie twice now, and this take is correct. That doesn’t mean the movie is not FUN (it is VERY fun!), and it doesn’t mean that it’s not good (it is good!), and it doesn’t mean that it’s untrue to the source material (it’s great at that!).
There is more to criticism than just “Thumbs up or Thumbs down,” and by that I mean, there is so many dimensions to a film that you can find the good in many of them and the bad in many others, and mixed reactions to still others.
It really does feel like a movie where they first started with a bunch of scenes that they wanted to have in the movie like “Karts racing on Rainbow Road! Mario running an obby and dying a lot! Bowser addressing his army! Princess Peach badass girlbossing!” and then finding a way to string those together into a plot afterward. The scenes are each very well done in the movie, imho, but there is no grand unifying vision. I understand WHY they did it like this, but understanding doesn’t mean it is good moviemaking.
I like to compare to a movie like John Wick. So in both movies, we are dealing with establishing the movie world, introducing the characters, explaining the ground rules and the stakes, and so on. For John Wick, this is super important because in the first movie, the audience has NO prior knowledge of the main character, or of his world. For Mario, this is completely the opposite – the main reason anyone goes to watch this movie is because they have at least *some* familiarity with the characters already, and want to see them brought to the big screen.
The problem is that the Mario Movie spends a whole lot of time with “Mario is a fish out of water” much like many other superhero/folktale/known character origin movies do. They use the main character as the audience insert – filling the “I don’t know what’s going on, please explain to me” role. Going back to John Wick, you don’t NEED that role in your movie at all. No character in John Wick says “Hey, I’m a new assassin, what do I do with this gold coin?” The world is built for the audience without doing that. “Show, don’t tell” as the old saying goes.
In John Wick, there is a story being told about a guy to do with revenge & loyalty, and the John Wick world and the characters in it all develop as the story progresses. The first Indiana Jones movie does this, too – it jumps right in to a pre-existing, competent character, as if we the audience already knew about him. But in the Mario Movie (or in the first Spider-Man or in The Incredible Hulk or in Superman or Sherlock Holmes or numerous other such movies), the world development ***is*** the story. And that’s a shame because the vast majority of the movie’s audience already knows what the deal is with the Mario cast (or with Spider-Man or with Wonder Woman or Sherlock Holmes, etc.).
The entire story of The Super Mario Bros. Movie could be accomplished in a couple of flashbacks. It isn’t done that way, however, because the world-building IS the story of this movie. There is no other story being told other than setting the stage. Setting it for what? Nothing! The stage being set is the whole movie. Again, it’s very well-done! It’s a lot of fun! I will watch it happily many, many more times. But all this amounts to nothing. That’s the point, but the point is nothing.
MonochromeTyrant
I don’t understand why a single piece of media with a primary target demographic of children is turning into a battlefield. See it, don’t see it, love it, hate it – it’s just another piece of media *designed for entertainment purposes*, and people need to keep that in mind.
Riomegon
I’ve noticed that people are doing backflips to come up with some sort of nuanced take on this movie… Really trying to delve into the psyche of Miyamoto or Illuminations to come with with some grandios idea why it’s good or bad regarding their narrative.
I’ll just say this, get ready for this same attitude towards Tears of the Kingdom regardless if it’s good or not. People are ready to shred it either way.
Oh btw, the Mario Bros Movie is fun, that’s all I wanted it to be and it delivered. Not much else to say.
Cephalie_100
It’s the most mario a movie can be imo, it’s fun, kid friendly(but not inherently for kids only) an mario eats a mushroom that makes him bigger.
14 Comments
The author does not like fun things.
Critics are really jaded about this movie.
It feels like because they know it’ll be profitable it’s easy canon fodder for their built up angst.
Not like that matters to me a whole lot.
Reminds me of when I was in my 20s and studying media. “Suits” ruined everything and no fun was allowed.
I still get like that occasionally
Kotaku has **NEVER** been a trustworthy news outlet
Its a mario movie, did you really expect a deep plot
Its a mario movie, did you really expect a deep plot
And ill add this, illumination’s other films feel more lab grown than this one
I mean, it’s Nintendo. It’s no secret that maintaining control of their IP and image is important to them. They were always gonna keep a tight leash on this one and not want it to go too crazy, especially after the “mad science experiment” that was the *last* Mario movie.
This is why I don’t listen to the critics. Seldom are they correct about movies.
Lump this into the “Joker” category of movies that critics tried to drown and the audience told them to get fucked.
