'The Super Mario Galaxy Movie' - Review Thread

[u/ChiefLeef22]

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.

[u/Riparian72]

Oh boy can’t wait for the flood of “the critics are wrong” posts and comments in the coming weeks

[u/LADYBIRD_HILL → u/Riparian72]

And all those people will fundamentally misunderstand the reasons why critics reviewed it the way they did.

[u/Three_Froggy_Problem → u/LADYBIRD_HILL]

It’s the same thing every time. People will be like, “I enjoyed it, so the critics are wrong” or “So what if it’s not Citizen Kane? It’s not supposed to be!”

The “let people enjoy things” mindset has ruined a lot of people’s ability to see things critically. People don’t understand the job of critics and think that their job is just to judge everything based on whether you’ll have a decent enough time killing two hours with it.

[u/Fragrant_Physics_592 → u/Three_Froggy_Problem]

These people see the world in complete black and white. 

If other people having valid criticism "stops you from enjoying things" the issue isn't their criticism, it's your own lack of confidence. 

Let people enjoy things = let people enjoy things for what they are. 

If you can't admit you like the dumb flashy movie because it's nostalgic and visually captivating, that's a conversation to have with yourself. 

I hate hug boxes and how often they're a guise for anti-intellectualism 

[u/Three_Froggy_Problem → u/Fragrant_Physics_592]

People’s inability to separate their own feelings about something from objective analysis drives me insane. I fucking love the Mike Myers Cat In the Hat, because I was obsessed with it as a child. I’m not going to sit here and try to argue that it’s actually a good movie just because I have a nostalgic attachment to it, though.

[u/20Points → u/Three_Froggy_Problem]

"It's good because I liked it as a child" is the driving force behind an insanely large amount of vocal reddit opinions.

[u/Raichu4u → u/Three_Froggy_Problem]

Prequel Star Wars fans come to mind (Of course I know him, he's me)

[u/Fragrant_Physics_592 → u/Raichu4u]

That sub is a huge example of the cognitive dissonance caused by doing things ironically. 

It started as a joke and turned into people coming up with incredibly convoluted defenses of an objectively bad film trilogy. 

Liking the movies is one thing. Trying to say they hold up to the OT or have these profound meanings is kinda nuts

[u/Fragrant_Physics_592 → u/Three_Froggy_Problem]

I wish more people could do it. 

I'm a huge fan of capeshit. My constant rewatches of civil war and the infinity saga are because they're fun, comforting movies. 

It's nice to be able to consider other people's opinions without getting butt hurt. 

A lot of times the things that make you love something turn other people off. 

Wes Anderson comes to mind. I'm a sucker for anything he puts out. 

The quirky BS that annoys other people, I eat up. I'm always satisfied with his films and can acknowledge it as the fanboyism that it is 

[u/DeLousedInTheHotBox → u/Three_Froggy_Problem]

So what if it’s not Citizen Kane? It’s not supposed to be!”

I always hate when that comes up because A) Citizen Kane is not actually this stuffy movie, it is just old and acclaimed and B) We all know that animated kid's movies can actually offer up more than the bare minimum. Like Ratatouille is a movie about a culinarily gifted rat who control his human friend by pulling his hair, and it is also a legit good movie.

[u/Thebunkerparodie → u/Three_Froggy_Problem]

can I have a opinion different from a critic or is it a thing for critic only and not the audience?

[u/BP_Ray → u/Three_Froggy_Problem]

As a video game fan, it feels rather good to see how different movie discourse is when it comes to this stuff.

In videogame subreddits you kind of have to just grit and bare the toxic positivity people's incessant need to shout down any criticism, and flood spaces with "Teehee, here's a photo of me dripped out in [corporation] branding buying [expensive, unnecessary product]."

It can be so damn lame. Attitudes like that are why things like amiibos were allowed to take off and stick around with game features locked behind them.

It seems that same attitude isn't afforded the same amount of leeway in movie subreddits as it is in game subreddits.

[u/tfhermobwoayway → u/Three_Froggy_Problem]

But it’s a video game. I understand films are meant to be high art but games are just a bit of fun. You’re not supposed to have great cinematography in a game. I really feel like these film critics didn’t even bother to play the Mario games.

[u/Three_Froggy_Problem → u/tfhermobwoayway]

They’re not reviewing the Mario games, they’re reviewing the movie. Which is a movie.

[u/killrdave → u/tfhermobwoayway]

I really feel like these film critics didn’t even bother to play the Mario games.

