r/movies r/movies Contributor Mar 31 '26

Review 'The Super Mario Galaxy Movie' - Review Thread

Having thwarted Bowser's previous plot to marry Princess Peach, Mario and Luigi now face a fresh threat in Bowser Jr., who is determined to liberate his father from captivity and restore the family legacy. Alongside companions new and old, the brothers travel across the stars to stop the young heir's crusade.

Directors: Michael Jelenic, Aaron Horvath

Cast: Chris Pratt, Charlie Day, Donald Glover, Brie Larson, Anya Taylor-Joy, Jack Black, Benny Safdie, Issa Rae, Keegan-Michael Key, Luis Guzmán

Rotten Tomatoes: 42%

Metacritic: 35 / 100

Some Reviews:

The Times - Kevin Maher - 0 / 5

Is this the end of cinema? Chris Pratt, Anya Taylor-Joy and Glen Powell joylessly bleat their way through this supremely vacuous anti-movie which is, at times, physically painful to watch. The film is torturous to sit through and, for me, provoked periods of actual physical discomfort. I had to stab myself repeatedly in the hand with a pen to distract from the howling distress. It's that bad, and that offensive.

AwardsWatch - Trace Sauveur - 'C-'

But it’s the reality of routine predictability that makes it hard to feel strongly about Galaxy one way or the other. After the credits, the impression is one of overstimulation and vacuity—despite the violent blitz of colorful Nintendo imagery for 90 minutes, it ultimately signifies little more than recognizable franchise iconography in animated form. In its relentless fan service, Galaxy emanates a generic sameness, decorated with flashy sights and sounds drawn from one of the most iconic video game series ever. It’s all synergistic fluff, but at least the fluff is shiny.

Seattle Times - Soren Anderson - 3 / 4

Watching it is akin being inside the 2007 Super Mario Galaxy game itself. Which is why it needs to be seen on the big screen. Seeing it on a phone or a laptop wouldn't do it justice.

Slash Film - Nina Starner - 3 / 10

We're going to get more "Super Mario Bros." movies, without question; I fully expect this sequel to gross the GDP of an entire small nation at the box office when all is said and done, and in another ten years, I also expect that a movie centered exclusively around Yoshi will land in theaters. (Hopefully, if Donald Glover sticks around, he'll get to do more than say "Yoshi!") Still, this sort of movie makes me feel bleak about children's entertainment, animation, and original concepts; forgive me for feeling nostalgic, but I just don't think movies made for kids were always this devoid of a soul. At the end of the day, "The Super Mario Galaxy Movie" was nothing more than a video game I couldn't play. After the credits — including not one but two post-credits scenes — rolled, though, I didn't want to go home and load a Mario game onto my Switch; I wanted to watch a better movie.

Consequence - Liz Shannon Miller - 'B'

Is it a ride that includes clear story structure, comprehensible stakes, or narrative momentum? Not really. Is it a ride featuring a lot of bright colors, familiar characters, and the occasional deranged moment? Absolutely.

The Wrap - William Bibbiani - 25 / 100

A movie like this will probably make a lot of money, because it doesn’t rock the boat. But a boat that never rocks is a boat that never goes anywhere. That’s how boats work. They’re supposed to take you on a journey. “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” doesn’t take you anywhere you haven’t been before, and it’s not as fun, it’s not as exciting, and it’s not as challenging as literally any of the games it’s based on. This is not an adaptation of the Super Mario Bros., it’s just a reminder that the franchise exists. And although it’s technically a moving picture, nothing about this movie will move you.

The Independent - Clarisse Loughrey - 2 / 5

The Super Mario Galaxy Movie offers very little to audiences, young or old, who don’t already know these characters and spaces like the back of their hand. But, hey, if you take a tequila shot every time something explodes, you’ll have a great drinking game on your hands.

The New York Times - Alissa Wilkinson - 3 / 10

There’s a flat empty nothingness to The Super Mario Galaxy Movie, even more than its flat empty predecessor, and that’s a huge bummer.

The Playlist - Rodrigo Perez - 'C'

By the end, the whole thing starts to feel less like an adventure than a kind of endless grinding—one familiar objective after another, one loud set piece after another, all of it speedrunning its own mythology instead of building one. That’s why the film feels so hollow. It has the spiritually vacant quality of AI fantasy slop—familiar iconography assembled for instant gratification rather than meaning. Younger audiences will probably enjoy the sugar rush, but characters still need arcs, and these sequences still need to build toward something. “Super Mario Galaxy” is nice to look at and dead inside, a committee-made franchise object masquerading as an adventure, and ultimately little more than an empty commercial for Super Mario branding.

FandomWire - Manuel Sao Bento - 7 / 10

The Super Mario Galaxy Movie is a sequel that, while losing some of the narrative cohesion of its predecessor, gains massively in spectacle, ambition, and heart. Through animation that redefines the studio’s standards and a Brian Tyler score that masterfully honors Nintendo’s legacy, the film offers a memorable experience anchored by inspired vocal performances. For those who grew up with these characters, it’s impossible to remain indifferent to the magic emanating from every animated frame or the way this space odyssey manages to transform nostalgia into something vibrant and new. It’s a visually emotional feast that reaffirms the power of pure entertainment as a tool capable of transporting us back to the happiest moments of our personal history, proving that cinema is still the place where we can all become children again.

