• 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.

Reviews The Super Mario Bros. Movie review thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I just hope Nintendo weighs the box office and gen pop reviews more heavily than professional reviews when deciding to make another movie based on one of their properties.
 
If they wanted some fresh ideas in this movie, they should have got in touch with those folks who make Max Headroom. Now that show is a real riot. They could show these Illumination folks a thing or two.
 
Matthew Huff's review for AV Club best sums it up:

Ultimately, Nintendo fans are sure to find the second Mario film (unlike the first) well worth a trip to the cinema, and with a runtime of only 92 minutes, it doesn’t overstay its welcome. But to swipe a metaphor from the original NES Super Mario Bros. game, while the film may complete the level, it doesn’t quite nail the leap to the top of the flagpole.
Click to expand...
 
I love Mario and the world but lets be honest, this shouldn't be that big of a shock. If you're deadly honest and know a bit about storytelling, there's not a lot in 40 years worth of Mario games to draw upon. Some side character in a Paper Mario game having some mildly hinted upon back story doesn't cut it.

Even games that have literal movie like plots struggle with game reviewsers ... Uncharted has a 42% rotten score case in point.

People underestimate how hard it is to make a good movie and doubly so how hard it is to make a good movie from a source material that basically has no story to draw from.
 
This is probably the project that Miyamoto has had the most direct involvement with since Star Fox Zero, haha
He's gonna be blamed for Mario having a nothing story all over again
 
Machrider said:
Return of the Jedi is underrated still I think, there hasn't been a Star Wars movie as good as that since 1983.

Yes there are Ewoks but that doesn't invalidate the Vader/Luke/Emperor scenes are arguably the best thing in the saga period (yes even peaking higher than Empire Strikes Back's peaks; Empire is the more consistent film but ROTJ peaks higher).

None of the prequels or sequels or spin-offs are as good as ROTJ.
Click to expand...
iu
 
N 2 Deep said:
Sonic really won bro

Nintendo being cheap as hell and going with Illumination did them in

😭
Click to expand...
Weirdly enough Sonic has a better Rotten Tomatoes score but a worst MC score. But yeah, I agree about Illumination, very poor choice, if they had a deal with Comcast they should’ve asked for Dreamworks.
 
0
EvilChameleon said:
I just hope Nintendo weighs the box office and gen pop reviews more heavily than professional reviews when deciding to make another movie based on one of their properties.
Click to expand...

The Cinemascore will be interesting to see - that'll probably be make or break for the film fulfilling its box office potential at this point.
 
Well, Nintendo people are very well experienced creating good action games.

They are not focused in story or character development.

Thus I think Miyamoto and whatever else supervised the film made special focus in action scenes, good visuals/art and don’t care about character development or drama like critics like. They probably wanted the film to be enjoyed over the expanded gaming audience (5-95 year old people like Wii days…) and hace a straightforward story.
 
0
Hylianhero777 said:
This is probably the project that Miyamoto has had the most direct involvement with since Star Fox Zero, haha
He's gonna be blamed for Mario having a nothing story all over again
Click to expand...

First Star Fox Zero, then Super Mario Bros 52.... Pikmin 4 bros
 
Hylianhero777 said:
This is probably the project that Miyamoto has had the most direct involvement with since Star Fox Zero, haha
He's gonna be blamed for Mario having a nothing story all over again
Click to expand...

I mean to be honest though how much blame can he really have. Dude is a game designer, has he ever even taken a screenwriting class? It's like asking a basketball player to go dominate a hockey game or something ... now maybe they can, but it's not like athleticism in one automatically translates 1:1 in the other.
 
Just a friendly reminder Uncharted had a 42% RT score (so even worse than this) and only made about $400 million and Sony has already greenlit a sequel.

Angry Birds The Movie had a 43% RT score, only made about 352 mill WW and still got a sequel too.
 
JR436 said:
The Cinemascore will be interesting to see - that'll probably be make or break for the film fulfilling its box office potential at this point.
Click to expand...
Unless something really drops the ball in the movie for fans, which I doubt, I don't think word-of-mouth will be an issue here.
 
Machrider said:
Just a friendly reminder Uncharted had a 42% RT score (so even worse than this) and only made about $400 million and Sony has already greenlit a sequel.

Angry Birds The Movie had a 43% RT score, only made about 352 mill WW and still got a sequel too.
Click to expand...

I pay for watching good movies, not many bad ones.
 
I won't lie, between Illumination usually averaging 6/10 and the trailers looking pretty great, seeing the reviews score be this low is disappointing.

I'm still excited, don't get me wrong, but still.
 
linkwashere said:
I pay for watching good movies, not many bad ones.
Click to expand...

Yes ... and? Would you like a cookie or something?

It's not that easy to make a compelling story narrative from the Mario games. Uncharted couldn't even do it and that literally is "I'm a Hollywood Movie - The Video Game" as a franchise.

Making a Mario movie that was a big hit with critics was always going to be a very steep mountain to climb, that doesn't mean the movie isn't going to be a big hit.
 
BZL8 said:
Unless something really drops the ball in the movie for fans, which I doubt, I don't think word-of-mouth will be an issue here.
Click to expand...

'Fans' only get you so much as a DC cinematic universe style turnout. The film has to actually be good on top of that to make a high box office because audience retention is super important, and if the film is boring, everyone is going to become aware quickly.

