User Reviews

I know nostalgia plays a huge [arty here but this film is camp, funny and silly good fun. Always worth watching.

I get why people don't like this movie but it's not as bad as people say it is I mean yeah it killed the careers for a lot of people. I don't think Bob hodgkins had another big movie after this. But looking back it actually did a lot it walked so the illumination movies could run. The illumination movies had more to work with than what the 1993 movie did. The newest Mario game was Mario world when this movie was in production. This movie deserves a little bit more love and respect honestly and it's sad that there was never a sequel the ending of this movie is with a cliffhanger for another movie that never came out. I mean that's one thing I hate about movies is when they promise to sequel and it never happens. And that alone cost the movie a few points because when you don't live up to your promise it just looks bad on the movie in the long run.

O filme Super Mario Bros. (1993), dirigido por Rocky Morton e Annabel Jankel, é uma obra ousada e criativa que merece muito mais reconhecimento do que recebeu na época. Inspirado no universo da Super Mario Bros., o longa conseguiu fazer algo raríssimo nos anos 90: transformar um videogame em uma experiência cinematográfica única e cheia de personalidade. Logo de cara, o filme impressiona pela sua estética. Ao invés de seguir o caminho óbvio de cores vibrantes e fantasia tradicional, ele aposta em uma versão cyberpunk e urbana do Reino dos Cogumelos — aqui representado como uma dimensão paralela distópica. Essa escolha dá identidade própria ao filme e mostra coragem criativa, algo que poucos blockbusters tinham naquela época. As atuações também são um grande destaque. Bob Hoskins entrega um Mario carismático, humano e determinado, enquanto John Leguizamo traz energia e leveza ao Luigi, criando uma dupla divertida e envolvente. Já Dennis Hopper interpreta um Rei Koopa excêntrico e memorável, adicionando uma camada de ameaça e personalidade ao vilão. O roteiro mistura aventura, ficção científica e humor de forma dinâmica. Há perseguições, efeitos práticos impressionantes para a época, criaturas animatrônicas e um design de produção que mostra cuidado em cada detalhe. Para um filme lançado em 1993, a ambição visual é admirável. Além disso, o longa tem um charme cult que só cresceu com o tempo. Muitos fãs hoje reconhecem que o filme não tentou simplesmente copiar o jogo, mas sim reinterpretá-lo sob uma nova ótica — algo que demonstra respeito à obra original, ao mesmo tempo em que cria algo autoral.

Creo que todos estamos de acuerdo en que esta es una de las peores adaptaciones de un videojuego y una de las peores películas en la historia

Realmente tengo que preguntar quién fue el enfermo mental que inventó esta película que es una porquería andante de adaptación del videojuego de Mario.

Soy el único que comprende Esta ambiciosa obra maestra cinematográfica es rara pero me gusta.

What the f Nintendo was going for this is the worst movie in the game history Nintendo couldn’t fail The NES game boy Super Nintendo but it killed Mario don’t you ever do this again like the virtual boy and the wiiu

No Real Super Mario Movie, the Best is the Orginal Soundtrak (Look at Spotify PLZ)

الفيلم سيئ جداً و لا يمد إلى سلسلة سوبر ماريو بصلة لم استطع حتى إكمال الفلم إلى النهاية

With the new Mario movie out, I felt curious about revisiting some scenes from this movie. I ended up sitting through the whole movie. It may not be a masterpiece or be "faithful to the original material" but it does have entertainment value

Another unwanted piece of garbage that makes me scared some of the time and sad for how a video game movie has turned into .

