Jump to content

Talk:Super Mario Bros. (film)/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Edit

The recent additional paragraph by Galactic war didn't really fit with the style of the rest of the plot. The English was slightly broken, and it repeated a detail already stated in the previous paragraphs. The paragraph attempted a detailed summary of the plot but didn't really get anywhere. --Crisu 00:30, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Super Mario World

The Super Mario Bros. film is not heavily based on Super Mario World. The only thing that the film really borrows from SMW in specific is Yoshi. --Furrykef 15:18, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Legacy

The legacy setion had for some years and unsourced fact about Nintendo Power using (and thus making it official) the Mario surname. Last week I edited the section so it no longer included that statement since 3 years had passed and no oned had sourced it. Now, it was change back to the same unsourced statement. Can someone back the claim with the Nintendo Power issue so as to source it adecuately? IF not, I'll re-edit the section in a three days. Veritiel (talk) 11:27, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Bowser Character

Is he ever called Bowser in the entire movie?129.139.1.68 (talk) 12:57, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

No. His character is only ever called "Koopa", with his full title being "President Koopa". However, various related media such as trading cards and novelizations indicate that Princess Daisy's father, the king of Dinohattan, is named "King Bowser". Jackal Killer (talk) 03:52, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Cult Classic among fans

The Super Mario Bros. The Movie Archive is a site that discusses the movie and archives information about its actors, production, merchandise, etc. and has a small community of fans devoted to discussing the movie and working towards a special edition DVD or Blu-Ray release.

It's just one small site, but has been active for the last three years (established 14 years after the release of the movie, suggesting there was continued interest) and has continued activity on the forums. I'll work to get further evidence of significant cult status among general Super Mario and movie fans if this information isn't enough. Jackal Killer (talk) 21:14, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't get it. It is natural fans of Super Mario will enjoy the movie. This is not noteable. G.I.Joe fans enjoy the Joe movie, for example. Lots42 (talk) 03:34, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
A fair amount of fans of the Super Mario Bros. game series don't enjoy the movie while a fair amount of fans of the G.I. Joe franchise doesn't like their movie adaptation. The difference is that the Super Mario Bros. movie was a commercial and critical failure, only recently garnering praise from fans and the crew of the film. Jackal Killer (talk) 23:30, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Okay...we have established that those who like the film will like it and those who do not like it don't. Not noteable. You can't know the opinion of every Mario/Joe fan. Lots42 (talk) 10:20, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
"X film has become a cult classic" is one of those lazy almost possible to prove/disprove assertions that litter virtually any wikipedia page for a film that initially had a poor commercial and critical reception. Here someone tried to get around it by saying "commenters" (actually only one) called it a cult classic" but this is just lazy weasel words and underscores the meaningless of the phrase (the linked article actually buts the phrase "cult following" in scare quotes and seems pretty sarcastically dismissive of the idea). Something becoming a "cult classic" needs to have a clear obvious examples, such as the following Rocky Horror got, or has clear definable influence such as Scorpio Rising by Kenneth Anger. Merely that someone bashed together and maintained a fan site is too low a bar to cross. I've removed the phrase and can;t really see a reason for it's re-inclusion. Verlaine76 (talk) 12:59, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Chicxulxub meteor reference?

I really don't beleive that the reference for a 'Chicxulub meteor' is an appropriate link from this article, cos said meteor struck Mexico, and not Brooklyn, where this film took place. However, I put this on the Discussion page in case anyone has objections before the link is removed. 3dsfan (talk) 03:29, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

I've no objections whatsoever. I considered removing it myself but felt if it was truly unnecessary someone would tackle it themselves. I don't believe the meteorite theory had been proven at the time of writing (or filming) so that link is just a retroactive change. Jackal Killer (talk) 08:55, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
I also support the removal of the link. Also, this should not be linked per WP:EGG. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 12:37, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

List of roles

They should have a Roles selection in this article.~Tailsman67~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.163.17.213 (talk) 19:07, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Shigeru Miyamoto

Shigeru Miyamoto, Mario's creator, stated, "[In] the end, it was a very fun project that they put a lot of effort into," but also said, "The one thing that I still have some regrets about is that the movie may have tried to get a little too close to what the Mario Bros. video games were. And in that sense, it became a movie that was about a video game, rather than being an entertaining movie in and of itself."

