Illumination's Super Mario Bros (2023)

[JungleSkip]

All of that may be true, but the problem is that Nintendo's businesses are highly uncertain because they're one of the console gaming co's.

If you were talking about Valve or TakeTwo or EA, that might be something different.

But I have a hard time seeing Comcast brass wanting anything to do with a risky or uncertain business like Nintendo.

Nintendo has powerful brands that can be exploited in theme parks and movies, but outside of that they derive the bulk of their revenue from their console markets and various attached aspects of those.

Comcast wants no part of a finnicky business like that.

Nintendo can have a console sell 100m units in a generation followed by another that sells 1/10th of that.

Look at what they've done to Universal's movie business; completely converted it into a stable franchise heavy business. Nintendo won't ever really be like that, they'll have booms and busts.

To be fair, all Universal would have to do if they bought Nintendo is cancel future hardware development and have Nintendo's studios start developing games for Sony/Microsoft/PC and they'd sell 10 million+ copies of every game that was formally shackled to Nintendo's hardware. It'd instantly become an EA-sized profit center.

Now, I don't think there's any chance of this happening, nor do I think it'd be good for gaming, but that's an easy "problem" to get around.

 

[zg44]

To be fair, all Universal would have to do if they bought Nintendo is cancel future hardware development and have Nintendo's studios start developing games for Sony/Microsoft/PC and they'd sell 10 million+ copies of every game that was formally shackled to Nintendo's hardware. It'd instantly become an EA-sized profit center.

Now, I don't think there's any chance of this happening, nor do I think it'd be good for gaming, but that's an easy "problem" to get around.

Comcast would want that started or at least partially done before they would takeover Nintendo.

It's like the theme parks. When Comcast bought NBCU from GE, the top Comcast execs wanted to sell off the theme parks. But with Harry Potter already taking off, they changed their minds and instead bought back the other half of UOR and took over USJ.

But I firmly believe that if there wasn't already HP in progress, the other 50% of UOR and USH would be gone.

Comcast execs just don't have any experience in shifting production at a gaming co on the scale of what you're describing.

While it's interesting to contemplate, they would either just focus on gaming companies that are already at that point or wait.

Either way, Universal is already getting the stuff they want from Nintendo, so it's pretty much moot.

 

[GadgetGuru]

To be fair, all Universal would have to do if they bought Nintendo is cancel future hardware development and have Nintendo's studios start developing games for Sony/Microsoft/PC and they'd sell 10 million+ copies of every game that was formally shackled to Nintendo's hardware. It'd instantly become an EA-sized profit center.

Now, I don't think there's any chance of this happening, nor do I think it'd be good for gaming, but that's an easy "problem" to get around.

I actually question if that's true. Nintendo sells all of its hardware at a profit which is rare for a console company. I'm pretty convinced that a nice chunk of Nintendo's profits come from console sales.

I think there's also not a very big market for Nintendo fans that don't own Nintendo consoles.

 

[JungleSkip]

I think there's also not a very big market for Nintendo fans that don't own Nintendo consoles.

Yea no. That's insane. Just by virtue of having those games on different consoles they'd sell multi-million copies more. You don't have to be a "Nintendo fan" to want to play Nintendo games, and some of the people who want to play their games won't buy their systems because, by and large, Nintendo's games are all there is for them. Opening those games up to said people would be huge.

Again, it's not gonna happen, and it shouldn't, but to say Nintendo's games wouldn't sell substantially more if they were on PS4/Xbox/PC as well is ludicrous.

Anyway... :topic:

 

[zg44]

Optimal Nintendo Universe sets up like this imo:

2020: Super Mario Bros - origin movie with Mario/Luigi/Peach/Bowser. Bowser steals Princess, Mario/Luigi go and get her back, pretty basic Mario plot.

2022: Super Mario Bros sequel - movie similar to Legend of the Seven Stars with Bowser stealing Peach but then Bowser's castle taken over by an outside enemy, Mario teams up with Bowser to save Peach/kick out enemy that took over Bowser's castle (could honestly just copy LotSS plot - it's a great setup for a sequel)

2024: Yoshi movie - similar to Minions (make kids happy, sell a ton of toys), prequel story about Yoshi (include all the different colored Yoshis, pretty easy to make it work).

2026: Zelda: A Link to the Past - Zelda origin movie along the lines of LTTP or OoT kind of story


That's probably what I think they'd aim for if everything works out (i.e. all the movies make a ton of money, production timelines are smooth, etc.). That makes the most sense to me anyways.

 

[Paulio]

Super Mario Bros. Movie: Should Mario Talk? – Okay, Cool

 

[Mike S]

Super Mario Bros. Movie: Should Mario Talk? – Okay, Cool

Proof that Charles should have no problem keeping HIS role.

 

[Paulio]

Proof that Charles should have no problem keeping HIS role.

