• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

News Nintendo Direct: The Super Mario Bros. Movie | 10/6 1:05 p.m. PT

Luckily, trailers are often cutting a bit to make stuff flow faster, so it could just be them showing the scene faster than it will actually be.
Oh dang, I didn't even consider that 😅

Actually if it's a slower pan and zoom out in the final film, that would be even funnier. Like rather than the joke feeding off the surprise shift in tone of the fast zoom, a slow pan and zoom would accentuate Bowser's boredom with the whole thing.

That'd actually be fantastic. 🤣
 
Seen a lot of live reactions
A bunch of they get so negative at the Penguin-Snowball gag. Like, "This is such a Kids' movie gag" or "Typical Illumination humor" and such, and I don't really get it.
I thought it was a fun gag, both visually and surprisingly. The added jokes about how the Penguin King actually thinks it was a show of force, plus his smirk when they attacked, gives another layer on the joke.
Like, what kind of joke would be 'not' a 'bad kid's joke' then?
Yeah, it was a perfectly playful gag that would not be out of place in an actual Mario game. I saw a person calling it "ironic modern humor" and I was like... what? What an odd stance to have, might as well just stand up and say "I hate jokes that aren't dialogue quips!" or whatever.

I wonder if that leaked pic indicates we'll get more news pretty soon. Since Peach was nowhere in the trailer but is alongside Mario and Todd there.
Someone please leak DK, I need to know what he looks like
There is a leak of DK's Happy Meal toy, but due to being a cheap and small toy with soft sculpting it is not exactly a great look, but it seems like we can see they gave him oval instead of perfectly round eyes and also a bigger chin than usual, perhaps homaging his DK 94 look?
H9HSTLs.jpg
 
0
Seen a lot of live reactions
A bunch of they get so negative at the Penguin-Snowball gag. Like, "This is such a Kids' movie gag" or "Typical Illumination humor" and such, and I don't really get it.
I thought it was a fun gag, both visually and surprisingly. The added jokes about how the Penguin King actually thinks it was a show of force, plus his smirk when they attacked, gives another layer on the joke.
Like, what kind of joke would be 'not' a 'bad kid's joke' then?
Ill never understand someone being mad that a kids movie has jokes targeted at well, kids lol!
 
Seen a lot of live reactions
A bunch of they get so negative at the Penguin-Snowball gag. Like, "This is such a Kids' movie gag" or "Typical Illumination humor" and such, and I don't really get it.
I thought it was a fun gag, both visually and surprisingly. The added jokes about how the Penguin King actually thinks it was a show of force, plus his smirk when they attacked, gives another layer on the joke.
Like, what kind of joke would be 'not' a 'bad kid's joke' then?
I mean, they're not...wrong? Like, it's a pretty predictable, silly gag - "Oh, look at these cute guys being serious and strong! Oh haha, they're not, the tough guys are barely reacting, that's funny.." It's fine, suitable for the target audience and one that also works for a mainstream audience, but it's not particularly clever or interesting (with perhaps an exception being made for the one Koopa that actually goes get hit by a snowball effectively).

I'm not gonna make a big stink about it, it comes with the territory of these kinda films, but I get why some people wouldn't like it.
 
0
@VolcanicDynamo
Of course not saying everyone has to like it, or that the joke is 'super clever'. Sometimes the best jokes are the ones that are just kinda stupid, haha.
But when people say stuff like that, like, "Such a Illumination joke, tsk tsk" I just wonder, what 'type' of jokes would NOT be labled as that? Like, if they were to have a gag, for the Penguins, as to not have the entire scene just be pure seriousness, what type of gag would actually be considered good?
Not necessarily asking you, just in general. Not all jokes can be masterfully made and 100% original. So just not sure what makes this joke bad, and what type of joke would do the scene better.
But yeah in the end, it is hard to label things like that since people like jokes in different ways, haha
 
@VolcanicDynamo
Of course not saying everyone has to like it, or that the joke is 'super clever'. Sometimes the best jokes are the ones that are just kinda stupid, haha.
But when people say stuff like that, like, "Such a Illumination joke, tsk tsk" I just wonder, what 'type' of jokes would NOT be labled as that? Like, if they were to have a gag, for the Penguins, as to not have the entire scene just be pure seriousness, what type of gag would actually be considered good?
Not necessarily asking you, just in general. Not all jokes can be masterfully made and 100% original. So just not sure what makes this joke bad, and what type of joke would do the scene better.
But yeah in the end, it is hard to label things like that since people like jokes in different ways, haha
Sorta like that period of time when pretty much any western cartoon, no matter the quality or depth, would be constantly shit on online with the dismissive "ugh, it's CalArts style"
 
@Bowser Sr.
Oh sorry missed that. That is neat. That... toy looks like his mouth is just one big yellow orb cuz of the quality, and now I am terrified XD

@chocolate_supra
Oh yeah, I still see that a lot. I understand the desire for 'more variation' but lots of the shows people complain about that for, are still vastly different, hah.
 
