|
|
Post by 1up on Nov 10, 2010 22:24:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Vent on Nov 13, 2010 14:15:35 GMT -5
I'd just like to say that the more I hear people spout off this Brooklyn nonsense the more I come to detest it.
There IS no evidence that Mario was EVER from Brooklyn in-game. The setting of Mario Bros. is SO nondescript you could say it took place in a bathroom on the Death Star.
The events of Donkey Kong '94 make it blatantly obvious that the DK arcade game's plot took place in Big Ape City and other cartoony environments, and that DK's country is likely set on the same plane as the Mushroom Kingdom.
Yoshi's Island, Yoshi's Island DS and Mario & Luigi 2 make it even MORE blatantly obvious that Mario and Luigi were both born AND raised in the Mushroom Kingdom. They've been saving the princess since they're babies! What MORE evidence do you WANT?
Oh, and don't give me that nonsense about "oh they were sent to the 'real world' and raised by an Italian family blahblahblah". That explanation is weak and unnecessary, largely because there's plenty of other cartoony humans in the Mushroom World, and characters with stereotypical foreign accents are even MORE prevalent.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1up on Nov 13, 2010 15:51:49 GMT -5
My, you're an angry little elf, aren't you? =p
The fact of the matter is that the games are so ambiguous on the matter, that it could be very possible that they were raised in Brooklyn. Besides, I think the cartoons are important enough that some of their ideas should be considered canon.
Everyone always likes to count Nintendo of America out, for some reason, when it comes to the important elements of Mario. Fun fact: Did you know that it was Nintendo of America who gave Mario his name (after deciding to change it from Jumpman)?
|
|
|
|
Post by Koopalmier on Nov 13, 2010 19:59:49 GMT -5
The fact of the matter is that the games are so ambiguous on the matter, that it could be very possible that they were raised in Brooklyn. If the cartoons and stuff weren't made, would you still have that theory ? Well, maybe. Instead of saying they come from Brooklyn, you'd say they come from Italia, huh ? [quoteBesides, I think the cartoons are important enough that some of their ideas should be considered canon.[/quote] ... What ? Is that a joke ? They are very obscure outside of America, they were poorly made and were a worst adaptation of the games than the Super Mario Bros. movie was, and... well, the only reason one would like them would be nostalgia. Mario is a Japanese series. Nothing that is said in other countries yet isn't said in the Japanese version doesn't count. It's also because of them that Lady was renamed to Pauline. And that Charles Martinet voices Mario the way he does. And some parts of the US continuity make more sense than the JAP continuity (i.e. King K. Rool, Kaptain K. Rool and Baron K. Roolenstein being the same character). But it's not because you helped someone to make a movie (for instance) that the movie is your's. |
|
|
|
Post by kingkoopa on Nov 13, 2010 22:54:59 GMT -5
... What ? Is that a joke ? They are very obscure outside of America, they were poorly made and were a worst adaptation of the games than the Super Mario Bros. movie was, and... well, the only reason one would like them would be nostalgia.
...Stop right there. The cartoons were liked not because of the nostalgia, but because they attempted to unravel Mario's history before much information was given on him. Not only that, but they took the ideas of "What would happen if you placed Mario into [insert character here]'s situation. The result was that Bowser became Mario's King K. Rool (at least in the cartoons) and it was funny to see how many different novels, ancient themes, and movies that they referenced. Let me give you a list: Zorro, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, James Bond, Jack and the Beanstalk, King Arthur, Pied Piper, The Lone Ranger, Roman Colosseums, Egypt at the time of Moses, Godzilla, Honey I Shrunk the Kids(just the shrinking concept was taken though), The Unstoppables, Tarzan, Australia, Prehistoric times, and many others that I was not able to name off the top of my head. I don't know about you, but when a hand rose from the lake and threw Mario a plumber's snake in the King Arthur episode I burst out laughing. I'll admit that you have to get the many references that they would make in these episodes to enjoy them fully. (Mouser was Oddjob in the James Bond episode, he threw his hat as a weapon too.) I'll admit that there were groan and facepalm inducing parts as well... (like when Mario and Luigi ran for their lives because a goomba was chasing them, but stuff like this was added because the show would have no suspense if the Mario Bros weren't scared of anything. Also there was one time where a Starman gave Mario Fire Powers) but the good parts greatly outweight those parts. And don't say that you didn't laugh when Luigi flipped off Srgt. Slaughter (in Italian of course... and it was in in the real life segents). Anyways, I think I've ranted about the Super Show long enough now...
|
|
|
|
Post by 1up on Nov 14, 2010 13:28:58 GMT -5
@ Koopalmier I find it a bit funny how you think the notion of the Mario Bros. being from Brooklyn is so ridiculous, but then, at the same time, you're trying to convince people that Mario was a teenager in Donkey Kong on another thread... It's also because of them that Lady was renamed to Pauline. And that Charles Martinet voices Mario the way he does. And some parts of the US continuity make more sense than the JAP continuity (i.e. King K. Rool, Kaptain K. Rool and Baron K. Roolenstein being the same character). But it's not because you helped someone to make a movie (for instance) that the movie is your's. Mario belongs to all of Nintendo. Not just the American branch, or the Japanese branch. But, all of it. Just because the Mario series began in Japan, doesn't mean that he solely belongs to them. Case in point, everyone accepts the DKC series as canon, but Japan had no part in making it. Is what you're saying a joke...? Are you honestly trying to say that The Adventures of Super Mario Bros. 3 is worse than the Super Mario Bros. movie (which had little to no connection to the games at all, save the names of the characters)  I'm sorry. I know I need to accept other peoples' opinions and all. But, how could any reasonable Mario fan think that? |
|
|
|
Post by Koopalmier on Nov 14, 2010 13:44:01 GMT -5
The Adventures of Super Mario Bros. 3 was the only "decent" part of the cartoon trilogy.