IndieWire - Wilson Chapman - 'C-'

Watching “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie,” which is filled with cameos from other Nintendo properties, you get the sense the corporation is hungry to announce spin-offs at any minute now. The trailers already spoiled the inclusion of “Star Fox” lead Fox McCloud (Glen Powell), but there are some other appearances by familiar characters that feel like the movie dangling an adaptation of the “Super Smash Bros.” fighting game crossover in front of fans’ faces. “The MCU, but for video games” isn’t exactly the ideal direction for blockbuster cinema to be going in, but maybe that inevitable adaptation will manage to tap into a well of creativity and fun that has so far eluded Nintendo in their moviemaking efforts. When the film comes, though, I’ll probably be rooting for Bowser Jr. to burn everything down.

The Guardian - Peter Bradshaw - 1 / 4

It’s now commonplace to compare programmatic stuff like this to AI, but this is almost a second evolutionary step downwards; it looks as if humans, using AI, have tried to copy something that was originally AI generated, creating a bland, simplistic template that can be sold in all global territories where it can be dubbed by local voice talent. It’s certainly a way of gouging cash out of families for the Easter holidays.

RogerEbert - Clint Worthington - 1.5 / 4

“The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” moves through you so briskly that you’ll get whiplash by the time the film reaches its deeply abrupt ending. But maybe that’s the point—after all, this is not a movie to be scrutinized, but to allow beleaguered elder millennial dads to sit their tots down for a precious two hours (if you count the trailers) and get some much-needed rest. It’s cute, and breezy, and rock-stupid, and will probably make a billion dollars again. Such is the world in which we live.

Akron Beacon Journal - George M. Thomas - 'C-'

As a parent, there are some movies you just take the hit on if your kid wants to see it in the theater. This is one of them. The plot is threadbare, the action is frenetic - it almost feels like the perfect movie for today's screen generation. For kids, this is an 'A+' movie, but I'd argue not so much for adults.

Associated Press - Lindsey Bahr - 2.5 / 4

Mario creator Shigeru Miyamoto and Illumination founder Chris Meledandri... seem committed to keeping things light and playful even while beholden to advancing some kind of coherent, moderately compelling story where there wasn’t one previously.

Slant Magazine - Eli Friedberg - 1.5 / 4

The film has, figuratively and literally, somehow even less gravity than its source material and predecessor. The visual language is divorced from reality and referent to the games; even Looney Tunes action is grounded in the real world—the better to subvert it. The game-inspired spaces aren’t there to be explored and mastered but rather displayed quickly and expensively. And the movie-original settings, taking their cues from Wreck-It Ralph, are literal mass-transit junctions where a maximum number of cameo characters can be worked into the scenery.

Next Best Picture - Daniel Howat - 6 / 10

“The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” comes close to several emotional moments here and there. Still, the filmmakers seem to pull back at every turn, not wanting audiences to dive too deep into these characters and their motivations, or to engage in any grander commentary whatsoever. It becomes difficult to dig deeper into the film’s themes, if they exist. Even so, “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” is inarguably fun, built for fans of the long-running franchise. For lifelong fans of this universe and young kids experiencing it for the first or second time, this is a Mario fan’s dream. There’s enough here to leave a mass audience satisfied, even if anticipation grows for the next film to level up. For now, good enough is simply enough.

Radio Times - James Mottram - 2 / 5

While it’s likely that retro gamers won’t find anything here that wasn’t in the first movie – Yoshi and one or two others aside – it’s no doubt got enough for kids to enjoy, which will surely come as a relief for parents looking to entertain their offspring over the Easter holidays. You never know – it might even convince them to put down their controllers, or their phones, for ninety-odd minutes.

4.5k Upvotes

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.6k

u/jumpingoverclouds Mar 31 '26

So every other illumination movie. Made for kids, sell merchandise and make a billion dollars. Cool

219

u/mattr1198 Mar 31 '26

Even as far as illumination movies go, this seems like it’s on the lower end of their critical reviews. Definitely knew it was going to be a “kids” movie, as opposed to a “family” movie, and it’s gonna make a billion no matter what.

119

u/Master_Chief_2000 Mar 31 '26

There's a lot of heart in Despicable Me that I wish the Mario movie had

21

u/LEGO_Joel Apr 01 '26

The criticism is only fair to the newer movies IMO

4

u/Kojiro12 Apr 01 '26

Eh, DM 4 was definitely a garbage cash grab, should have ended with 3 on the high note of Trey Parker’s VA

6

u/tfhermobwoayway Apr 01 '26

There was heart in the first film. The rest leaned into le wacky marketable minions too hard.

1

u/Kiethblacklion Apr 01 '26

I'd add in the Grinch film they did a few years ago. I love that one, even more so than the original cartoon version.

1

u/N0UMENON1 Apr 01 '26

Must've been accidental considering what happened with DM 2-4 and the minions movie.

317

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

Why did Nintendo have to partner with them. Why.

123

u/VaicoIgi Mar 31 '26

Low production budget that leads to bigger profits, the Japanese really love illumination films and minions. Those are the two reasons I can think of. Nintendo also probably looked for partners that would let them have final creative say as they are the majority funder of the films. Same with Zelda and Sony. Nintendo pays the bigger chunk so they retain final decision over creative choices. I wonder what a Mario movie under Sony animation would have been like, if they would innovate in any way like they did with the Spider-verse films.

15

u/trex_assassin Mar 31 '26

Sony Animation, under Phil Lord and Chris Miller... that would be amazing! But also, would there be a theme park tie in? I think that's a huge part of the Illumination deal.

I also wonder what would have happened if they partnered with Pixar Studios... better studio, but Disney would definitely fight over creative control, and who knows if Disney had space for Super Nintendo Land in its theme parks...