Seen a lot of live reactions
A bunch of they get so negative at the Penguin-Snowball gag. Like, "This is such a Kids' movie gag" or "Typical Illumination humor" and such, and I don't really get it.
I thought it was a fun gag, both visually and surprisingly. The added jokes about how the Penguin King actually thinks it was a show of force, plus his smirk when they attacked, gives another layer on the joke.
Like, what kind of joke would be 'not' a 'bad kid's joke' then?
They're fishing for something to be mad at
 
Luckily, trailers are often cutting a bit to make stuff flow faster, so it could just be them showing the scene faster than it will actually be.
Yeah, and like... (as it's not clear enough), there's much more on that scene of Mario arriving on the Mushroom Kingdom and meeting Toad; Mario probably gets a longer period alone before talking to Toad, and probably gets convinced to follow Toad after a couple more of exchanges;

Betting that "Mushroom Kingdom, here we come!" isn't said even exactly on that scene and the delivery also may change on final movie;
 
@frog
Unfortunately that is often the case, you can tell that loads of people, reactors and not, have already sorta 'decided' what they thing regarding a lot of stuff, because of the pre-reveal negativity the plagued the talk about Mario Movie.

@CyberWolfJV
Oh yes. I am certain Mario do not say that there at all, and it is clear that a bunch of stuff happens between Toad reveal and them running. Or else, Mario teleports a lot and Toad learns his name by magic XD
 
0
I haven't heard enough of Chris pratts mario to really judge it, but one thing I can definitely say is I am happy it's not Martinet doing the voice as I was never a fan. I remember the first time I heard it in Mario 64 and thought it was too over the top and not near the voice I imagined playing the nes and snes Mario bros games
 
When I was a kid I had never seen any gameplay of Mario 64, this was my reference for Mario's voice in my imagination
 
I haven't heard enough of Chris pratts mario to really judge it, but one thing I can definitely say is I am happy it's not Martinet doing the voice as I was never a fan. I remember the first time I heard it in Mario 64 and thought it was too over the top and not near the voice I imagined playing the nes and snes Mario bros games
I'd imagine if Charles was casted as Mario for the movie, he would probably tone it down a bit. He has pretty good range.
 
If Mickey Mouse and SpongeBob can have full length movies with their respective iconic voices with constant dialogue, so should Mario. That's a non-issue.

I'm very interested to see how the Brazilian Dub will deal with this, in fact. because the actor in question is not known for voices like this, but he's reaching for that same tone Martinet does.
 
Me processing my trauma: nnnnnnnrgh... I have to vote for the genocide party... this is my coping mechanism
That’s pretty much the mindset of Xenoblade Chronicles X main antagonist.
« Let’s join the aliens who destroyed Earth and my family because mankind couldn’t save my family ! It makes sense when you don’t think about it ! »
 
0
I'd imagine if Charles was casted as Mario for the movie, he would probably tone it down a bit. He has pretty good range.
If the whole point of getting Charles Martinet to voice their iconic character in a movie is telling them to tone it down; then there is no point in asking them because someone else could do the voice instead.
 
I think at some point people just have to accept Martinet is not gonna voice this character forever. We are already hearing differences due to their age with Luigi for instance.
That's kind of what I've just said.

Having someone else doing a different take on Mario is fine, it's a matter if the take is good! Pratt's Mario is just... boring.
 
Why does everyone insist that Mario says "Wahoo!"? Name me one game where he says this...

"Wahoo!" is a Klonoa thing.
He says it all the time when he jumps along with woohoo and weehee! Sometimes it is “wa, wa, wahoo!” for triple jumps.

Here’s Odyssey’s wahoo for example, around the 1:20 mark following a yahoo.