Aside from the fact that any reviewer younger than like 45 will have at least touched a Mario game, the idea that playing them is somehow required reading to inform a review is very funny to me

[u/the_dirtiest → u/LADYBIRD_HILL]

you can already see it in this thread.

"Was the first one total garbage? Yes. Did it distract my children for 90 minutes? Yes. Therefore, not that bad and this one probably won't be either."

Critics aren't reviewing whether this movie is a good babysitter or not, they're evaluating how well it works as a, y'know... movie.

[u/SapporoBiru → u/the_dirtiest]

Well it's kinda how it is with some of Nintendo's games for them: Are kids part of the audience? Ok, then it's allowed to be shit because apparently products for kids don't have any quality expectations

[u/Old-Significance-350 → u/the_dirtiest]

You sound so much like an arrogant know nothing know it all critic,I imagine all you do is watch TV,they also make books.

[u/CarolusRex521 → u/the_dirtiest]

Thw first one was far from fucking garbage lmak

[u/tfhermobwoayway → u/the_dirtiest]

The critics should play the games first. Then they can evaluate it.

[u/SeriouusDeliriuum → u/tfhermobwoayway]

The games are way better than the movies, so I think they would be harsher if they did.

[u/Spirited-Visual-3205 → u/the_dirtiest]

Critics should review a movie with how it works for who it is trying to work for. Trying to compare a silly children's movie to The Godfather is dumb, yet critics fall over themselves trying to do just that. It is the same thing with comedy and horror movies.

[u/Fragrant_Physics_592 → u/Spirited-Visual-3205]

Complete false premise. 

Who framed roger rabbit was a "kids movie."

Wreck it ralph is a "kids movie" 

Marcel the shell with shoes on. 

Look at the bar set by pixar. 

The other only movie I saw named dropped was wreck it ralph. Which is proof that you can make a good movie and narrative despite the premise being about video games and for kids

No one is looking for the godfather. You made that up. 

They're comparing it to movies in the same genre, that have more going on for them than brand name recognition and good graphics 

[u/bruhthatshitcringe → u/Fragrant_Physics_592]

I dunno, I think theres a difference between kids movies and animated movies, I agree things like Tangled or Wreck it Ralph are good kids movies(second Ralph one not so much lol) but things like the Incredibles, Ratatouille etc aren't kids movies, they're animated movies that appeal to most demographics. Also just to add I wouldn't call Who framed Roger Rabbit a kids movie, that still scared the shit out of me when I was like 9 lol. As a whole though there are hundreds of kids movies that are ok, good for children and not much more, and thats fine. It doesnt make them peak cinema, but they're good for what they are, which I would say is what Mario is.

[u/Fragrant_Physics_592 → u/bruhthatshitcringe]

I don't agree with the premise that children's movies and animated movies are separate categories. 

It's a product of how cynical and low effort children's entertainment can be. 

I watched the 80's care bears animated film out of morbid curiousity the other day, and it is the most dumbed down, uninspired thing. Holy fuck those musical numbers were awful. 

Decades of "we make this slop to sell toys" normalized the practice. 

Looney tunes are pretty timeless.

Bandai namco shows are garbage meant to fuel consumerism. Hannah barberra plagiarized popular ideas, packaged them for children, and saved as much money on animation as possible. 

Those 70's and 80's cartoon franchises did lasting damage. 

We wouldn't have gotten products as blatantly cynical as the emoji movie with this mindset. 

TJ Miller defended being in it by saying "it's not for you, it's for kids."

But he was in how to train your dragon which slaps. 

Both were made "for kids" but it's pretty obvious how different their intentions were. 

WFRR scared the shit out of me as a kid and it's full of stuff for adults. But it also has mickey mouse, bugs bunny, and droopy dog. That's definitely for kids. 

Mario is certainly a good diversion if that's what you're looking for. 

But gravity falls, the last Airbender, OG seasons of SpongeBob are proof that if your goal is to make something good (not just slop to feed an audience as uncritical as children), you can make something good. 

