This is part of a series, read the first installment here.
“Hey Huw, you haven’t done a review in a while, what’s wrong?”
“I don’t think that’s any of your business imaginary reader, but you’re right I need to get cracking!”
Oh, how optimistic I was when this Quest started, and I’ve had such great adventures. I’ve frolicked through the Mushroom Kingdom; I’ve fought monsters with ninjas and fought evil business men with street wise martial artists. However, my adventure is now taking a step back, a step back into the Mushroom Kingdom, but the fields have gone. The air is thick with pollution. Where am I? Oh no, not this place, not this film… It’s time for Super Mario Bros. (1993).
The flame for the Moth.
Now I know I don’t need to tell you what the Super Mario Bros. games are like so I’m just going straight into the film.
Super Mario Bros. is based on two Brooklyn plumbers, Mario and Luigi who must go to another dimension to rescue a princess from the evil dictator King Koopa and stop him from taking over the world… Now, this short blurb sounds perfect, this is what the game is about, and this is what the film is about too. However, on release this film was completely destroyed by critics and fans alike. Even the cast hated doing it, now if you find yourself hating being Mario, as in Super Mario film, then you know something is going wrong. In an interview with The Guardian in 2011, Bob Hoskins (Mario) was asked what his biggest disappointment was, he answered Super Mario Bros. John Leguizamo (Luigi) admitted in his autobiography that he and Hoskins would get drunk just to get through it, knowing that it was going to do bad. Dennis Hopper described it as a nightmare, everyone hated this film. Hopefully my review might show us why it did so badly, or maybe shine some light on it’s better qualities, but I am not optimistic in any way, but let’s dive in.
Does the film stay true to the source material?
I’ve been thinking of how to answer this question without going into an over embellished rant that doesn’t make a shred of sense, and just turns into me throwing my computer against the wall and giving up, not just on this blog, but on life. So to prevent me from locking myself in a dark room and crying for a month, I think I might just share with you all the questions I wrote down while watching this film and quickly explaining them to you (by the way, the theme for this review is WHY).
Why is everything so oddly sexual?
Seriously, like everyone is dressed in Latex. Also, there is a scene where Mario and Luigi are arrested and are presented to a police officer at the stations reception desk, the officer is talking to them as normal as he can whilst receiving… a massage from the heel of a woman’s stiletto…?
Why is the Mushroom Kingdom a Dystopian world?
The Mushroom Kingdom is meant to be an amazing world full of happy creatures, hills and clouds with cute eyes and chubby faces, magic and wonderment. Why is everything grim and grimy?
Why have Bob-oms but not Thwomps?
What I mean by this, is that a lot of the crazy characters and items you get in the Mario World are either referenced to or twisted in some weird way. Yet, Bob-oms are still exactly the same, so confusing.
Why are their Police cars Mad Max cars?
Seriously, why is this a fusion between Mad Max and Mario? I have no time for this. Mad Max is grim and dangerous, Mario is meant to be fun and charming.
Why is Princess Peach dead?
Or is she? Was that even her?
Why isn’t Bowser, Bowser? He has cousins?
I understand that making a Bowser look just like he does in the games may have cost money…but why is he a sleazy mayor, why does he have idiot cousins?
Why is it about Daisy and Luigi and not Peach and Mario?
I hate that the story is about the Player 2 characters. The games up until this point are centred on Mario and Peach. Why isn’t Peach here? Why is Luigi the main protagonist?
Why is Peach, Daisy’s mother? Was that even Peach? If not, where is Peach?
So many questions.
Peach?
Why didn’t Bowser make his henchmen smarter in the first place?
The henchmen fail so many times…then Bowser decides to use his machine on them to make them smarter.
Why do dinosaurs evolve into humans? Does everything evolve into humans?
Because science.
I know Bowser’s other name is King Koopa, but no one knows that name, no one uses that name. Why use it?
Why are the Henchmen stupid even when they are smart?
They still make the dumb mistakes.
Bowser’s cousins?
Big Bertha, as in the fish?
Yes, the turn an enemy from a fish into a busty temptress.
When did the Gangsters blow up the hole through dimensions, also…how?
We are told that there are gangsters in New York causing trouble, yet that has nothing to do with the story. It feels like they might start something with them.
Why are they at a club?
Where is the Mushroom Kingdom?
WHERE IS THE MAGIC!?!?!?!
I’m crying.
What happened?
Why are the villains businessmen and politicians?
They are tyrants and rulers, not this.
Why are people dancing so crazy to such a chill song?
The whole club scene disturbs me.
Why are Goombas dinosaurs? Why is anything a dinosaur?
This is a really good question, and it needs to be answered.
Why reference the Mushroom Kingdom, but don’t make the Mushroom Kingdom?
THIS, is the Mushroom Kingdom.
