Super Mario Bros.

This is one of those movies I loved as a thirteen year old, I remember seeing it a few times. It was a film naturally aimed at my age group in 1993, I wish people would remember that when writing up such serious reviews. It's quite a fun story, the special effects are probably a little naff thirty years later, but what do you expect? Bob Hoskins is good fun.

I'm surprised by just how dark the story is, funny how you have a different look on things when you're young.

What I found interesting, was the theme music, Almost Unreal by Roxette, what an awesome track, arguably the best aspect of the film.

Fun, 7/10.

The Super Mario Brothers games are still great fun. Admittedly they are light on plot, almost simplistic, but they are imaginative, lots of fun and thrilling with memorable characters and interaction.

'Super Mario Bros' did have a good deal of potential, with talented actors like Bob Hoskins, Fiona Shaw, Samantha Mathis and Dennis Hopper on board, and it was always going to be interesting to see whether the film would be able to make an interesting story that didn't have a huge amount of narrative material to work from. Unfortunately, it is a real let down, and was doomed from the start from trying to do too much and from its notoriously troubled behind-the-scenes.

Video game/interactive film adaptations have a very dubious record, always giving a sense that video/interactive games don't translate well to film, and 'Super Mario Bros' is not an exception. This said, in general there are far worse films out there, while it misses more than it hits 'Super Mario Bros' has a few good spots. Some of the photography is good. Bob Hoskins and John Leguizamo do their best in the lead roles and both do a more than respectable job especially Hoskins. Their chemistry and rapport is enjoyable if at times rather too father and son than brothers. Alan Silvestri's score while in want of more recognisable themes for fans is well-suited for the film and has a nice rousing energy, atmosphere and whimsy. Good song choices too.

However, 'Super Mario Bros' has several problems that stop it from being the thrill ride it could have been. The rest of the cast don't really impress that much. Dennis Hopper is always a great pleasure in over-the-top roles, particularly villain ones and when he loses it, and on paper he did seem an ideal choice. The thing is though with a role like Frank Booth in 'Blue Velvet', Hopper was not only over-the-top but also terrifying and the character was interesting, here in 'Super Mario Bros' as King Koopa Hopper is a large piece of unsubtle ham and that's it and there are some points where he's almost subdued, sometimes you expect Hopper to lose his rag and it doesn't really happen. His dialogue also further dumbs down the character, making King Koopa very much a missed opportunity as a villain. Samantha Mathis has some moments of heart and charm but is pretty bland on the whole, while Fiona Shaw at times comes close to out-hamming Hopper. The Goombas are sometimes sort of fun, but sometimes pointless and too goofy.

It is a shame really that the film's production troubles come through loud and clear in the film itself. The direction has a very inexperienced and erratic feel, and like the directors had no idea what to do with the film. The same is with the story, granted credit is due for trying to do something with source material that doesn't give them an awful lot to work with and it's very energetic in pace and never dull. Unfortunately, there is the sense that the writers didn't know which direction to go or how to start, with target demographic/audience and what it wanted to be never really clear (despite also being a bad film with many huge problems, 'Street Fighter' at least got that right). 'Super Mario Bros' constantly feels rushed, bloated, over-complicated and like there was too much going on, and further sadly not all of it was necessary or made sense as a result of not being explored enough. Exposition is also garbled, so that it has nothing to do with the games other than a few clumsily inserted references which reeked of trying to squeeze them in when this fact was realised in production.

As well as lacking in thrills, as a result of the over-crowded and over-complicated story, there is a lack of fun and imagination. The jokes are too juvenile and too embarrassingly awkward to be any fun, and only succeeds in dumbing down so many of the characters (a huge part as to why King Koopa is lacking as a villain). In fact, the script generally was poor, with childish and sometimes misplaced humour and dialogue that clunks badly. Action is very jagged and stop-start. Apart from in the photography and in a couple of neat effects, the expensive for back then budget is not hugely obvious in the production values, where interference and production troubles are second most obvious after the story. The sets are cluttered, too small in scale and quite drab and lacking in colour or dazzle, the world is never fully immersed and others have said it looks like a cheaper and dumbed down 'Blade Runner' which this reviewer agrees with. A lot of the effects are slapdash even for the early pre-'Jurassic Park' 90s.

Overall, has some good assets but, while it is not as horrendous as the universal critical and commercial failure on release and as its reputation suggests, too much of it is lacking for it to be the thrill-ride it had the potential of being with the right execution. 4/10 Bethany Cox

This is one of those films where it's more fun to hear about how it was created than actually watching it.

It's not as bad as people like to think, so let's just hope in the future they give the same sort of love to a Mario movie as they did for Mortal Kombat, or even Sonc.

This is a cheesy movie for people who play video games. I don't understand why some people adamantly insist this movie should never have been made. It's cute and entertaining. It doesn't stay completely loyal to the game storyline, but Bob Hoskins and John Leguizamo are perfect for these two roles. Worth watching if you see it on TV.

Super Mario Bros. (1993), was another case of the source material, for a film idea, being too advanced for the cinematic technology of the day. CGI was just starting with Jurassic Park (1993), so the choice to do this film with practical, physical effects and live action characters was its major downfall. This prompted the story to be adjusted to fit the capabilities of the filmmakers of the day. It all culminates into a silly plot, that actually manages to make video game characters, caricatures of themselves. This however, isn't a knock on the special effects used in this film at all. The effects fit the pre-CGI era fairly well. They did a very good job with the special effects, art direction, set design and most of the costumes and make-up. There actually is a dinosaur in the film and the computer effects used for him are pretty good. For 1993, it is visually pleasant.

Dennis Hopper, as President Koopa (Bowser), looks ridiculous though. There also is this weird use of the fungus in the film. It looks bad technically and isn't menacing at all. Many of the characters are pail, empty and mindless, especially Samantha Mathis as Princess Daisy. It doesn't translate well, especially having to depict Mario (Bob Hoskins) and Luigi (John Leguizamo), running around Brooklyn. The attempt to make the film as real as possible backfires. I never got a chance to see this film when it was first released, but I had heard of the negative fallout that came after it was released. I remember when Siskel and Ebert gave it two thumbs down. Most film-buffs remember hearing, that Bob Hoskins hated the movie. This is probably why I never got around to seeing Super Mario Bros. (1993), until the 2023 film was announced. 30 years later I finally understood. This film is a failure, but I still recommend seeing it, at least once, as a curiosity, because you have to see it to believe it.

3.9 (F+ MyGrade) = 4 IMDB.