Skip to main content

A Worthlessly Patronizing and Insular Super Mario Galaxy

Barely a single choice made in The Super Mario Galaxy Movie is done in the service of a story, character, or thematic beat. Rather they are entirely designed to set up the next point of fan service. Even the mild pervasive ones, like Mario’s juvenile crush on Princess Peach, Bowser’s desire to reconnect with his son, and Peach’s drive to reunite with her sister Rosalina after many years, all are basically just to culminate in reference moments for the game franchise, with no worthwhile or honest integrity for their own sake. Because those sort of things don’t matter -it’s the flashiness that counts, and the number of game references that can be shoved into a single scene to distract your attention from the vapid material of the film itself.
It is at least a little more story-driven than its predecessor, a film that proved the futility of loyal video game movie adaptations by simply recreating the pastiches of several Mario games but of course without the option of interactivity that is entirely why those games are fun in the first place. There are certainly remnants of that through The Super Mario Galaxy Movie, from returning directors Aaron Horvath and Michael Jelenic, but it isn’t so blatant about it in its action scenes or story devices. Though it is once more an incredibly thin narrative, held up by even thinner characters and an obnoxiousness here and there in its animation that is a little offensive.
The movie takes on the foundational premise of the Mario games -it is about rescuing a princess. Princess Rosalina (Brie Larson), the long-lost older sister of Princess Peach (Anya Taylor-Joy) and ruler of an outer space realm, is captured by Bowser Jr. (Benny Safdie), the estranged son of Bowser (Jack Black), currently shrunken and imprisoned in the Mushroom Kingdom. Peach and Toad (Keegan-Michael Key) embark on a mission to rescue Rosalina while leaving the kingdom in the hands of Mario (Chris Pratt) and Luigi (Charlie Day), alongside their new dinosaur friend Yoshi (Donald Glover -though you wouldn’t know it). But Bowser Jr. soon attacks the Mushroom Kingdom, freeing his father; the Mario Brothers abandoning their duties to go after him.
That part is very underplayed, but it is indeed notable that the Mario Brothers completely shirk the responsibilities Peach entrusted them with and it is not brought up again even once they’ve caught up to Peach and Toad not long after. It epitomizes how little the narrative integrity matters to this movie that there is not even a small follow-up to that plot beat because what matters is bringing the characters together for a particular set-piece. Mario and Luigi have to stay behind for a first fight in the Mushroom Castle with Bowser Jr., but then they have to be united with Peach and Toad for the sake of some comedy beats when they get turned into babies -which must happen because Baby Mario and Luigi will get a reaction from the fans. That is an example of just how cynically the movie is constructed. The points it needs to hit are all inherently for the sake of fans getting that dopamine rush of recognizing something.
As such, the lip service to real narrative throughlines are so half-baked it is insulting the movie even tries. Mario's crush on Peach, Peach's yearning for her sister, Bowser's reconciliation with his son -it is virtually impossible to care about any of these. Yoshi is there to be a mascot, Rosalina is exactly the character Larson has lambasted as a symbol of femininity on screen. At one point the world of the Mario franchise is even breached by another Nintendo property, Fox McCloud of the Star Fox series -a completely useless and empty space rogue archetype voiced by Glen Powell, included potentially just because Powell is a fan, serving a bad gag around the supposition of a love rival for Peach.
Speaking of humour, the movie is pretty dim on this level as well. Its sensibility is akin to the generic tenor of most franchise blockbusters of the last several years, though with little else going for the movie its seams are easier to spot. Most of the jokes are very predictable, and the style of their deliveries (especially from Black) even more-so. The visual gags aren't quite so derivative, but their construction isn't often very inspired either, such as in a dinosaur chase sequence and two bits involving a customer service robot that just recycles a joke executed better in movies like Zootopia and Ralph Breaks the Internet. It is as though the whole comic tone was designed by committee around the easiest kinds of jokes to get a reaction out of kids. But it doesn't quite work -at least at my screening, there was very little laughter from the kids in attendance, who seemed to be restless and more entertained by exploring the theatre itself.
Perhaps that is indicative of a broader experience kids are having with the movie, perhaps it is an outlier. But either way, the movie doesn’t much care. It is content to make no effort at engagement on more than a surface level -very blatant in its single focus on making money for an I.P. juggernaut. One that has so expansive a world to play in but no imagination in how to uniquely utilize it. It is especially apparent in the last act, where both the Mario Brothers and Peach rely on the conventional game mechanics as a sort of magic button to easily accomplish their goals, and something that happens to Bowser renders just the general stakes of anything completely hollow -not that there was much of those to begin with. Ultimately it is a movie that has less dimension than even some of the earliest Mario games, less dimension than Paper Mario. And I am once more confident in all of the years of their ubiquity that there has never been a Mario game less enjoyable to play than this film is to watch.
As has been stated lately around the internet and from all corners as long as movies for children have been made, the age of a perceived demographic does not excuse a movie from being cheap or bad. Kids deserve movies that challenge them, inspire them, that don't talk down to them. And until very recently that wasn't considered a controversial thing. My generation grew up with bold new movies from Pixar, just behind mine they had the Disney Renaissance, and Gen-X got the onslaught of unique or "dangerous" family films of the 1980s -many of which are rightly classics. Overall, kids movies have perhaps never been worse than in these past few years, and The Super Mario Galaxy Movie is endemic of that. Its name-brand alone ensures success and so there is no incentive to enrich it with any of the kind of effort, originality, or emotional depth. There is almost a glee at this emanating off the screen. A sterile vacuum of energy with a cute plumber's face on the cover.
Play a Mario game instead, it is a far more worthwhile use of your time.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....
1 comment
Read more

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...
Post a Comment
Read more