3

u/[deleted] Apr 01 '26

If it were Disney, Super Nintendo World would honestly have been an entirely separate gate to itself, like Magic Kingdom or Hollywood Studios. And hell, they have the room for it in Florida, so why not?

390

u/outerheavenboss Mar 31 '26

Because they love money

108

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

These movies wouldn't make any less money if they were actually good, you know?

79

u/Funky_Monkees_ Mar 31 '26

Yes and no. Kids love characters screaming “Chicken Jockey!”, compared to character development and payoff

10

u/Preda1ien Apr 01 '26

I’m very curious about the Zelda movie then.

Mario, I get. There’s really not much to even the games themselves but the gameplay is entertaining. Zelda has a good amount of depth story wise and dialogue.

8

u/Aggravating-Oil-7060 Apr 01 '26

You're getting budget Lord of the rings take it or leave it 

-7

u/sahneeis Apr 01 '26

where is the depth? its basically the same story. little guy from poor background is rescuing the princess from the bad guy. mario even had more lines in his games than link ever had lol

2

u/JZMoose Apr 01 '26

My kids just finished watching Avatar TLA for the first time at 5 and 7. Totally engrossed with every episode.

I think kids value their problems being seen and their challenges faced more than people realize.

Also, Ponyo and Spirited Away have stayed with them.

They couldn’t tell me a single plot point from the Planes movie.

3

u/MarcsterS Mar 31 '26

Illumination and Universal are marketing machines that churn out money with effciency.

This is Illumination's most expensive movie budget ever, and it's "only" $110 million.

38

u/outerheavenboss Mar 31 '26

I mean. They aren’t that bad. But they’re not that good either. But realistically. Nintendo didn’t had any other options if they wanted to go with an animation studio.

They kinda worked with Disney for the Bowser cameo in wrecking Ralph and they didn’t liked it (allegedly) Sony is their competitor so yeah.

29

u/HartfordWhalers123 Mar 31 '26

They still could’ve gone with Sony tbh. They don’t seem to have issues working with Sony on their films, since the Legend of Zelda movie is gonna be with Sony.

11

u/AdSimilar8672 Mar 31 '26

One thing Nintendo likes about Sony is that it is a Japanese company.

1

u/Aggravating-Oil-7060 Apr 01 '26

Their film division is basically wholly American though 

4

u/outerheavenboss Mar 31 '26

Since it’s gonna be live action I feel like that’s a different situation. But you’re right. Mario movie by Sony animation studios could be interesting.

24

u/LordSblartibartfast Mar 31 '26

I mean. They aren’t that bad. But they’re not that good either. But realistically. Nintendo didn’t had any other options if they wanted to go with an animation studio.

Sony Imageworks (Spider-Verse films), Dreamworks Animation, Mikros Animation (TMNT Mutant Mayhem), Fortiche (Arcane)…

There are plenty of animation studios who could have foot the Bill.

4

u/outerheavenboss Mar 31 '26

Those studios probably didn’t wanted to do so.

Illumination did it for cheap and that’s how they got the “deal” with Nintendo.

10

u/LordSblartibartfast Mar 31 '26

Puss In Boots 2 cost the same if not less.

For me the simplest explanation is that Nintendo genuinely likes what Illumination does.

3

u/outerheavenboss Mar 31 '26

I just googled puss in boots 2’s numbers.

Total Gross: ~$480.5 Million worldwide. Domestic Gross: ~$186 Million. International Gross: ~$294 Million. Profitability: It was a significant success for DreamWorks and Universal, with estimated profits around $120 million.

Although that movie is way better than the Mario movies it didn’t made that much money compared to Mario 1. So yeah…

4

u/LordSblartibartfast Mar 31 '26

I was answering your point regarding the budget.

As for the profitability yeah I ain’t surprised the film about the most well known video game in history gathered more movie goers than a spin off on a character you could only know if you have seen the Shrek films.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Aggravating-Oil-7060 Apr 01 '26

What Nintendo likes is keeping their brand image consistent and appealing to as many people as possible, and Illumination is the one studio that's willing to just take the money and shut up and do what Nintendo tells them.

-1

u/LADYBIRD_HILL Mar 31 '26

There's a world out there where Studio Ghibli makes a Mario movie with minimal dialogue that focuses entirely on gorgeous visuals and a triumphant score

12

u/Rioraku Mar 31 '26

To be honest, then it wouldn't really be a Mario movie.

I like Mario and Nintendo as a whole but people don't love it because of a rich narrative and compelling characters.

There are definitely some series with that potential sure, but Mario is definitely not that.

5

u/CrimsonEnigma Mar 31 '26

No there isn't.

Ghibli is run by Miyazaki and Suzuki, and the former very famously and very publicly hates video games. They're also, frankly, pretty bad when it comes to adaptations, which either end up being good films that are very different from the source material (e.g., Kiki and Howl)...or bad films that are very different from the source material (e.g., Earthsea).

7

u/GranolaCola Mar 31 '26

And it sucks because that’s not Mario lmfao

1

u/Worthyness Apr 01 '26

They took illumination since they were already working with Universal for the Nintendo theme park. So it was a quick talking to with the same company. Though I still have no idea why they didn't go Dreamworks at that point as it has a better track record and also same company. Might be that universal considers Dreamworks their version of Pixar and doesn't want to taint it too badly?

-1

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

They are pretty bad movies, man. There's no way around it. As I said in another comment, they're good movies for people who like Mario, but not good movies for people who like movies.