I mean, Charles Martinet doesn't do a lot of voice dialogues for Mario, except saying some catchphrases. I really wonder how it's going to turn out? It's awkward to see him very silent.

 

[Mike S]

I mean, Charles Martinet doesn't do a lot of voice dialogues for Mario, except saying some catchphrases. I really wonder how it's going to turn out? It's awkward to see him very silent.

There’s a video in that link with him talking.

 

[rhino4evr]

Proof that Charles should have no problem keeping HIS role.

Sorry, but this doesn't prove anything. Talking to a videogame character for 30 seconds vs watching a 90 minute movie is totally different.

Comparing Mario to a Minion is also a stretch. Mario is expected to talk. Unless of course he's not going to be the main character. Which I guess is possible, but kind of takes away from the idea of a "Mario" movie.

 

[JungleSkip]

Mario is expected to talk.

I....disagree. I'm not saying it'll 100% happen, but I would not be surprised if Mario is largely non-verbal in the movie while everyone else around him talks a whole heck of a lot.

 

[rhino4evr]

I....disagree. I'm not saying it'll 100% happen, but I would not be surprised if Mario is largely non-verbal in the movie while everyone else around him talks a whole heck of a lot.

that may be the case, but it doesn't sound like something I'd like to watch. I don't really want to watch a Mario movie where the Mario characters are just supporting actors personally.

 

[JungleSkip]

that may be the case, but it doesn't sound like something I'd like to watch. I don't really want to watch a Mario movie where the Mario characters are just supporting actors personally.

Where did I say he’d be a supporting character?

WALL-E says like 2 words and is clearly the star of his movie. It’s not like a mostly-silent protagonist hasn’t been done before.

 

[rhino4evr]

Where did I say he’d be a supporting character?

WALL-E says like 2 words and is clearly the star of his movie. It’s not like a mostly-silent protagonist hasn’t been done before.

Listen, I'm happy you're excited. Let's wait and see how they handle it. I don't think a Wall-E type protagonist would work in a movie about the mushroom kingdom.

 

[JungleSkip]

Listen, I'm happy you're excited. Let's wait and see how they handle it. I don't think a Wall-E type protagonist would work in a movie about the mushroom kingdom.

Worked pretty well for the games so far. :tongue:

 

[rhino4evr]

Worked pretty well for the games so far. :tongue:

exactly...it worked as a videogame. This is a movie. Completely different form of media. Even if most modern videogames try to pretend their movies these days. Mario does not. It's still just a platformer at heart, with brief cutscenes with very little dialogue.

Once again, may work for a 90 second cutscene, won't work for a 90 minute movie.

 

[JungleSkip]

exactly...it worked as a videogame. This is a movie. Completely different form of media. Even if most modern videogames try to pretend their movies these days. Mario does not. It's still just a platformer at heart, with brief cutscenes with very little dialogue.

Once again, may work for a 90 second cutscene, won't work for a 90 minute movie.

I think it's ridiculous to say it won't/can't work when we've literally seen an animated movie where it works beautifully. Not to mention Minions made a billion dollars off characters who don't speak English

 

[zg44]

The main difference between video games and movies is first person perspective versus third person perspective.

Mario has to have agency, and it's difficult to see how they'd explain him not talking much. With WALL-E it made sense that there was literally no conversation for large parts of that movie because of the setup.

But why would a human Mario not talk much if he's surrounded by people like Luigi and others.

Link is a bit different because presumably he'd be on a solo adventure for a lot more of a Zelda origin movie, so I could actually see a more silent Link making sense.

Link on a mostly solo/quiet adventure makes sense, but Mario is more likely to be interacting with other people, so he'd probably talk a fair bit more.

 

[Legacy]

But why would a human Mario not talk much if he's surrounded by people like Luigi and others.

Mute humans, surrounded by other humans, have worked before...

 

[JungleSkip]

The main difference between video games and movies is first person perspective versus third person perspective.

Mario has to have agency, and it's difficult to see how they'd explain him not talking much. With WALL-E it made sense that there was literally no conversation for large parts of that movie because of the setup.

But why would a human Mario not talk much if he's surrounded by people like Luigi and others.

Link is a bit different because presumably he'd be on a solo adventure for a lot more of a Zelda origin movie, so I could actually see a more silent Link making sense.

Link on a mostly solo/quiet adventure makes sense, but Mario is more likely to be interacting with other people, so he'd probably talk a fair bit more.

This is my personal feeling on the matter, but every time they've had Mario talk, he doesn't feel like Mario. The old cartoons and movie (yes I know the movie was a special kind of bad) just feel...off with him having loads and loads of dialogue. His physical/body language reactions to things are gold in the games, and I think relying on those are better, personally.

Heck, even in the RPGs he's in he has no dialogue. I just think Mario, as the put-upon hero dealing with Luigi, Toad, etc and being the strong silent type is just a better way to go with the character.