I'm not trying to convince you. I'm just saying it's the only way the canon can make sense. I do think they should fix it, because it seems unlikely that Mario and DK were at the same age at the time of Donkey Kong '94.
I'm not talking about the whole series. I'm talking about its contiunuity.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1up on Nov 14, 2010 14:57:33 GMT -5
I'm not talking about the whole series. I'm talking about its contiunuity. As am I. Like I said, the DKC trilogy is accepted into the continuity, and Japan had no stake in developing it. I really believe that the Mario series has more than a single author (just like the Star Wars franchise). |
|
|
|
Post by kingkoopa on Nov 14, 2010 16:16:49 GMT -5
Did no one see my post???
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarisa on Nov 15, 2010 1:51:44 GMT -5
Looks like I've been away too long again.
Applying a strict construction of canon, Mario and Luigi's last names are from the bottom tier of canon but they're never contradicted anywhere, so there's no reason not to use them. The need for characters to have a last name seems to be American and a great help for papering over name changes; the Japanese Koopalings just have their American names without the surname "Koopa", for example. If we were all using Japanese canon I think this thread would instead be about the existence of family names in the Mushroom Kingdom.
Not canonical but related: Japanese has a suffix -tachi used to form groups. So Mario-tachi means "Mario and friends", and Luigi-tachi means "Luigi and friends". I wonder if the syntax of "Mario Bros." didn't borrow from -tachi.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vent on Nov 17, 2010 20:35:26 GMT -5
Note to all above: I'm not "counting Nintendo of America out". I'm just saying that unless I see anything related to Brooklyn IN-GAME, I'm not counting it as part of Mario's backstory.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1up on Nov 18, 2010 0:16:39 GMT -5
I don't see why not... It's certainly not going to lessen Mario's integrity or anything. Nintendo of America has offered a solution to a question that has otherwise gone unanswered. I don't see what's so wrong with accepting it, until we're given something that blatantly contradicts it.
If it's good enough for Charles Martinet, then it's good enough for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vent on Nov 18, 2010 11:53:47 GMT -5
Did I not just make an elaborate post before detailing why Brooklyn really has no place in the games' continuity (or what little continuity exists) or is everybody just blind?
Having Brooklyn factor into Mario's backstory is unnecessary and just makes the fanon needlessly complex. Isn't it just easier to accept that he's always been a Mushroom Kingdom resident and leave it at that? Why must we add on layers to what is already a finely pained canvas? What does having Mario be from Brooklyn add to the fanon?
|
|
|
|
Post by kingkoopa on Nov 18, 2010 22:09:52 GMT -5
Um pointless additions? You do realize that pointless additions to canon are what this whole website is about right.
|
|
|
|
Post by Koopalmier on Nov 19, 2010 6:07:51 GMT -5
This website is about making so that the Mario continuity makes sense, not to add bits that can only complicate things.
Even if you do that, all here is theories.
I see the American bits of canon that NoA added as nothing more than theories.
|
|
|
|
Post by kingkoopa on Nov 19, 2010 18:03:28 GMT -5
Why? I could list at least 4 other series that have story elements that were created by someone who is not the main character and those story elements are still considered to be canon. Do you not like the American canon because it doesn't make sense? If this is why, you do realize that if Shigeru Miyamoto suddenly said that Mario was actually a Koopa spy who was really working for Bowser this entire time, it would be considered canon, even though it sounds completely ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
Post by Koopalmier on Nov 20, 2010 6:46:07 GMT -5
Shigeru isn't the guy behind the story in Mario games though. He doesn't know we know Mario's favorite color (which is red, according to M&L2) nor that Mario has gotten a bit of a personality since Super Mario RPG.
What I'm saying is that Nintendo of America isn't on the same level as Nintendo of Japan. They don't make games, they only port them to America and make changes.
They even say Nintendo of Japan is their "parent company", not just another HQ of Nintendo that happens to be in Japan. Nintendo of Japan is THE Nintendo, Nintendo of America is porting these games to American people, Nintendo of Europe is porting these games to European people.
If you really want to take every version of the continuity as canon, then the Star Sprites are actually named "Spirits of the Cobalt Star", the Star Spirits from Paper Mario and the Star Spirits from Mario Party 5 are different characters, Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a retelling of Super Mario Galaxy, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by PDoogan on Nov 20, 2010 10:54:52 GMT -5
He doesn't know we know Mario's favorite color (which is red, according to M&L2) This...wasn't much of a secret.... |
|
|
|
Post by kingkoopa on Nov 20, 2010 11:29:58 GMT -5
Well now I wasn't saying take every single bit of continuity that NoA gives us. But I see nothing wrong with saying that the Star Sprites are "Spirits of the Colbalt Star". Now I can't remember if PiT said that E. Gadd built the Colbalt Star or not, but it is possible that the Colbalt Star is a powerful artifact made by the stars that might have been sentinent at one point or another. As for Super Mario Galaxy 2 being a retelling of the original... it never actually said that in the game, that was just what NoA thought about it. Now what NoA puts in a game has some level of canon, but their simple thoughts about something have little to none. If they put this idea in some sort of Mario related media release or something like that (show, movie, game, whatever) then we can begin to consider it canon. I won't even talk about the Star Spirits being different from Paper Mario to Mario Party 5, because that is simply ridiculous. But I don't remember the game saying that they were different people.
|
|
|
|
Post by Koopalmier on Nov 20, 2010 12:38:54 GMT -5
They aren't said to be the same though, and it's said that it's their first appearance.
Why'd Nintendo of America's major or minor thoughts be canon ?
|
|