 
Last edited:
He says it all the time when he jumps along with woohoo and weehee! Sometimes it is “wa, wa, wahoo!” for triple jumps.
Wrong. He says "Ya, wa, yahoo!" and "Yipee!"

He is also notable for saying "Mama Mia!"

(I'm guessing Yahoo! and Mama Mia are trade marked, so people try to disassosiate Mario from those sayings?)
 
I think at some point people just have to accept Martinet is not gonna voice this character forever. We are already hearing differences due to their age with Luigi for instance.
Anyone that would hypothetically replace Charles in the games eventually, would need to go for the same tone he goes for the characters. Either way, Mario's voice isn't changing.
 
I just edited in a video. Clov’s video has it in the first few seconds too. It’s super common for Mario to say wahoo.
I knew he said wahoo, I was told the same thing in the beginning of this thread.
 
That's kind of what I've just said.

Having someone else doing a different take on Mario is fine, it's a matter if the take is good! Pratt's Mario is just... boring.
That wasn’t at you specifically but others. I’ll withhold anything on Pratt’s Mario till I hear more.
Anyone that would hypothetically replace Charles in the games eventually, would need to go for the same tone he goes for the characters. Either way, Mario's voice isn't changing.
It will change in small ways as they can never replicate exactly how Martinet did it + whatever else they bring to the character. Unless Nintendo wants to do what Pokémon does & just reuse the same voice clips till kingdom come.
 
It will change in small ways as they can never replicate exactly how Martinet did it + whatever else they bring to the character. Unless Nintendo wants to do what Pokémon does & just reuse the same voice clips till kingdom come.
What I meant is Mario is like the Mickey Mouse and his friends; you can get a new voice actor on an occasion, as long you keep the voice as everyone expects;
 
What I meant is Mario is like the Mickey Mouse and his friends; you can get a new voice actor on an occasion, as long you keep the voice as everyone expects;
That’s what I’m talking about too. There is no occasion for this either. Mario & co keep their voice actors relatively stable unless there are extenuating circumstances. The person who eventually will voice Mario may be able to imitate Martinet but it will never be 100% so very minor differences will crop up + whatever else they choose to bring to the character as time moves on. The only other option is what the Pokémon companies does with its sounds design, which is reuse a lot of sound bites from their archives.
 
0
This just makes me desire that the should-happen Luigi's Mansion movie will have Luigi sing to himself in some dark corridoors while Ghosts do backup-singing but they vanish when Luigi looks for them.
 
@VolcanicDynamo
Of course not saying everyone has to like it, or that the joke is 'super clever'. Sometimes the best jokes are the ones that are just kinda stupid, haha.
But when people say stuff like that, like, "Such a Illumination joke, tsk tsk" I just wonder, what 'type' of jokes would NOT be labled as that? Like, if they were to have a gag, for the Penguins, as to not have the entire scene just be pure seriousness, what type of gag would actually be considered good?
Not necessarily asking you, just in general. Not all jokes can be masterfully made and 100% original. So just not sure what makes this joke bad, and what type of joke would do the scene better.
But yeah in the end, it is hard to label things like that since people like jokes in different ways, haha
Jumping into this a few days late because I had some time to think about the gag, and I discussed the topic with my partner, who loves animation and was able to put things into words better than I could. We concluded that it was the structure of the joke that lets it down. There's not enough build up. The penguins are already not taken seriously by the audience as soon as they are shown and they pull that height gag. Okay, one joke already. Then they do the attack scene, that's another, oh, and it looks like the penguin took that attack seriously, that's another gag. They kinda land individually, but rather than going for that one big laugh, it's trying to get laughs out of three moments - all basically the same gag in concept (penguins aren't tough but they think they are) and you get the idea from the first joke. Not the worst, but they're not all that strong.

One very simple tweak you could make to the penguin gag? Take the penguins seriously for longer. Don't do the height gag with the camera, that deflates them too soon. We already don't take them that seriously as a result. Instead, let the story build the penguins up a bit more, let them seem more serious...then let the attack scene pull the rug out of that seriousness. Maybe even hide the fact that the penguins are short until the attack happens properly. The audience's expectations are subverted, and it earns the laugh more. You could even move the "Do you yield?" exchange earlier to help build to the joke.

