This is one of those movies I loved as a thirteen year old, I remember seeing it a few times. It was a film naturally aimed at my age group in 1993, I wish people would remember that when writing up such serious reviews. It's quite a fun story, the special effects are probably a little naff thirty years later, but what do you expect? Bob Hoskins is good fun.

I'm surprised by just how dark the story is, funny how you have a different look on things when you're young.

What I found interesting, was the theme music, Almost Unreal by Roxette, what an awesome track, arguably the best aspect of the film.

Fun, 7/10.

Why would I choose to watch "Super Mario Bros." when it was a critical and financial bomb? Well, IMDB recently changed their criteria for films to make their infamous Bottom 100 list and now this film is officially on it...at #96. And, since I have long been trying to see every Bottom 100 movie, I have a bunch of new pictures to watch and review.

It's interesting when you read through IMDB's trivia about this movie. Apparently everyone connected with it except for the two directors hated it and hated making this film. I could only assume that I would hate it as well.

Well, I did hate the film...for many reasons. Much of the problem is the plot. It often makes no sense (such as minions suddenly switching sides for no apparent reason),the dialog is among the dumbest I can recall in a film and the story is not at all the sort of thing I'd want young kids to watch...which is odd, since it's based on a kids' game!

The plot, if anyone really cares is about Koopa (Dennis Hopper),a reptile who has used his evolving/devolving machine to make himself and many of his subjects in a parallel world look human. His goal is to capture Princess Daisy and use a meteorite shard to merge the two worlds and become dictator of both---though exactly how doesn't seem to have been worked out by Koopa. As for the brothers, they fall into the parallel world and battle Koopa to save the worlds.

If I were describe the film in one word, it would not be terrible but TIRESOME. The film is dull, uninvolving and a bit stupid. I would NOT place it, however, on the Bottom 100...as there are many worse films which will never make the list because they were NOT made in the last 30 years--and the list is heavily weighted towards this. "Santa Claus Conquers the Martians", "Robot Monster", ALL of Al Adamson's and William Grefe's films and the terrible exploitation films of the 1930s and 40s (such as "Sex Madness" and "Reefer Madness") aren't even on the list--and these films are all, amazingly enough, worse than "Super Mario Bros." but were made during an era that has almost no representation on the list...not that this is a glowing endorsement! Would I put it on a Bottom 200 (if such a list existed)...easily!

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