This is the BEST Mario adaptation of all time, I can now say that this is my favourite anime.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

I vaguely remember watching this when I was a younger but I think I blocked it out. I probably never would have watched it again had John Leguizamo not started crying like a little child about it. And it's just as bad as I'd forgotten it was. I mean it truly belongs in the worst movies of all time hall of fame. Now I have to spend the next 30 years trying to forget it again. On a side note: Dear John, I just wanted to remind you that while you run around complaining about the lack of Latinos in the cast. There are no Latino characters in Super Mario. If anything, you should be complaining of a lack of Italians in the cast. Lemma just remind you real quick. Mario and Luigi are Italian while you are Columbian and Bob Hoskins is British. Perhaps you should be apologising for stealing those rolls from Italian actors. You know what they say about throwing stones in glass houses don't you?

Not the best movie. Its clunky and shares only a passing resemblance to what was at that point a still very much developing series. Its limited technically and some of the quirks it introduces to fill in story are odd at best. But at least it was imaginative it took my child mind on a journey. It filled in the games back story created interesting intriguing lore and brought mario in to our world. I still remember it fondly and always will.

Original, well-scored, incredibly entertaining. I'm glad the take on these brothers wasn't so copy/paste from the video games.

I watched this in the theaters in 1993. I was 7 years old. The thing about me is that I knew nothing about Mario, and I had never played the games at the time. I actually got a game boy a few years later. Anyway, considering all that, I actually liked this movie a lot at the time. I thought it was a great Sci-Fi Dino-Punk adventure. I enjoyed the concept of this alternate dino-universe, and I enjoyed the characters. I also loved the crazy design of the city of Dino-Hattan, and the ambiance was like nothing I had every seen in any other movie (well, at 7 years old, I didn't know about Blade Runner). Nowadays, I have played all of the main Mario games, but I still have a lot of nostalgia for this film. But I can see more faults now. In retrospect, sure, it's not faithful to the lore because it went in a weird direction. Some of the major plot points are not very solid. And considering how the movie was made, it's actually amazing how watcheable and decent the final product is. Perhaps its weakest trait is that it's linked to the Mario franchise. On its own, without the Mario name, this movie might have fared better based on its Dino-Punk novelty alone. But of course, Jurassic Park would have destroyed it a year later.

Honestly, the plot in this "Super Mario Bros." movie is too much like the movie "Speed." The plot devices in this movie worked with "Speed", a highly successful movie, but not with this particular mess of a movie. The special effects were also really cheesy, and did make the audience feel like it was in an actual moment in the "Super Mario Bros." games. I grew up with "Super Mario Bros." and this movie is not faithful at all to the game material. The acting did not help either. The acting was pretty run-of-the-mill for a movie. The acting is nothing like the acting in a video game. The acting is more like acting found in an action thriller, like "Speed." "Super Mario Bros" is not supposed to be an action flick. It is supposed to be a movie that closely resembles that of the video game. Even the poster looks so cut-rate and disappointing. Mario and Luigi look nothing as they do in the games, or even as they are in the "Super Mario Brothers Super Show" I grew up with as a kid. Besides, this movie lacks humor the audience would find funny. Most of the humor consists of overly-used slapstick gags, that turn out to be more annoying than funny. The only remotely (no pun intended) attractive part of this movie is Dennis Hopper. Dennis Hopper really is the only reason to come down and watch this weird, slapsticky, action-filled movie that is supposed to take place in a game, but really is nothing but some weird action flick, using similar plot devices to the successful (and completely different) movie "Speed."

This movie is ridiculously bad and infamous for completely duffing what made the Mario Games well Mario Games. It would have worked far better animated than live action that was used here.

This movie, is a lie, this feels like a different world a world that's not Super Mario, the characthers looks disgusting especially Bowser, I remeber wathcing this as a kid and it was really awful

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

Despite being objectively terrible the ill-fated Super Mario Bros. movie manages to somehow still be an entertaining and fun romp, if slightly drunk.

This movie is like a fanfiction made by a boomer that doesn't know anything about Mario whatsoever.

This movie is very mediocre, generally, it is watchable, it is alright, but it lacks some feels and it is..very mediocre, once again.

Ver good mivo i likt the muvie its kinda like ju know cool and staff Its just cool