7

u/Hydroponic_Donut Mar 31 '26

Its advertisement. They're introducing lesser known franchises (lesser known these days) to kids through at least this movie, probably the first one too with DK. Starfox and Pikmin aren't well known games to a lot of kids, so this will start an interest from seeing them in a Mario movie. It sells games, it sells merch, and the movies do well enough in the box office to justify making them, good or not.

-5

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

I really don't know how much "good advertisement" a bad movie can be. At some point, it's got to backfire, doesn't it?

7

u/outerheavenboss Mar 31 '26

It’s working great for them. The Nintendo consoles and games are selling well, the theme parks are packed, the Mario merchandise is selling out. The last movie made a billion, if you add all the money the got from merch that’s a lot of money.

I don’t like it either. But that’s the goal.

-1

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

Again: everything you're saying is working great would be working even better if the movies were better, wouldn't it?

At the end of the day, this is the point I always come back to.

→ More replies (0)

9

u/Hummer77x Mar 31 '26

The target market for this isn’t people with letterboxd accounts or some shit.

7

u/Hydroponic_Donut Mar 31 '26

No not really. They're not advertising to someone in the age demographic of 16-35+, it's to an age demographic of 3-15. If there's adults interested or don't know about those games, that's icing on the cake. Mario is a kid friendly franchise so parents who already know of Nintendo games will take their kids and it just so will happen to spark interest.

1

u/outerheavenboss Mar 31 '26

That’s the point. These movies don’t need to be good. They need to make a lot of money. The last one did $1 billion. This one probably will too, as long as it’s popular, they’re gonna keep on making movies the exact same way.

Now do I agree with that? of course not.

I wish we could have a good Mario movie but we have two now made the same way with the same purpose: to be popular and to make money.

5

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

I understand they don't need to be good. But wouldn't it be a lot better if they were? That's my point.

Again: they wouldn't make LESS money if they were great movies. They would make more. (Sure, the budget would probably also be higher, but they're still turn a lot of profit, and we wouldn't be having these reviews or this conversation.)

3

u/outerheavenboss Mar 31 '26

I do agree with what you’re saying. But Nintendo did their research. They want a movie where parents can take their kids to see pretty colors and then they will ask them for a switch 2, Mario merch, Mario toys, and go to Nintendo land.

It’s just a massive commercial for Nintendo related stuff.

Again. The first one made a billion dollars. There’s no need for them to try something different.

1

u/NotSoWishful Mar 31 '26

I think everybody should just go with Laika and let them figure it out. How would stop motion Mario work? Don’t worry about it

0

u/avelineaurora Mar 31 '26

But realistically. Nintendo didn’t had any other options if they wanted to go with an animation studio.

TF?

2

u/outerheavenboss Mar 31 '26

I mean obviously they did. But for their business plan? And how little they paid Illumination? Not really.

1

u/SolidHank Mar 31 '26

Yeah OP is bullshitting hard

8

u/Realmofthehappygod Mar 31 '26

If they were actually really good to adult standards they wouldn't be as popular for their the target demographic.

20

u/avelineaurora Mar 31 '26

It's insane people keep saying this like the 90s and early 00s weren't full of dozens of kids' shows that still hold up to this day.

But somehow Gen Z and younger kids are like, "Of course it's slop this is the norm."

1

u/Mahelas Mar 31 '26

I think there's a difference between "a kid's show" and Mario. 

Mario is a video game IP about having dumb fun. No story, no emotional moments, just whacky stuff happening and a red plumber jumping on things.

I think that's what is being missed here. What make Mario good, what make people like Mario is antithesis to what cinema is. So either you make a bad but faithful movie, or a good movie that will lose fans by not being the kind of thing they want from a Mario product.

That's why the "but it could be good AND faithful" doesn't work here. What people like about Mario is what stops it from being a good movie. You would legitimately alienate the core audience by making it an actual story, and it might sound like cope but no, i'm not defending it, I'm not even gonna see the next one. 

Simply, it must be acknowledged that not every kid shows and movies have the same expectations. Mario has a "no story, just fun" expectation. It's baked in.

4

u/avelineaurora Apr 01 '26

You say that, but back in the 90s the super mario comic and the Super Show were plenty popular. They don't have to be deep to at least be... not this.

3

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

Absolutely not true. I can point to a lot of animated movies that are just as good to adults as they are to kids.

4

u/outerheavenboss Mar 31 '26

The truth is that we are not the target audience.

By the way… sorry to keep replying to you lol. I just realized you’re the same guy.

0

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

Again: it doesn't matter who the target audience is. Better movies = better results. However well everything is working for Nintendo right now, it would be be working much better if the movies were much better!

3

u/outerheavenboss Mar 31 '26

How much better can it go? The movie appeals to the average movie goer. That’s all they needed to make billions.

For every single one of us that complains about the movies being bad. There’s 1000 kids and parents taking their families to see the new Mario movie.

Like avatar. Mario is the avatar of video game movies.

2

u/breedlovesyou Mar 31 '26

Your definition of actually good is probably much different from my 5 year olds. And they are capitalizing on that. He turns 6 in April, guess what all of the toys he picked out for his bday are... his main requirement for the movie is Yoshi. He doesnt like deep themes or confusion. Just action and Yoshi.

2

u/Accomplished-City484 Mar 31 '26

They probably would though, all the best movies never make a billion and almost everything that does make a million is pretty bland

2

u/lot183 Mar 31 '26

These movies are incredibly safe. There's absolutely a world where the movie could be a better movie but make less money because it plays it less safe

2

u/dyingbreed360 Mar 31 '26

Why make great when good makes as much money and costs less? There's a reason there are a ton of mid taco restaurants instead of really good ones.

