Saturday 15 April 2023

The Super Mario Bros. Movie - Cheap Thoughts

It always seems to be the most undeserving of movies for audiences to become champion defenders for against the villainy of critics. These fans believing the delusions that between a combination of two-billion dollar corporations coming together to make a guaranteed blockbuster and individual journalists with opinions on movies, that the former is somehow the underdog. Also this idea that 58% on Rotten Tomatoes is somehow a bomb, and not a sign that the majority of critics enjoyed the movie to some degree. It reeks of insecurity and unfounded arguments such as critics being unable to enjoy movies that aim simply to entertain, as if recent movies Dungeons & Dragons: Honour Among Thieves which is also a family friendly adventure film that aims to entertain didn’t get good reviews, or rival family friendly videogame mascot Sonic the Hedgehog didn’t also get good reviews, or the majority of Pixar, Dreamworks, Ghibli, Sony and Warner Bros animated films don’t also get good reviews. There are people out there who enjoyed The Super Mario Bros Movie and are seemingly so insecure in that opinion that they need to shout at other people who’s job it is to have opinions on movies and scream “No! You’re wrong!”. This is a warning to state that if this is you, this is going to be another negative review of this movie, so you might want to leave now.

Truth be told it’s not even going to be that harshly negative, arguably more positive than the Sonic the Hedgehog movies which I was very critical of (Though we’ll see). The Super Mario Bros movie is the second attempt by the west to adapt the Mario franchise into a feature length movie, the first attempt in 1993 with a live action film that was truly panned by critics and audiences, it’s main criticism being that it is incredibly unfaithful to the source material, and so this film has gone to obscene lengths to be as faithful as possible, in visuals, in tone, in music and even in plot by being paper thin and lacking anything substantive.

Mario videogames can get away with this because they have always been about spectacle. They have fun gameplay, creative worlds and often multiplayer components to make them entertaining experiences. Being adapted into a movie, and thus having their main benefactor removed you would think that they would replace it with something, perhaps give Mario a personality, an arc, anything resembling a character beyond his iconic look? Nope. He is a mascot first, a mascot second, a mascot exclusively.

The film begins with Mario (Chris Pratt) & Luigi (Charlie Day) recently starting their own plumbing business in Brooklyn and everyone seems to be against them, both their former boss and their family members mock them in their attempts to follow their dreams, yet the two brothers ignore them. On their first job they are shown to be perfectly competent plumbers, and it is due to external forces that disaster happens. Shenanigans occur and they are eventually brought into the Mushroom Kingdom, quickly separated, they meet all the staples of the Mario cast and are dragged into the middle of a war as Bowser (Jack Black) wants to kidnap and marry Princess Peach (Anya Taylor-Joy), while all the two care for is reuniting and making their way home.

When people say their enjoyment for this film comes from what if offers them in terms of entertainment it’s easy to see why they view that, it is a bright and colourful films-truth be told it is easily the best looking film Illumination have ever produced-and it has heavy emphasis on comedy and loyalty above all else. It’s rare for people to root for the corporate overlords over any artistic merit but it is very clear Nintendo were breathing down Illumination’s necks to make this a faithful recreation down to the smallest of details and fill it with dozens of easter eggs for audiences to enjoy.

Yet it also relies on incredibly lazy needle-drops to make sure the audience is paying attention, songs that have no relevance to what's happened but they are broadly appealing enough the film hopes it can cheat by passing this off as quality entertainment. Where critics interrupt this is simply asking why not offer more? Don’t you want something other than cotton candy to eat? Don’t you want something of value to be gained from watching the film? As harsh as I was on Sonic the Hedgehog it at least put in the bare effort to try and tell a story, to give Sonic an arc. I ask you, what does Mario do? What does he learn? What does he want? Several times in the film people exclaim “you just don’t know when to quit” but at no point is he given a reason to quit. He’s a good plumber, he’s a good brother, there is no reason for him to change throughout the events of the film. Well okay, that can also work, have him be a flat character and change the world around him, yet he is an outsider in the world of the Mushroom Kingdom and has no direct impact on anyone and has no skills to offer. He wins because of power ups that anyone can wield. He fails as a plumber due to external forces and he succeeds in being a hero due to external forces.

A big marketing factor for this film was it’s star studded A-List cast, and I’m not going to be arguing against what other people are saying. The scene stealer was Jack Black, the runners up are Charlie Day and Keegan-Michael Key, everyone else was fine, even Chris Pratt. Yet them being just fine does further prove they could have just hired professional voice actors who would have been better and cheaper, but they still are willing to spend all that money for the sake of placing a name on a poster.

Part of me wants to be more lenient on the film and offer it the same benefit of the doubt I did Dungeons & Dragons, where that film took the easy route because their main goal was to prove a D&D movie could work, this film clearly had a similar mindset and just wanted to prove that a Mario movie could work. Yet there was still an attempt in the D&D movie to give their characters some emotion and arcs. Watching this film feels like the equivalent of eating a can of whipped cream, it is sugary and sweet yet lacks anything of nutrition or even solid substance to make it worth something.

-Danny

No comments:

Post a Comment