Why mess around with Toad?
Why are the henchmen good all of sudden?
What happened?
Why is “Get the Goomba mattress!” a line from this film?
Seriously.
Why does Bowser order a pizza?
He actually stops doing evil and orders a pizza. It’s not even code for a mercenary or an assassin, he just wants pizza. Am I missing a reference or something? Why is this something that needs to be written and filmed and kept in the final edit!?
“Where’s my pizza?”
Why use a Wizard of Oz reference?
In the Wizard of Oz, Dorothy is transported is to a magical world, this world has sapped all the magic from the Mario games.
I don’t get how the Mushroom King turned back. Also, is that Bishop from Aliens?
Oh my God, it is!
Why did they set up for a sequel?
Like hell are you getting one. Who would pay for more of this?
So, in short it does stick to the source material, in that they managed to spell all the characters names correctly.
Does the film capture/express/mimic the absorbing abilities of Video Games, and how?
The film doesn’t do it in a blatant way, like the original Mario film does, however when thinking this question over the film does do it quite well, and in quite an interesting way. When talking about any form of escapism, the user/audience is transported to a faraway land, a world where anything can happen. However, with Video Games critics and gamers describe it has stepping into a virtual world, not just sitting back and being moved but physically entering a new reality, which is exactly what Mario, Luigi and Daisy do.
Think about it, this film is one huge exploration of what it’s like to play Video Games. Two, working class guys from Brooklyn enter a new world; this world has its own set of rules, its own history, its own mechanics and Mario and Luigi must learn them in order to fight and survive, but most importantly they have to use the rules of the world to obtain their ultimate goal.
What the inside of a pip looks like.
Sound familiar? It should, it’s exactly like playing a Video Game. Two guys enter a new plane of existence and become more than plumbers, they become heroes. Same with Daisy, in the real world she is a student, in this other world she is a princess, a woman of power. In Video Games we are constantly entering other worlds and becoming characters that are way more important and powerful than us, and this film explores this phenomenon really well.
Are any Video Game aesthetics used, and do they contribute to the narrative of the film?
Other than the absorption that I discussed earlier, there aren’t a lot of Video Game aesthetics used in this film. There are a lot of references however, such as the use of power ups and items, but nothing that I can label as Video Game aesthetics. Luigi is seen playing a video game and him and Mario have a quick back and forth about it, but nothing concrete.
Does the film balance narrative with spectacle, and does the spectacle contribute to the narrative?
Normally, I would list off all the moments of spectacle and tell you if they do or do not contribute to the narrative of a film. However, I don’t wish to throw another list your way so I will just say that even though the action sequences look random and slapstick, they do result in placing characters in situations which moves the plot forwards.
Does the film blatantly sell anything to me?
If this film has one ray of hope, it’s that there is no product placement.
Did I enjoy this film?
Right, let’s go over what I did like about this film. Bob Hoskins being cast as Mario is probably the greatest things that has ever happened, and whoever made that decision and secured the deal needs to be administrated into a Hall of Fame of Best People. It’s a crying shame that Hoskins hated this movie so much, as he is one of the redeeming features of the movie.
His face is my face.
The song Walk the Dinosaur (1988) is an absolute tune, and should be on every party playlist. Yoshi, even though he was transformed into an actual dinosaur is insanely cute. There is a scene where Mario and Luigi have to avoid a lift full of Goombas. Luigi tricks them into dancing with each other, so that they can sneak past. This scene is actually hilarious, and even though the Goombas are done totally wrong, I couldn’t help but laugh at this scene. The Mario Bros. costumes at the end of the film are pretty awesome, but I would have preferred them at the start, and the Mario Bros. use plumbing to fight bad guys, a dream come true.
Last but not least, the scene where Mario rescues a group of girls from Bowser, (oh sorry, King Koopa) is what should be happening all the way through a Mario film. Mario kicking ass and taking names, saving the day with his bro! This vibe that this scene creates comes way too late at the 1 hour 19 minute mark.
This is how the whole film should have been.
Too late film, I am not excited for you.
So there are elements of this film that I did enjoy, but I feel that these small diamonds are lost in a whole lot of rough. I feel like this film could be enjoyable if it wasn’t an adaptation of Mario Bros. which some say shouldn’t cloud my judgment and enjoyment of the film, but it does. I read once that Shigeru Miyamoto is like the John Lennon of Video Games, a man who puts character and soul into his art medium, and Mario is a testament to this interpretation. Its set in a world full of magic, wonderment and joy, the characters are so fantastical that you want to live in their world and meet them. The Mario Bros. film however takes the magic and mutates it into a sort of Monkey’s Paw consequence of a wish for a live action Mario Bros. film. I hate it, it’s gross and I wish it didn’t happen.
Huw's Reviews 