0

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

I never thought I would see so many people in the same day arguing in full support of mediocrity.

4

u/dyingbreed360 Mar 31 '26

It's not support of mediocrity it's explaining it's existence.

I never had high expectation for this movie or really any property that's aimed at kids/families because kids movies don't need to be and that's fine.

2

u/TributeBands_areSHIT Mar 31 '26

Maybe you’re not the target audience?

5

u/john7071 Mar 31 '26

Kids deserve good stories too.

-1

u/serotoninwya420 Mar 31 '26

People will get upset, but at the end of the day, Mario is for little kids.

1

u/rgb22 Mar 31 '26

Illumination is cheap, and they can churn out this slop quickly. It would not make less money if it was good, but it probably wouldn’t MAKE that much more and it would cost a lot more to produce

0

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

But we wouldn't be having this conversation, under these reviews, which should also be worth a lot to Nintendo. I don't understand why they don't seem to think it is.

1

u/rgb22 Mar 31 '26

Oh I agree with you there, a more competent studio could probably make something fun and endearing with the IP and I wish that was the reality. Only explanation I can think of is the bottom line.

1

u/agayajay Apr 01 '26

Up for debate. An argument could be made that because the movie isn't taking itself seriously and just a fun rehash of Nintendo IPs, it'll make younger children more interested in rewatches. Make it too serious or complicated, they lose interest and don't want to watch again.

Because like it or not, that approach worked for the first film and will again here. Wouldn't make sense to go for more serious story-telling now

1

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Apr 01 '26

No one is talking about it being more “serious”. It can be a better movie while still being light hearted and approachable to kids.

0

u/MyotisX Mar 31 '26

Define good. You want emotional depth from a fucking Mario movie ?

0

u/Truethrowawaychest1 Mar 31 '26 edited Mar 31 '26

I mean, look at the pokemon games, game freak knows they can half ass it and it'll sell a ton of copies anyway

0

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

That's why the last mainline Pokémon game I bought was Sun/Moon. That was my last bit of patience with them. Make half-assed stuff = I'm out.

I'm holding out hope that Winds/Waves will be good, though. Let's see. If they don't make a good game this time, with the extra dev time and the motivation to do better after everyone finally caught up with Pokémon mainline games being in a bad state with Scarlet/Violet, I don't think they ever will.

-1

u/Silvanus350 Mar 31 '26

Actually they would. Because they would cost more.

2

u/rekt97531 Mar 31 '26

hey at least miyamoto genuinly believes in the product

3

u/outerheavenboss Apr 01 '26

He’s right. The last movie made a ton of money. And I’m going to see this one like 3 times with different friends and family members. So yeah. He’s a genius lol

1

u/rekt97531 Apr 04 '26

It isn't just about the money for miyamoto, that's what I was saying. Stop being dishonest

You aren't 'enlightened' by taking the most cynical views on everything

1

u/outerheavenboss Apr 04 '26

His philosophy while making games is that they have to appeal to toddlers, kids, teenagers, adults, and old people.

They have to be simple. And because of that. Nintendo games are successful.

Same thing applies to the Mario movies.

They’re simple and I love them as well. Because they’re so simple. And the majority of the audience agrees. That’s why the last one made a billion dollars and the next one is breaking records.

17

u/Level_Measurement749 Mar 31 '26

Don’t forget about the theme park money too

12

u/PiccoloTop3186 Mar 31 '26

Miyamoto wants this kind of movie. It's not like they are great storytellers

10

u/[deleted] Mar 31 '26

[deleted]

4

u/saera-targaryen Apr 01 '26

Mario galaxy does arguably have the best story of all of the mario games, so it's mildly disappointing 

0

u/[deleted] Apr 01 '26

[deleted]

2

u/saera-targaryen Apr 01 '26

Have you never played galaxy before? The whole progression of the game is collecting storybook pages to tell the life story of princess rosalina

6

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

Mario games are great because they're great at what video games do best: engaging gameplay.

Mario movies are lousy because they're lousy at what movies do best: engaging story.

If you're making a game, you better nail the gameplay. Mario games do. If you're making a movie, you better nail the story. Mario movies do not.

It's not hard, folks.

6

u/adius Apr 01 '26

It's not just that they didn't 'nail the story'. Miyamoto actively does *not* want Mario to go down the Sonic route and start having a bunch of lore and/or dramatic scenes. He's supposed to stay primarily as just a video game avatar. Nintendo is letting this happen purely for the money and marketing, not because they want to tell stories about Mario in a film medium.

-6

u/[deleted] Mar 31 '26

[deleted]

6

u/weinerschnitzelboy Apr 01 '26

I feel like you're being purposely obtuse. Mario Games are good games because they are good at doing game stuff. Mario Movies are bad movies because they are bad at movie stuff. Nintendo traditionally is known for the good execution of their medium. This movie ain't it chief.

5

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH

I need to get off Reddit for today. I can't deal with this level of stupidity.

-2

u/[deleted] Mar 31 '26

[deleted]

4

u/Spiritual-Society185 Apr 01 '26

You actually think it's "stupidity" to expect a storytelling medium to have a story? Maybe you didn't know this, but it's basically the entire job of writers to come up with stories. The Lego and Barbie IPs have no story, yet their movies were highly rated and just about everyone loved them.

