The Super Mario Bros. Movie (2023)

@The Superstar Saga, I think it's worth taking into consideration that animated movies, even the big budget ones, rarely surpass the 90 minute mark, and even then, only by a measly 10 minutes or so. Shrek, Shrek 2, Ice Age, and Toy Story, to name a few seminal CG animated films, are all 92 minutes or less, and I assume the considerable technological progress that has since occurred in the field of animation has only made production more costly, so executives really don't have much of an incentive to budget for an animated film at the same scale as a live-action film. I doubt that the age rating is a factor when they establish a film's duration in the pipeline, as Sausage Party, which is obviously anything but a children's movie, is also 90 minutes long much like its PG-rated homologues. Animated movies haven't diverted from this trend at all in recent years.

Good plot and characterisation don't really hinge on the movie's duration. Of course, your mileage may vary on what you consider compelling enough, as many stories are developed over entire books, serials, and TV series, but we have plenty of testimony to the fact that a talented team of directors, scriptwriters, and story artists can create something compelling even with the strictures of a 3D animated film. And in regards to your complaint regarding the Mario movie's story, would you expect a masterpiece from the people who came up with Teen Titans Go and those who wrote Big Fat Mommas or whatever that garbage was called? Probably not.
 
Last edited:
The argument presented was age demographics are the reason for moive length, your point about technical considerations is different, but totally fair! I understand there are real world logistical reasons why longer animated films are more expensive, I agree. I also understand that these directors aren't known for masterpieces. But had things been done differently, could it have been a masterpiece? I think so.

Good characterization (more specifically better characterization) hinges on duration in this situation because the pacing is too fast to give the characters enough time to really interact. The two remedies would be either:

A) Cut down on the action scenes so there's more room in 1h30m to show the characters interacting.
B) Expand the film to 2h30m so there's enough character interaction to flesh out more of a story.

I'd be fine with either, but I think the second option of expanding duration would be preferable for those who enjoyed all the action scenes.

To be clear, I loved the movie, it just had the potential to be so much better.
 
imo i don't think a mario movie without action scenes is a good pitch. the entire appeal of the franchise lies in its action-adventure nature. to try and drive the point home, i'll say that even the slower, more puzzle oriented entries in this franchise are just as rompy, where some games have you kill viruses with weaponised medication (Dr. Mario) and others have you guide your vain capitalist produce through a complex and often vicious market (Mario vs. Donkey Kong).

mario is versatile, but he's a born jumper and stomper first and foremost, and that philosophy echoes most profoundly. a plot-heavy movie just seems unfitting for the character.
 
a plot-heavy movie just seems unfitting for the character.
I agree Mario should always be displaying his upbeat and active personality, but I can't agree with this. Mario has had plot-heavy games, so a plot-heavy movie seems like a good idea to me. Movies are way more of a story driven medium than games, so if there can be games with grand, dramatic and high-stakes stories, I think there can be a movie too. I'm not sure it would have been a good idea to go that route for THIS movie, given it's an origin story, but I absolutely want sequels to start taking pages from Mario's more story-driven outings.
 
The first Harry Potter was rated PG, the same age rating as the Super Mario Bros. Movie.

Young children were a massive demographic regardless, with Harry and Hermione dominating as the most popular Halloween costumes they wore when Trick or Treating in the 2000s. The same way Harry Potter was a family film for all ages, I think the Super Mario Bros. Movie could benefit from that too.

Star Wars, a series who's largest audience was kids buying toys, "All the money is in the action figures"- George Lucas, has films over 2 hours.
  • A New Hope— 2 hr 5 min (125 min)
  • The Empire Strikes Back— 2 hr 7 min (127 min)
  • Return of the Jedi— 2 hr 16 min (136 min)
  • The Phantom Menace— 2 hr 16 min (136 min)
  • Attack of the Clones— 2 hr 22 min (142 min)
  • Revenge of the Sith— 2 hr 20 min (140 min)
  • The Force Awakens— 2 hr 15 min (135 min)
  • The Last Jedi-- 2 hr 33 min (153 min)
  • The Rise of Skywalker— 2 hr 22 min (142 min)
The argument that kids series cannot have successful 2.5 hour long films, has been proven wrong by history. Even very recent history, with the Sonic The Hedgehog 2 movie being just over 2 hours.