I recall reading somewhere that Miyamoto might have actually been talking about the animated film that was released in Japan. He might have been asked about the live action film, but the animated film was probably more familiar to him and so he likely misunderstood the question. Unfortunately, I can't remember where I read this. - furrykef (Talk at me) 18:27, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

What Happened?

Now I can't fix the grammar and plot mistakes in this article either? Geez.

I mean, I fixed them a couple of days ago, but then, the article reverted back to the way it was before I fixed it. It's like, the article asks for someone to fix it, but when it rejects my edits, that, my friends, is hypocrisy at work.

What do I have to do? Join Wikipedia?

Planned CGI Reboot from Universal/Illumination announced

I'd like to inform that Universal Pictures and Illumination Entertainment have announced a computer-animated Super Mario Bros. movie earlier today.

Mario Bros. Set to Jump to Big Screen in Movie Deal with Universal’s Illumination

MatthewRC (talk) 02:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Neither Illumination nor Nintendo have confirmed that, only "people who are knowledgable of the discussions". Furthermore, the source states that they are only close to agreement, so as of now there is no movie deal.
In other words: there was no announcement, only rumors. SkyWarrior 13:02, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Super Mario Bros. (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:36, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Super Mario Bros. (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:38, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Cleanup

I removed some stuff from the article, mostly from the lead. There was a synthy description of the film's reception. I removed it and replaced it with the Rotten Tomatoes summary, which is something that we can actually use. Coming up with our own personal analysis is forbidden by policy – this has to be done by reliable sources. If reliable sources haven't come to a conclusion, then we don't, either. I also removed the bit about the fan-created website and comic strip. Again, unless reliable sources comment on this, these websites don't belong in the article. Wikipedia isn't here to promote random fan websites that pop up. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:31, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

I preferred the old version. I generally prefer the shorter paraphrase over repeating the information from Rotten Tomatoes (a site people take way too seriously). The article body is already reliably sourced and if done properly then the lead/intro is only summarizing it. Other people prefer to directly repeat what Rotten Tomatoes says, which does avoid any risk of summarizing turning into subjective interpretation, but I'd prefer brevity in the intro.
The article has a section about legacy, I thought the last part of the intro was attempting to summarize the Legacy section by mentioning that web site etc. I only thought to look at this page because of an article about the fan website, and it seems the site may actually be significant, and actually rise to being notable itself, which is more than you'd expect from most mere fansites. The intro wasn't great and I'd usually prefer rephrasing over deleting, so I think the intro does need some kind of line to summarize the fact that yes this film has a legacy of sorts.
Also there was a big note saying <!-- DO NOT CHANGE --> which would make me think there is probably a good chance that text was worked out after some debate and consensus and that anyone thinking about deleting it should definitely check the Talk page and Talk page archive before deleting it. -- 109.78.214.58 (talk) 01:18, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
While I'm here I think the critical response section of this section is too short and it would be improved by a few other critics talking about aspects of the film. As it stands we have a few saying good, others saying bad and only one specifically complaining about the script.
I had also expected this article to mention how often this film gets mentioned negatively in the context of lists of film adaptations of video games, so it was a surprise that the article doesn't have anything like that at all. Literally the first article that came up when I searched has a big picture of Mario Bros (but goes on to point out other films were far worse). -- 109.78.214.58 (talk) 01:18, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
It doesn't matter if someone puts "do not remove" in HTML comments; if it's unsourced, it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. This includes coming to conclusions not found in any cited sources. If the fansites have coverage, they can go somewhere in the article, such as the legacy section. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:54, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Filming dates?

I've just realized that principal photography dates and locations aren't included the production section. We may have to find some sources to include it if it's necessary. Any ideas? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 07:49, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

"Cult Status"

The lede states the film has attained "cult status" but is this really correct? the only quotes in the current page to support this are the director and producer who are hardly impartial. There are a few pages around the web that make a similar claim but most (if they're not repeating the claim by by Joffe and Jankel) of them seem to actually be connected to the SMB page, a specific fan page that a couple of chancers put together to promote their own fan sequel, or it's just being used as the sort of banal journalistic cliché that gets attached to any film that flops yet turns up its own wikipedia page. 148.197.47.194 (talk) 15:10, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Super_Mario_Bros._(film)/Archive_2&oldid=1237883150"