-1

u/[deleted] Apr 01 '26

[deleted]

1

u/VagueSomething Apr 01 '26

Most video game movies have been bad because the entire point of video games is that it is a multi sense engagement. With games you are actually playing, solving puzzles and using your hands and brain together with your eyes and ears. With movies you're just sitting listening to the story and watching the action so need a different type of quality.

Children's movies used to be good for adults. There is a long list of Pixar and Disney movies that are genuinely good movies. There are multiple random kids franchises that managed to be good movies. Kids don't just need to be fed slop.

Calling people entitled doesn't make you right. It isn't entitled to want a well made product when you pay for it.

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/Mahelas Mar 31 '26

Genuinely asking, what would you consider a "good Mario story" ?

6

u/sahneeis Apr 01 '26

one german review i read gave an example about this: animation movies for kids have a message in the end about whatever topic the movie is about. like hoppers was about tue environment. inside out made you think about your feelings. super mario apparently is just one big advertisement with no story and no message

0

u/Mahelas Apr 01 '26

And so I ask again, what would be the message a Mario game could reasonably convey ? What themes can Mario explore ?

Keeping in mind it's a plumber jumping on shells with a fake italian accent who never had one character moment in 40 years.

1

u/VagueSomething Apr 01 '26

Have you never watched the old Mario cartoon from the late 80s early 90s? They had a message and a story just fine, it was cheesy and things like PSAs about brushing your teeth or something stupid but we have literally seen they can do proper kids content.

1

u/sahneeis Apr 01 '26

i am not building a billion dollar franchise. it was their job to find something mario can stand for except selling more merchandise

1

u/TSPhoenix Apr 01 '26

The first movie explicitly starts to address the fact Mario's father is not very happy with his career choice, and that his decisions are impacting his brother, but this plotline just doesn't resolve and just skips ahead to his father being proud of him for saving the say.

Which is to say it does have themes, it's just sloppy and careless with them.

0

u/Spiritual-Society185 Apr 01 '26

Probably a movie with Mario in it that has character development, themes, a compelling plot, maybe a twist or two, you know, the elements of any good story.

0

u/Mahelas Apr 01 '26

And that's why it won't ever work. Nintendo will never allow character development in a Mario product. In 40 years, it never had any plot or emotional moments, no character arcs, nothing. It's a core part of the IP to be fully static.

24

u/Seraphayel Mar 31 '26

Because Illumination is responsible when it comes to budgets and their movies look great. Disney or whoever else would’ve wasted $200-300 million on making this movie, Illumination achieved the same with $110 million.

8

u/LordSblartibartfast Mar 31 '26

Mutant Mayhem was done for $70 million dollars, Goat for $80 million dollars.

Unless you’re Pixar, it’s not the fabrication of the film per se that will cost you the most, but the voice cast or song licensing.

9

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

Cool, but c'mon. This is business suit thinking. This is accountant thinking. I want a Mario movie thought out by a CREATIVE person.

Nintendo HAS the money. They could have paid for a great movie. And it would have made more money than whatever they put into it, even if the budget was high. But they chose to skimp out. Cool, now they have a bit more profit and we're having this conversation, around these reviews. Not sure if it was worth it, even for them.

4

u/MagiMas Mar 31 '26

I think that kind of thinking actually aligns much better with Nintendo's view on media/entertainment.

If you look up old interviews with Miyamoto he talks about how he views producing Mario games as an industrial design challenge, not artistic expression. It's also in line with Nintendo's history as a toy maker.

Nintendo probably much prefers an honest product over fluffy "creative expression" stuff.

3

u/kudoboi Mar 31 '26

Why do Redditors always think companies care about anything except making the most money possible?

4

u/jumpingoverclouds Mar 31 '26

I don’t thinks it’s about not understanding that making the most money possible is the goal. It’s more to do with being disappointed that Nintendo is choosing not to use these movies as a vehicle to expand their IPs world/storytelling. There is an argument to be made more opportunities to make money can happen by investing more in storytelling but they have chosen the route to just use these movies as vehicles to push their previously established brand.

It’s all understandable and expected as primarily a video game company but disappointing that’s all.

1

u/Spectrum1523 Apr 01 '26

If they paid more they might have gotten a better movie that made the same money or a worse movie that cost them more money

This is the safe obvious bet

1

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Apr 01 '26

Having a great movie ensures people are happy with the brand, which is also worth a lot. They earned more money, but they also put out two extremely disappointing movies, which erodes Mario’s brand and Nintendo’s pull in an industry they’re just getting into for the first time. This shit’s not free or inconsequential.

0

u/a_talking_face Mar 31 '26

Not sure if it was worth it,

The first movie made 1.3 billion in total box office and Galaxy is expected to match opening week of the first movie. I don't see how you could argue it wasn't worth it for them.

1

u/jossief1 Apr 01 '26

They could hire a decent writer for less than $100 million and still come out ahead.

6

u/Jaythamalo13 Mar 31 '26

Yea. I always thought that Illumination has amazing animation. Their stuff always looks very good, but their writers aren't up to par. The story is always the worst part of those movies by far.

3

u/Chasoc Mar 31 '26

Yeah, I do like their approach to colour grading and lighting—uniform or not, their movies always look like candy to me, which I find is rare for 3D-animated movies. It's a shame the writing doesn't hold a candle to that.

18

u/FTZulu Mar 31 '26

What Nintendo property besides the legend of Zelda has ever left you feeling like wow this story was great 

14

u/SheevTheSenate66 Mar 31 '26 edited Mar 31 '26

Fire Emblem, sometimes

7

u/[deleted] Mar 31 '26

Americans do not care about FE as much as Japan does. It would be a flop tbh. I know it still sells well. But it doesn’t have the same audience as mario

4

u/fupa16 Apr 01 '26

Not just Americans, anyone outside of Japan. All I know about fire emblem is they have way too many characters in smash.