Some of the issue here may be trailer pacing, yes, but other aspects are pure writing and editing choices. A lot of lower-tier kid's stuff is similar. My partner likened it to the film lacking confidence in its jokes, instead trying too hard to make the audience laugh with rapid fire jokes rather than earning that bigger laugh. And that's why people say this is "typical Illumination." It's perfect serviceable humor. Not necessarily unfunny, it may make you smile or chuckle, but it's not much more than that. It's the average I kinda expect from Illumination. Which is why I'm not too miffed - it met my expectations, it was cute and not much more - but the joke could have been made better. The critique isn't without merit.
 
@VolcanicDynamo
I am not good enough at managing long posts without lines literally blurring together, so I hope I am not rude for making a short reply to your very long one
Yeah I totally get what you mean. I imagine the pacing of it is very fast because they realize we won't think the penguins are tough for very long and thus the pacing is very fast for the snowball moment. MAYBE they figured we'd take them as a joke first, but then they charge so seriously and with that smirk, that we'd suddenly think, of wait they ARE good. And then once again with the 'oh nevermind they are a joke' thing.
Very likely they did not do that intentional tho.
But yeah I do get what you mean. I still think the joke works pretty well, with the many layers around it. One can even say the 'their snowballs won't work' is a joke that you are meant to see coming, as a sorta "Here it comes, here it comes!" joke, and the main joke being the visuals of it.
But yeah
I dunno, again, I totally get what you mean ^^ It is not a perfect gag either way.
 
0
So I avoid politics on my channel, but this isn't my channel so I figured I would speak up, as my parents, and basically half my family, votes republican. The other half votes democrat, and yes, this makes for some VERY interesting family gatherings around the holiday season... especially in election years for state/national elections (nobody seems to argue over the local elections, which actually impact them more than the national ones do, but I think that's because no matter who runs things in our town, nothing seems to change and life is fairly peaceful).

That being said, I have been to rallies on both sides of the isle in the state of wisconsin because of my family. I have been to conventions on both sides. Several times. Although religion (in our families case, Roman Catholics) is very prevalent in all of my family and nearly everyone goes to church, there doesn't seem to be a real connection between them all being roman catholics and what they vote for, since as I said, they all go every sunday and every church picnic and church event, but they all vote different ways. I am setting the table a little to help explain my perspective, as this isn't one that is based in city living, but rather out in the areas that are typically considered to be heavily red.

The reason I want to address this is because while my parents and others did definitely vote for Trump. Twice, I think people massively misunderstand why a lot of people vote the way they do. Much of the internet focuses so heavily on social issues. Racism, Bigotry, LGBTQ+ rights, equality, work place treatment, and sure... abortion rights are a big one right now. A LOT of people online really heavily focus on this stuff. And that's fine - for many people these are the things that decide how they vote.

But others have different things they value most. As an example, my parents voted trump purely because the tax laws under him help them keep more of the money they make (in particular, my dad). This matters, because my mom is handicapped and my father getting to keep even more of his paycheck helps him support taking care of her as they are a one income family. You may go that's a stupid reason to vote trump - but when you have issues you deal with personally one one side over another side is going to be able to best help you out in your given situation, you sort of overlook all the other stuff because in many of the areas in wisconsin that are heavily red leaning, the issues the internet drones on about doesn't seem affected here.

As an example, we have a quickly growing black and hmung community (I think that's how it's spelled) and they are never looked down upon here and work in good jobs like everyone else. We have a pretty vibrant gay community that nobody seems to give any gruff too, even at the bars. My sister literally had gay friends in her wedding in a Catholic Church. I think what gets lost on many is they have a narrow view of what being a republican means because they are so focused on whats happening in the highly dense and populated areas of the US, that when they look out towards rural america (in at least my areas), these issues are huge non factors and thus not something people are focusing on when they vote. Instead they are focusing on who's going to get our roads fixed and snow plows running, who's going to give us the most tax breaks. For others who aren't as fortunate, they vote based on what's best going to benefit them too.

It so happens most people who vote democrat here are also living off wellfare and popping out kids like crazy to keep the checks coming. So when you see this, it can greatly influence that why would you want to support a side that's allowing this to happen and keeps giving them more and more of the money that they earn? That's the gist of how voting lines work on here. Those that make even 50k+, vote Republican. Those that make less, vote democrat. And the split on the line isn't a social disagreement over abortion/rights laws, it's purely because both sides want money. Republicans want to keep theirs, democrats want more free money from the government.

I am not saying this applies to both parties on the whole nor can I say this applies to say, rural areas in alabama and other southern states. I can only speak for rural areas of wisconsin, minnesota, and michigan. And none of this applies to cities.

