A place for those who "Trust the Fungus"

Super Mario Bros.: An In-depth Look

We explore this movie adaption full of creepy lizard-head thugs, John Leguizamo, and an underground fungus-filled metropolis. What could possibly go wrong?

Simply put, this article is laughable. It's barely two pages long (and only then because of some trite page-length system) and covers nothing we don't already know. I've read ranting reviews longer than this that had more substance. The entire "article" is spent commenting on elements of the film itself while speculating about the production, with any promised depth believed to be "lost to the mists of time." The how and why of the movie is ignorantly presumed to be forgotten... Which would have been true any time other than the last six months.

And want to know the real kicker? The guy even has the nerve to link to the site and Phlibb's Youtube channel throughout the article and his comments below, yet never brings it up otherwise! The one source that could have answered all of these questions (and to a huge audience, to boot), yet he admits to not having really looked at it.

Questionable journalistic practices aside, articles like this absolutely infuriate me.

We've seen articles a few times saying things like "we'll never find out the answer to this" or "these things are lost to the mists of time" and junk like that.

But like Redstar said, over the past few years--and especially in the past few months--we've busted our asses off solving these mysteries. And then some guy from 1UP just makes a random article claiming an "in-depth look." And it's laughable--there's no depth to be found, and don't even get me started on his use of stuff from the site without mentioning the site NOT ONCE and still claiming to have an "in-depth" article.

And then in the comments below, some people praised the article, saying things like "wow, this is the reason I read 1UP." Like, seriously.

It's a slap in the face to the guys who've been doing the REAL legwork and research on this movie.

he, this gives me an idea. Why don't YOU guys make an in depth look article? You have the paperwork, AND you have lots of images! Plus if done correctly an in depth article could raise the popularity of the film itself thus making more people want to watch the movie.

I know it might be a lot of work but like I said, if done correctly this could really raise the people's interest of the film. But that's just what I think.

That's a really good idea--and one that I've considered. Actually, that's going to be the entire point of the "editorials" section is to cover topics like this. However, that section is kind of on the back burner until I get all of the actual film content up.

Okay, so we've since tried several times to speak Mr. Gandert about his "supposed" in-depth editorial to request that he properly cite and credit our videos. And like a true professional he's been ignoring us every time. Even further, he's taken joy in ignoring us, as evidenced by several tweets that mention us:

22 Nov
SeanGandert: The dude who runs the Super Mario Bros. Movie site read my colun and was slightly pissy with me. Awesome!: http://bit.ly/dblz8D


27 Jan
SeanGandert: oh_toole The super mario movie guy just sent me a nasty twitter message. Seriously. I fear he may eventually hunt me down and slay me.

Because of this we've decided to contact 1UP directly to see about getting our work properly sourced since he obviously has no intention of doing so himself.

Like Redstar was saying, it's one thing to have someone write a bad article about our film.

But it's another thing to claim it's "in-depth" without doing any research at all.

And it's another thing to link to videos and scripts from our site without properly giving us credit. Which also shows that this guy knows about the site but chose to write his own horrible article anyway.

However, it's ENTIRELY ANOTHER THING to not only ignore our requests to give us credit in the article, but to completely ignore us and laugh in our faces to others about it.

Also, if you want to see just how dedicated Mr. Gandert is to doing research into his articles and making them "in-depth," take a look at his other SMB movie article at the Reelz Channel site: http://www.reelzchannel.com/article/112 ... ario-bros/


At the end of the day, this wouldn't be a huge problem if it was some idiot 12-year-old on YouTube or something. But this guy is supposed to be a professional journalist, who's written for magazines and websites that lots of people read. And to have someone like that act like this baffles the hell out of me. While this website has always favored the SMB movie, it's not like we don't take well thought-out criticism towards it. However, Mr. Gandert's article just takes this to a whole new low by writing an "in-depth" article just to spread crap about the film when he KNOWS resources like this site exists, uses the information and then ignores it and laughs at us while doing so.

Wow. This guy is a real piece of work huh? Its not like you guys are asking a huge favor of him, all you want him to do is properly cite the material used here for his article. It was hardly an "in-depth" look if you ask me. Its like he was mocking the idea of the movie having depth at all. Plus I'm sure you weren't nasty with him at all, Redstar. This is a pretty reputable website, and I think we are all pretty nice and respectable people here, unlike other forums. I hope the 1-Up website does do something about it though. He's pathetic.

billbot85 wrote:Plus I'm sure you weren't nasty with him at all, Redstar. This is a pretty reputable website, and I think we are all pretty nice and respectable people here, unlike other forums. I hope the 1-Up website does do something about it though. He's pathetic.

Thanks for posting your thoughts about this, billbot. And yeah, Steven is handling this as professionally as possible. We've done everything possible to not have to take things to this point. You're totally right--this site has always been about presenting all of this SMB movie material in most neutral way possible, embracing both the good parts and the bad. Such a shame when we have a "professional" journalist act like a spoiled child.

How vulgar of the author to not go 'in-depth' - and of course to include the odd hate comment here and there! Pathetic pathetic pathetic!

Redstar wrote:27 Jan
SeanGandert: oh_toole The super mario movie guy just sent me a nasty twitter message. Seriously. I fear he may eventually hunt me down and slay me.

Well I don't know about you hunting the guy down, RedStar - but I would, gladly! By Dennis Hopper and Raul Julia, I will! You can tell him I said that - and don't forget to mention about my DAMME good reason why I defend SMB so much I've even declared it my second-favourite movie...

^Just wait until you see his article on the Street Fighter movie--it's next.

Wow. That second article really explains it full circle huh? This guy is nothing but a hypocrital pathetic man who bashes a movie and then makes an in depth look at the film without the depth. I am just hating this guy more and more and more each time.

Wow, this guy's kinda sad, his review is just like any other regular Mario movie hater's review: A terrible explanation of the movie where the person just bashes on everything & doesn't care to get into the GOOD aspects of the film. Seriously, people do these reviews, but, they don't know how to do it right. I've only seen one or two negative reviews that are actually relevant.

Any more news on this shmuck or have you gave up? I wouldn't be surprised. This guy doesn't sound like he's worth it.

Opinions are like buttholes, everybody has one. (Unless you've had a colostomy, like the people who wrote this article.)

1upmushroom wrote:Any more news on this shmuck or have you gave up? I wouldn't be surprised. This guy doesn't sound like he's worth it.

We decided not the bother. We've met so many people who are considerate and respectful when it comes to the film and corresponding with us, so he's just another drop in the bucket. He's fast becoming a minority of haters.

This article is going to be 2 years old and you guys are still worrying about it? Lol talk about no life.

jka12002 wrote:This article is going to be 2 years old and you guys are still worrying about it? Lol talk about no life.

One year, actually, and we were just explaining why we haven't bothered to care about it further.