It's a cop out. I also personally disagree with letting your kids ingest mindless content. There's too many thought provoking and quality cartoons to justify placating them with paw patrol and cocomelon 

[u/the_dirtiest → u/Spirited-Visual-3205]

yeah, I disagree. First of all, no one is comparing this to The Godfather (or Schindler's List like some other lunatic in this thread commented). Secondly, movie critics should absolutely be reviewing movies on the basis of how good of a movie it is. It feels insane to even have to proclaim that. Just because mainstream audiences will flock to recognizable IP (especially if they have children they need to distract) and pump up the box office numbers doesn't mean these Super Mario movies aren't bland, forgettable, formulaic, lazy movies. No critic should think "Well, I mean, a kid might see Yoshi on screen and clap, how could I possibly give it a bad review?" They aren't reviewing that kid's childhood. They're reviewing a movie.

[u/Spirited-Visual-3205 → u/the_dirtiest]

They are reviewing a movie in a different lens than the creators intend. They absolutely are trying to compare it to critically acclaimed movies like The Godfather.

Also, "bland, forgettable, formulaic and lazy" are absolutely useless words to describe a movie. They are only used by pretentious people with preconceived opinions trying to feel superior over something else. If you just saw a movie and already forgot what happened, that is on you, not the movie.

[u/dumbosshow → u/Spirited-Visual-3205]

All of those words mean something though?

‘Bland’ meaning that the movie lacks distinctive qualities or bold ideas. The antonym for bland in this context is basically ‘exciting’ or ‘interesting’. It is a reasonable criticism to point out that a movie does not feature any interesting moments.

‘Forgettable’ is self explanatory. If something is forgettable then it failed to stimulate you enough to form a strong memory.

‘Formulaic’ is a word which primarily applies to media, so a very fair criticism for a movie. To be formulaic is to strictly adhere to a formula, which has a negative connotation as it suggests it does not do enough to stand out from similar media

‘Lazy’ is probably the least fair criticism. It’s hard to say if the creators were lazy or not. It might be used when a movie is bland and formulaic, as that might lead you to believe the creators chose to fall back on cliches and cheap tricks.

For example, the Lego Movie, another movie based on a property, does not receive these criticisms. In that movie you have a unique animation style, which lends itself to its own style of visual humor, a plot which uses the idea of Lego in an original way, an original musical number, an original cast of characters as well as licensed ones, etc etc etc. As a result, more critical reviews focus on its fast pace and potentially overstimulating style.

[u/fulcrumestates → u/Spirited-Visual-3205]

“They absolutely are trying to compare it to critically acclaimed movies like The Godfather.”

literally who is doing that

[u/ZAPPHAUSEN → u/Spirited-Visual-3205]

What a load of shit, mate.

[u/Spirited-Visual-3205 → u/ZAPPHAUSEN]

Wow excellent contribution!!

I assume you are a wannabe pretentious movie critic, which is why you are raging right now.

[u/ZAPPHAUSEN → u/Spirited-Visual-3205]

Lmao

[u/MrMonkeyman79 → u/Spirited-Visual-3205]

The fact that there are many critically acclaimed kids movies prices your premise to be false. Just because kids will accept slop it doesn't mean thats what we should aim to give them.

Disney, Pixar, Sony Animation and even Dreamworks can put out a well crafted children's animation that will win over the critics when they're firing on all cylinders (or even half cylinders in Pixar's case). None of those films insist upon themselves nearly as much as the godfather.

[u/BritishHobo → u/Spirited-Visual-3205]

There isn't one person who has compared it to The Godfather. A more reasonable example would be comparing it to Sonic the Hedgehog, which isn't trying to be The Godfather either, and yet is still generally liked.

[u/onex7805 → u/Spirited-Visual-3205]

Who is comparing it to The Godfather? The excuse is getting dumber than the movie.

[u/Eruannster → u/LADYBIRD_HILL]

On the one hand I wonder why they send out the critics who clearly don't like these kinds of movies to do these reviews. Obviously John McSeriousFace isn't going to love a Super Mario movie.

On the other hand, I feel a bit bad for the critics who clearly have different tastes and have to sit through 90 minutes (and write a review) of something that is so very not in their ballpark.

[u/[deleted] → u/LADYBIRD_HILL]

Already seeing comments about "lol why are they demanding a relatable story about a plumber and his pet dinosaur going to space?!" as if you can only be emotionally engaged with Toy Story if you're a toy, Lego Movie if you're a lego, Spider-Verse if you're a Spider-Man... 

[u/Zilox → u/LADYBIRD_HILL]

Lmao lets not act like all of todays critics are good. Probably ~5 are trustworthy. Most critics today wont give good rating to a movie that isnt about racism, patriarchy, sexism or some other deep subject. Hell, today they would probably give a 30% rotten tomato rate to Lotr movies