Usually I hate kotaku and think they’re kind of a joke but honestly this person has a point. This is exactly how I feel about the movie. There is no substance. The plot if so barebones and feels like it’s just stringing setpices together to barely qualify as a “movie”. The characters have no real depth to them. They don’t feel like people with their own agency and goals. It just feels like they spent so much time crafting this world and then forgot to make a movie surrounding it.
This movie fails at being a good movie and makes so many mistakes that aren’t acceptable. I hate seeing people say that this is OK just because the movie has tons of fanservice and references. Problem is that’s all there is and there’s nothing to go along with it.
>This is not a film that feels like it came into being because Nintendo or its creative partner, animation studio Illumination, finally hit upon a Super Mario tale worth telling. It feels like it came into being because some suits determined (rightly, no doubt) that now was the time to expand Mario’s media profile well beyond games, to get more people coming to the theme parks, buying the consoles, seeing the movies, snagging the official merch, and generating revenue in any number of other ways.
I’ve seen the movie twice now, and this take is correct. That doesn’t mean the movie is not FUN (it is VERY fun!), and it doesn’t mean that it’s not good (it is good!), and it doesn’t mean that it’s untrue to the source material (it’s great at that!).
There is more to criticism than just “Thumbs up or Thumbs down,” and by that I mean, there is so many dimensions to a film that you can find the good in many of them and the bad in many others, and mixed reactions to still others.
It really does feel like a movie where they first started with a bunch of scenes that they wanted to have in the movie like “Karts racing on Rainbow Road! Mario running an obby and dying a lot! Bowser addressing his army! Princess Peach badass girlbossing!” and then finding a way to string those together into a plot afterward. The scenes are each very well done in the movie, imho, but there is no grand unifying vision. I understand WHY they did it like this, but understanding doesn’t mean it is good moviemaking.
I like to compare to a movie like John Wick. So in both movies, we are dealing with establishing the movie world, introducing the characters, explaining the ground rules and the stakes, and so on. For John Wick, this is super important because in the first movie, the audience has NO prior knowledge of the main character, or of his world. For Mario, this is completely the opposite – the main reason anyone goes to watch this movie is because they have at least *some* familiarity with the characters already, and want to see them brought to the big screen.
The problem is that the Mario Movie spends a whole lot of time with “Mario is a fish out of water” much like many other superhero/folktale/known character origin movies do. They use the main character as the audience insert – filling the “I don’t know what’s going on, please explain to me” role. Going back to John Wick, you don’t NEED that role in your movie at all. No character in John Wick says “Hey, I’m a new assassin, what do I do with this gold coin?” The world is built for the audience without doing that. “Show, don’t tell” as the old saying goes.
In John Wick, there is a story being told about a guy to do with revenge & loyalty, and the John Wick world and the characters in it all develop as the story progresses. The first Indiana Jones movie does this, too – it jumps right in to a pre-existing, competent character, as if we the audience already knew about him. But in the Mario Movie (or in the first Spider-Man or in The Incredible Hulk or in Superman or Sherlock Holmes or numerous other such movies), the world development ***is*** the story. And that’s a shame because the vast majority of the movie’s audience already knows what the deal is with the Mario cast (or with Spider-Man or with Wonder Woman or Sherlock Holmes, etc.).
The entire story of The Super Mario Bros. Movie could be accomplished in a couple of flashbacks. It isn’t done that way, however, because the world-building IS the story of this movie. There is no other story being told other than setting the stage. Setting it for what? Nothing! The stage being set is the whole movie. Again, it’s very well-done! It’s a lot of fun! I will watch it happily many, many more times. But all this amounts to nothing. That’s the point, but the point is nothing.
I don’t understand why a single piece of media with a primary target demographic of children is turning into a battlefield. See it, don’t see it, love it, hate it – it’s just another piece of media *designed for entertainment purposes*, and people need to keep that in mind.
I’ve noticed that people are doing backflips to come up with some sort of nuanced take on this movie… Really trying to delve into the psyche of Miyamoto or Illuminations to come with with some grandios idea why it’s good or bad regarding their narrative.
I’ll just say this, get ready for this same attitude towards Tears of the Kingdom regardless if it’s good or not. People are ready to shred it either way.
Oh btw, the Mario Bros Movie is fun, that’s all I wanted it to be and it delivered. Not much else to say.
It’s the most mario a movie can be imo, it’s fun, kid friendly(but not inherently for kids only) an mario eats a mushroom that makes him bigger.
And those scientists were cooking