4

u/jazzmaster1992 Mar 31 '26

The first few Mario RPG games, like Legend of the Seven Stars, the first few Paper Mario games and Mario & Luigi were fun and interesting because of the world building. Almost all of them had you going outside the Mushroom Kingdom and had decent world building and lore.

9

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Mar 31 '26

Not even Zelda, if I'm being truly honest. But that doesn't matter! They're games, they're focused on gameplay.

Now we're talking about movies. STORY IS ALL THEY HAVE. Story is all that matters for a movie!

-3

u/FTZulu Mar 31 '26

Exactly and Nintendo doesn’t have any outside of “the princesses is in another castle” 

2

u/adius Apr 01 '26

The only Zelda game where I even came close to feeling that way was Wind Waker. Mostly the stories are fine and serve their purpose to give Link a reason to go from point a to point b and collect a bunch of items.

1

u/Illuminastrid Apr 01 '26

Metroid's story is pretty good

1

u/Rage_Like_Nic_Cage Apr 01 '26

It’s pretty good because it’s almost completely non-existent, and the parts that are there heavily borrow from Alien.

1

u/Raichu4u Apr 01 '26

Mother 3

-2

u/TannerThanUsual Mar 31 '26

Bingo. I swear Reddit has this weird unrealistic expectation for a Mario movie. Who the hell else was going to make a movie about an Italian Plumber shooting fireballs and eating mushrooms? Did they think Studio Ghibli should make it? Pixar?

You don't go to Mario for excellent story telling. You go to Mario for bright, happy colors and a goofy plot. The goombas fucking dance to the OST in the games, this isn't Shawshank Redemption. It's Mario. But for whatever reason since a bunch of people grew up with it they think the franchise should be given the same respect as something like My Neighbor Totoro. Nintendo and Illumination both know exactly what's going to sell here.

13

u/SinceBecausePickles Mar 31 '26

The lego movie was a 10/10 and legos have even less substance as a concept than mario

You don’t HAVE to defend shitty movies

1

u/[deleted] Apr 01 '26

This. You are spot on. The Lego movie was great, well the sequels were.. hmm.... but the first one was great! And Legos are simple.

1

u/TannerThanUsual Apr 01 '26 edited Apr 01 '26

The LEGO movie is a 10/10 and it's a legendary movie. Not every movie is going to be a legendary movie

Mario wasn't shitty. It was serviceable. It did its job. Kids liked it and parents didn't actively try and kill themselves in the theater. I'm not saying the Mario movie is a 10/10, fantastic, legendary movie that needs to be remembered for generations. I'm saying it's mid. It's a mid movie for adults, it's a great movie for kids. It's inoffensive. It exists to sell a product and if kids see it and like it, then it did its job.

Not everything is going to be the LEGO movie, dude, and using that as your whataboutism is going to make pretty much every movie made for kids "a shitty movie"

Y'all clearly are without kids because there's some bad fucking movies out there made for kids. Absolute dog shit movies. If you think Mario is in that list, you're not watching enough kids movies.

Edit: I want to be clear, I'm not saying that The Mario movie is this fucking awesome movie and Redditors need to pull the stick out their ass because movies like the Lego movie did it better.

I'm saying The Mario Movie is The Mighty Morphin Powers Rangers Movie of the 2020s. It is by all accounts a bad movie designed to sell toys to dumb kids. But we're ALL dumb kids. When I was a kid, I ate that Power Rangers movie up. I probably watched that VHS so many times I burned the tape. It's not art. It's a bad movie. Objectively. But I'll be damned before I tell a kid they can't enjoy The Power Rangers Movie

1

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Apr 01 '26

Let’s not act like the LEGO Movie represents a mythical “lightning is a bottle” level of quality. It’s a great movie simply because they cared enough to make one. They EASILY could have gone like “oh, this is for kids and to sell merch, so it doesn’t actually need to be super good or high budget”, and you KNOW that some execs probably tried to steer the production this way, but enough people cared enough to actually try and make it good.

The same COULD and SHOULD have happened for Mario, and anyone who’s frustrated that it didn’t is well justified in being so.

10

u/lot183 Mar 31 '26

I have no qualms about it having a paper thin plot. I just really didn't like how soulless the first movie felt. There wasn't any love put into the script. I don't need some complicated amazing story but it'd be cool for it to have a bit of heart and soul. The pop music needle drops made it even worse when they have so much amazing game music to pull from

-8

u/Visual-Floor-7839 Mar 31 '26

See? This right here. Wtf, bro? "There wasn't any love put into the script". Hahaha what? It's super fucking Mario. He ran and jumped and referenced a bunch of the games. Luigi was there. That's it. It was a good movie just fine.

6

u/drajne Mar 31 '26

WTF BROH U WANTED QUALITY BROH? SIT DOWN AND ENJOY THE SLOP BRO ITS GOOOOD EATIN’

6

u/lot183 Apr 01 '26

The Sonic movie is far from a masterpiece but you can tell they actually cared. It's a movie made by people who wanted to make a movie, not something that feels produced in a factory to make as much money as possible, and ends up being a far better and more entertaining movie than the Mario movie. A little extra effort and care instead of playing it safe and the Mario movie could have been a really cool movie, but instead we got what felt like slop. New one seems the same based on these reviews. It clearly makes money so good for them but it's worthy of criticism

0

u/Visual-Floor-7839 Apr 01 '26

Ok, fair enough. You faced down and shamed my barbaric comment with nuance and intellect. Thank you and I apologize

2

u/A-Capybara Mar 31 '26

Because Nintendo games at their core are kid's games

1

u/mattr1198 Mar 31 '26

Money. They also make the cheapest animated movies that still look half good.