It'll still make a lot of money purely due to being tied to a strong IP, but illumination and Nintendo were doubtlessly hoping for this to come close to illuminations higher earners, and that's probably out the window of possibility now.
 
JR436 said:
I won't lie, between Illumination usually averaging 6/10 and the trailers looking pretty great, seeing the reviews score be this low is disappointing.

I'm still excited, don't get me wrong, but still.
Click to expand...
Just remember - with 52 reviews, the difference between a 46 and a 60 on RT is 5 critics liking a movie just a little bit more.

Just like with games, the contents of the reviews matter much more than any metascore.
 
Machrider said:
Yes ... and? Would you like a cookie or something?

It's not that easy to make a compelling story narrative from the Mario games. Uncharted couldn't even do it and that literally is "I'm a Hollywood Movie - The Video Game" as a franchise.

Making a Mario movie that was a big hit with critics was always going to be a very steep mountain to climb, that doesn't mean the movie isn't going to be a big hit.
Click to expand...

So it's my experience watching the film gonna be better just because many people will watch the movie? Should I install Candy Crush in my phone?

Also, keep your condescendency to your fucking self.
 
The fact that the review thread has successfully created an intersection between Useless Miyamoto, Star Wars and Paper Mario discourse is ample proof that Nintendo should drop out of the movie business tomorrow

Don't @ me

this is a shitpost
 
There is a long history of film critics bashing films that go on to be considered timeless classics. Then you add in how the academy treats animation in general and it's easy to be cynical about the opinions of hollywood movie critics for animated films in general.

Maybe the movie will be bad, but the tone of the negative reviews I've read comes off as a bit axe grinding. The amount of glowing reviews from game outlets makes me think this is just a film where your enjoyment is going to come down to how much you enjoy Mario's world.
 
Machrider said:
It's not that easy to make a compelling story narrative from the Mario games.
Click to expand...
Maybe they should’ve asked Intelligent Systems to make the movie, then, because Origami King sure managed to make a compelling story narrative from the Mario universe
 
linkwashere said:
So it's my experience watching the film gonna be better just because many people will watch the movie? Should I install Candy Crush in my phone?

Also, keep your condescendency to your fucking self.
Click to expand...

That's not what they were saying though - they simply made the observations that other video game adapations managed to get sequels when when they reviewed poorly and (likely) made less money than Mario.
 
BassForever said:
There is a long history of film critics bashing films that go on to be considered timeless classics. Then you add in how the academy treats animation in general and it's easy to be cynical about the opinions of hollywood movie critics for animated films in general.

Maybe the movie will be bad, but the tone of the negative reviews I've read comes off as a bit axe grinding. The amount of glowing reviews from game outlets makes me think this is just a film where your enjoyment is going to come down to how much you enjoy Mario's world.
Click to expand...

Which stage of grief is this at? Bargaining? Wonder when people will reach the acceptance bit.
 
Linkstrikesback said:
'Fans' only get you so much as a DC cinematic universe style turnout. The film has to actually be good on top of that to make a high box office because audience retention is super important, and if the film is boring, everyone is going to become aware quickly.

It'll still make a lot of money purely due to being tied to a strong IP, but illumination and Nintendo were doubtlessly hoping for this to come close to illuminations higher earners, and that's probably out the window of possibility now.
Click to expand...
Michael Bay, among others, have proved countless time that "being good" is actualy not at all necessary for audience retention.
 
Mango said:
Those reviews are ruthless. Sheesh. I just hope this doesn't prevent them from wanting to explore other franchises for adaptations.
Click to expand...
If it makes a lot of money I don’t think it would deter them. Uncharted was basically the first of Sony PlayStation Productions film/series and that didn’t review well but made decent money and didn’t deter Sony much.

Though Sony had already had like 5 scheduled projects while Nintendo only has this one as far as we know.
 
0
JR436 said:
That's not what they were saying though - they simply made the observations that other video game adapations managed to get sequels when when they reviewed poorly and (likely) made less money than Mario.
Click to expand...

And my point is: why would I care for sequels if the quality standard is this? (Which is expected being Illumination the studio behind it).

We are discussing the quality of the film through the reviews, not how much money it's going to make (which will be fairly high, there is not doubt about that).

I would care about ticket sales if the product was good and for whatever reason it didn't succeed. The other way around it's whatever.
 
0
Party Sklar said:
Maybe they should’ve asked Intelligent Systems to make the movie, then, because Origami King sure managed to make a compelling story narrative from the Mario universe
Click to expand...

I don't think so, the Paper Mario games still have (no pun intended) paper thin basic plots (you have to rescue XYZ to beat villain ZYX type of thing).

Just because Paper Mario games have more interesting side stories/some references to darker things (that aren't really actually that relevant to the main plot) doesn't make a great story.

I mean lets also remember this "Ratchet & Clank" by video game standards has a "good" story. The Ratchet & Clank movie was totally destroyed by film critics (21% Rotten score). I'm sure if that same story/plot was used in the video game most gamers would say "well that's a pretty good story".

Film story "good" and video game story "good" are two very, very, very, very different planets.

Writing a good screenplay for a motion picture is probably the hardest of all artistic endeavors I think, even people who are the best of the best have shit movies on their resume.
 
0
Status
Not open for further replies.


Back
Top Bottom