You can argue it's socially and collectively irresponsible to vote based purely on your own self interest rather than the interest of every person on the whole, nit of we're REALLY honest, a lot of us vote for that very reason anyways. It just so happens whatever that self interest is may not be driven by money. It might be driven by abortion rights or whatever thing you prioritize more than money.

But it is my experience that a majority of republicans I know literally don't care about racism, don't care about abortion laws, don't care about bigotry. Because basically... we don't really have issues with this stuff overall in our area. It's not something they are seeing every day.

So they vote based on what helps them live a better life - which is generally about money. It's why it's so hard hearing people online say if you vote republican it means you support all this crazy stuff, and then the right will fire back and say if you vote democrat it means you support people being lazy and living off government aid instead of working for a living, etc.

All of these views, just like my own, are skewed by where we live and what our upbringing is. So to add perspective: Everyone is my family are very nice people, have never talked down or looked down upon another person in their lives, all of them donate to charity, work at soup kitchens, volunteer time for the homeless, and do IMHO, a lot of good. But because some of them voted to keep the money they make, they get grouped with a bunch of other people.

I think in reality, there is a HUGE chunk of people on both sides that would love a legit 3rd party that will give them what they want and stop with the BS that goes both ways, but because the two party system is so engrained it's really hard to vote anyone else and actually get what you want. So you can call the reason some of my family votes the way they do short sighted, but I also think the amount of people that are extreme isn't as large as you think, and the only reason the Republicans hold power is because a lot of peopl emaking money want to keep their money. If you flipped ideologies and instead, republicans were for giving handouts and democrats for tax breaks for wealthier people, but then both sides KEPT their ideologies on rights? I almost think the democratic party would landslide the entire country like 70-30. But that's just not reality. The money issue is what keeps so many republicans on that side.

I know this too, because for a little while all of wisconsin went blue, and it went blue because the democratic governor's policy promises included tax breaks to let people north of 50k keep more of their money.

Over time however, too many extremist found their way into politics and power, and it's a crap show.

As for my political affiliation? Completely independent. I am seen a lot of bullshit on both sides. I voted Andrew Yang for the last presidency, as I believe and still do to this day, that he was ACTUALLY the right man for the job. But, who cares what I think lol.

Speaking about Jack Black, the autism speaks stuff is the #1 charity that shows up in every single search engine in the world for autism, and their websites and claims all seem above board and without a deeper dive, it appears to be a worthy charity to help autistic people. And, the real issues of that charity are not very well covered. Most of what he supports and where his money goes is partly determined by an agent, and they worry a lot about public image. Most people that are famous supporting autism speaks likely do so because they think it's actually a pretty good charity that's making a big difference.

I have no clue if they actually are, but I know as someone who isn't autistic and knows nothing, if it wasn't for people on the internet tell me it's bad, I wouldn't know any better tbh. And with the amount of popularity someone like Jack Black has, I can't blame him if he isn't listening to the public, and the public online will say a lot of conflicting things when you're that popular. He probably mostly focuses on his movie/music career and his kids. He ain't wasting his days arguing online and reading comments.
Smfh
 
Do we know what the current stats for overall views the official trailers have right now?
And how it stacks up to other big movies?
Curious
 
0
'The Super Mario Bros. Movie' actor Khary Payton says people are overreacting to Chris Pratt's Mario accent
Payton added that Pratt's take might be "more interesting and updated" than the traditional cartoon voice we've come to know from the games.

An interesting thing here that was mentioned is how it was only one month between 'Teen Titans Go! to the Movies' release in theatres and Aaron Horvath and Michael Jelenic going straight to Illuminations Studios Paris for the Mario Movie
 
lol it's uh...
..not the accent that people are reacting to, your highness. 😅
Unfortunately, it is just the accent that most people are reacting to. From what I’ve seen at least, most people either don’t know or don’t care about Pratt being a shitty person, and most of the discourse I’ve seen about him being cast as Mario online is almost exclusively about the voice. Problem is not enough people are talking about the real issue.
 
Unfortunately, it is just the accent that most people are reacting to. From what I’ve seen at least, most people either don’t know or don’t care about Pratt being a shitty person, and most of the discourse I’ve seen about him being cast as Mario online is almost exclusively about the voice. Problem is not enough people are talking about the real issue.
well then damn
 
0


Back
Top Bottom