Again, these movies were not intended for the even younger ages that the Mario movie is aimed at. The Mario movie is meant to be aimed at REALLY young ages. The PG rating is just due to all the cartoon violence.

And the 2nd Sonic movie is a prime example of why a longer movie would be a stupid idea since it's full of nonsense that isn't funny, doesn't go anywhere and is mostly just irritating and just pads out the running time. If you are trying to improve the film you should give a good example for the argument, not that.

Plus you forget the other part of my argument, the source material. Mario is not a series that lends itself well to longer films. It's characters and plots are all extremely basic and trying to cut out most of the action and increase the length time in a vain attempt to elaborate on something that has no inherent depth is just about the best way I can think of to bore your audience.
 
Just wait for a sequel bros. They unnecessarily split up movies by part one and part two anyway.

but I absolutely want sequels to start taking pages from Mario's more story-driven outing

I already know what you're talking about but like only one game is this epic drama, the rest are very simple plots that can be in 90 minutes by Illumination movies.
 
Last edited:
Again, these movies were not intended for the even younger ages that the Mario movie is aimed at. The Mario movie is meant to be aimed at REALLY young ages. The PG rating is just due to all the cartoon violence.

And the 2nd Sonic movie is a prime example of why a longer movie would be a stupid idea since it's full of nonsense that isn't funny, doesn't go anywhere and is mostly just irritating and just pads out the running time. If you are trying to improve the film you should give a good example for the argument, not that.

Plus you forget the other part of my argument, the source material. Mario is not a series that lends itself well to longer films. It's characters and plots are all extremely basic and trying to cut out most of the action and increase the length time in a vain attempt to elaborate on something that has no inherent depth is just about the best way I can think of to bore your audience.

It's just an assumption though that the Super Mario Bros. Movie was meant for younger kids than the first Harry Potter. The only evidence to go off of is them both being PG with massive numbers of young children watching both, which puts them both in the family friendly ballpark of kids movies.

Sonic The Hedgehog 2, I think it could have been much better with more Sonic-type character scene replacing the padding human scenes like the wedding, while still being 2.5 hours. Make the most of the duration, rather than squandering it.

Action is important, I completely agree! Which is why expanding the duration could allow for both action and story to shine, is the better remedy than cutting back on action scenes. Both action and story are important.

For example, one of the best action scenes in the Super Mario Bros. Movie at the very end, had a certain character...
...had a certain character use a trash can lid from a dumpster, those who watched the movie will know what the lid was used for and why it was a great scene.
The scene felt amazing. It would not have felt amazing, if it wasn't that one specific character doing it, who showed both character growth, and because of the relationships established earlier on. It would have been a completely vacuous scene without that prior story the movie had. Story clearly does matter.



That great scene near the end landed well thanks to decent storytelling, but it also would have landed so much better if the storytelling prior went even deeper.
 
Last edited:
On another note, RPG fans might have gotten indirect (probably unintentional) references!

The animation in the movie is so fluid that some of Bowser's angry facial expressions appear ripped straight from Bowletta's angry expressions from Mario & Luigi.

352555235021c1426c61cc1a6ea6c613f37febd6_hq.jpg


His expression is almost identical to that and a few other Bowletta expressions in some scenes.

Bowser has an extremely cartoonishly floppy mouth in the movie. Love it.
 
Last edited:
It's just an assumption though that the Super Mario Bros. Movie was meant for younger kids than the first Harry Potter. The only evidence to go off of is them both being PG with massive numbers of young children watching both, which puts them both in the family friendly ballpark of kids movies.

Except that it's not at all an assumption. Mario is inherently meant for people of all ages. Harry Potter the novels are meant for older children. They are considered "advanced reading" for children ages 10 and up and the movies reflect this.

So again it's a bad comparison and as was mentioned earlier animated movies are almost never over 90 minutes. The movie's length is just fine for what it is meant to be and if you expected anything more than that then thats a you problem.