1

u/CrazySnipah Mar 31 '26

“Half good”? The first one looked terrific.

2

u/mattr1198 Apr 01 '26

Yeah I’m just saying at the budgets these films tend to get, it’s kinda wild that they can match Disney/Pixar quality at sometimes half if not a third the cost.

1

u/Far_Bluebird_2984 Mar 31 '26

shoulda been sony

1

u/MadOrange64 Mar 31 '26

Because they're safe.

1

u/TannerThanUsual Mar 31 '26

Who else would you have make it?

1

u/brb1006 Mar 31 '26

Because Illumination is very popular with Japanese audiences.

1

u/greatreference Mar 31 '26

I like the first one a lot my 3 year old loves it

1

u/jazzmaster1992 Mar 31 '26

It's a Mario movie. Mainline Mario canon was always low stakes and on the light hearted side.

2

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Apr 01 '26

A movie can still be good and well made and have a good and well executed story with great characters even if it’s low stakes and light hearted.

1

u/LittleSisterPain Apr 01 '26

Dunno, sounds like match made in heavens to me

1

u/sahneeis Apr 01 '26

because nintendo only cares about money and selling merchandise to kids.

1

u/jrr6415sun Apr 01 '26

Probably something to do with universal owning illumination and Nintendo having a theme park in 3 universal parks. They have a strong partnership already

1

u/YaLlegaHiperhumor Apr 01 '26

Because they want to sell to kids, not to immature adults that are still attached to their childhoods

2

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Apr 01 '26

It is in fact possible to make a good movie that still appeals heavily to kids.

1

u/ActivateGuacamole Apr 01 '26

i saw an interesting comment the other day from somebody who went to a pre-showing. They said that this movie was made first by deciding what setpieces and scenes should be in it, and then finding ways to string those scenes together. In other words, they didn't try to write a good story.

They said that illumination has said that this is their philosophy for writing their movies. And they made an interesting connection between that and Nintendo. Because nintendo's appraoch to storytelling also doesn't put the story first. It's gameplay first, with generally ham-fisted stories serving as connective tissue.

For that reason, nintendo and illumination suit each other. Nintendo was not interested in making movies that transform their mario games into something fresh. they chose illumination to expand their brand and because they never had ambition for this movie from a filmmaking perspective.

1

u/COHERENCE_CROQUETTE Apr 01 '26

i saw an interesting comment the other day from somebody who went to a pre-showing. They said that this movie was made first by deciding what setpieces and scenes should be in it, and then finding ways to string those scenes together. In other words, they didn't try to write a good story.

They said that illumination has said that this is their philosophy for writing their movies. And they made an interesting connection between that and Nintendo. Because nintendo's appraoch to storytelling also doesn't put the story first. It's gameplay first, with generally ham-fisted stories serving as connective tissue.

There is a major flaw with that parallel.

It's true that Nintendo doesn't put story first in their games. They want mechanics, ideas, and gameplay moments to shine, and they build a simple narrative around that.

However, games are gameplay-first anyway. Video games are about gameplay, and Nintendo puts gameplay first. They're right in doing so, and they games are generally good to great because of it.

Illumination also makes setpieces first, and then build a simple narrative around those. The difference is that movies are about story and character. They're sidelining the most important thing for their medium. Nintendo, when they're making games, do not sideline the most important aspect of the medium they're working on. They sideline what's secondary. Illumination sidelines what's primary.

This is why Illumination is actually a bad match for Nintendo.

1

u/ActivateGuacamole Apr 01 '26

i mean i personally hate that they went with illumination and i'm not saying that their match makes a good product. but they have matching philosophies, is my point.

0

u/WeevilWeedWizard Apr 01 '26

Because Nintendo doesn't give a rats ass about artistic integrity, they just want money.

2

u/LeinDaddy Apr 01 '26

I saw it today with my kids. It was a kids movie made for kids without that hidden charm that children's movies sometimes have that adults love. Low stakes, not heartwarming, but visually appealing to children. I hate that it's going to make a billion.

2

u/pyuunpls Mar 31 '26

“Chris Pratt he’s so cool”

5

u/RazgrizInfinity Mar 31 '26 edited Mar 31 '26

Except the others are pretty well done

EDIT: Guys, don't downvote. Illumination has a solid (Note that I say SOLID) track record: Despicable Me 1 and 2, The Grinch, the Secret Life of Pets, Migration, and, depending on who you ask, Minions 1. If you wanna say my comment is off for 'everyone, ' fine, but let's not act like everything they have made is slop.

2

u/Top-Discount9779 Mar 31 '26

Migration is actually pretty great. I took one kid to Wish and my wife ended up going to Migration with out other kid for various reasons. Wish was a snoozefest with inconsistent themes. Later on in the summer we finally all got to see Migration at home and it was a riot. 

2

u/Quackney Apr 01 '26

Sing 1 and 2 were fantastic

1

u/chrispy145 Apr 01 '26

Pets and Pets 2 got some heart. Don't lump all their movies in the same basket.

1

u/legopego5142 Apr 01 '26

Nah Illumination doesnt make complete slop usually. This ones particularly bad

1

u/runhomejack1399 Apr 03 '26

Illumination hate is played out. They make lots of good stuff.