Seeing the cloth fibers on Mario’s clothes and overalls is also an insane concept to grasp if you played the original 8-bit Super Mario Bros. video game on NES in its prime.
The highlight of the film is all of the Easter eggs and homage to the Mario video game franchise.
Jesus Christ talk about paid talking points that have nothing to do with the film.
This is what a review looks like when they are forced to give a positive review but the film is trash.
It is clear this reviewer didn't like it but was essentially forced to find arbitrary things to list as positives because he wasn't allowed to shit all over it.
Well considering that everyone is tearing apart the critics who hate it for being morons who don't even know the franchise, like this one bitch who claimed that the catsuit was humiliating to mario despite it being a powerup in the games for about a decade at this point, it isn't hard to see the editors and publishers telling their writing staff that if they don't actually have criticisms and haven't even touched a console in the last ten years to keep their mouths shut and just vague positives for the film.
As someone who has played mario since the NES days and saw the film, is it a masterpiece, absolutely not. But it's fun and it doesn't try to do anything it shouldn't, like tell kids that Luigi is trans or that Peach is now a lesbian.
It's just a Mario movie, that's it. It has fun with the premise and tries to establish somewhat how things work, which is all fine. There were some solid jokes, mostly out of Luma that I found to be good. Besides the licensed music the updated scoring of classic mario music is fantastic.
I don't think it will win awards but since Nintendo is likely to see a few hundred mil come there way for this film, if we get more movies such as a Metroid, Legend of Zelda or Kirby at the same quality, then I'll be happy since it'll be nice to have children's films I could show to my two year old niece that don't try to groom her and she can just have fun watching.
But the critics are butthurt about Chris Pratt not sacrificing himself on the altar of wokeness and use that as any excuse to attack the film, Mario doesn't have a thick first generation italian accent, which is fine too, it probably would have gotten old anyway.
My only gripe is that it seems to make Mario and Luigi like mid twenties to early thirties but it also feels like they are portraying them as late teenagers, it's hard to nail down exactly how old they are supposed to be in the movie.
And should some of the scenes have had more time to breathe, yeah some would have benefited by exploring more of what was going on or said, but again, it's fine since that means it doesn't linger and waste time either.
Remind me the last time someone spent 20% of their review talking about hair in a CGI film?
Like every CGI movie released between the years 1995 and 2005. Probably longer, but I stopped paying attention around then. A huge amount of focus was put on Puss In Boots' super special fur technology in Shrek 2. Nvidia and AMD both also have libraries specifically for rendering hair, and the inclusion of AMD's TressFX was the main thing I remember about the ad campaign for the Tomb Raider reboot.
They made a huge deal about comparing the cat in Toy Story 4 to the dog in Toy Story. It was really astonishing which is why I still maintain that Toy Story 4 was as much a technical demonstration as it was a cash grab.
Isn't that the guy who very clearly hates all non-jews and goes around on twitter asking people if they're Jewish or not, because that's the data point he bases all of his opinons about people on?
Jesus Christ talk about paid talking points that have nothing to do with the film.
This is what a review looks like when they are forced to give a positive review but the film is trash.
It is clear this reviewer didn't like it but was essentially forced to find arbitrary things to list as positives because he wasn't allowed to shit all over it.
That isn't a critic, it is paid marketing.
That'd be fine if it was a personal blog, but this is supposed to be a professional critical review of the film.
Well considering that everyone is tearing apart the critics who hate it for being morons who don't even know the franchise, like this one bitch who claimed that the catsuit was humiliating to mario despite it being a powerup in the games for about a decade at this point, it isn't hard to see the editors and publishers telling their writing staff that if they don't actually have criticisms and haven't even touched a console in the last ten years to keep their mouths shut and just vague positives for the film.
As someone who has played mario since the NES days and saw the film, is it a masterpiece, absolutely not. But it's fun and it doesn't try to do anything it shouldn't, like tell kids that Luigi is trans or that Peach is now a lesbian.
It's just a Mario movie, that's it. It has fun with the premise and tries to establish somewhat how things work, which is all fine. There were some solid jokes, mostly out of Luma that I found to be good. Besides the licensed music the updated scoring of classic mario music is fantastic.
I don't think it will win awards but since Nintendo is likely to see a few hundred mil come there way for this film, if we get more movies such as a Metroid, Legend of Zelda or Kirby at the same quality, then I'll be happy since it'll be nice to have children's films I could show to my two year old niece that don't try to groom her and she can just have fun watching.
But the critics are butthurt about Chris Pratt not sacrificing himself on the altar of wokeness and use that as any excuse to attack the film, Mario doesn't have a thick first generation italian accent, which is fine too, it probably would have gotten old anyway.
My only gripe is that it seems to make Mario and Luigi like mid twenties to early thirties but it also feels like they are portraying them as late teenagers, it's hard to nail down exactly how old they are supposed to be in the movie.
And should some of the scenes have had more time to breathe, yeah some would have benefited by exploring more of what was going on or said, but again, it's fine since that means it doesn't linger and waste time either.
It's a perfectly serviceable movie and a 7/10.
Believe it or not, that's apparently the canon ages according to Shiggy.
They were never intended to be old guys. It's an Ash Ketchum scenario too, they don't age.
Remind me the last time someone spent 20% of their review talking about hair in a CGI film?
That's laughable. Especially if the 'best' thing about a film is just simple nostalgia? It isn't hard to see what this author is doing.
Like every CGI movie released between the years 1995 and 2005. Probably longer, but I stopped paying attention around then. A huge amount of focus was put on Puss In Boots' super special fur technology in Shrek 2. Nvidia and AMD both also have libraries specifically for rendering hair, and the inclusion of AMD's TressFX was the main thing I remember about the ad campaign for the Tomb Raider reboot.
They made a huge deal about comparing the cat in Toy Story 4 to the dog in Toy Story. It was really astonishing which is why I still maintain that Toy Story 4 was as much a technical demonstration as it was a cash grab.
Isn't that the guy who very clearly hates all non-jews and goes around on twitter asking people if they're Jewish or not, because that's the data point he bases all of his opinons about people on?
That guy?
Oy vey goy stop being anti-semetic
The critics hate it because it doesn't push The Message.
That's all.
That's seriously all.
I dunno. Swapping Peach and Luigi's roles for the majority of the runtime is pretty blatant.
It happened in the 1992 comic and that was great.
Ok, but I’m still not going to watch this Hollywood slop.
There’s 0 gay shit or politics in the movie. It’s not bad for a kids movie.
For this reason it must be panned critically.
I don't know why they keep trying to remake something that was already perfect.