My thoughts on Chris Pratt as Mario
This article is an extension of one written for the University of Exeter’s student newspaper, Exeposé - go and check out their work if you enjoyed reading this!
With the recent announcement of a new, animated Super Mario Bros movie – the first attempt since the 1993 canonically so-bad-it’s-good effort to bring the beloved video game plumber to the big screen – the internet (or, more specifically, the Twittersphere) has come alive in response. The reaction to the announcement has come in the form of bemusement, shock, and even genuine frustration.
In large part, though, it’s been laser-focused in one direction: in general, on the cast – featuring Charlie Day as Mario’s brother, Luigi, Anya Taylor-Joy as his love interest, Princess Peach, and Jack Black as his nemesis, Bowser (the real outrage here is that the 1993 version featured Dennis Hopper in this role) – but particularly on the leading man set to don that red cap, Chris Pratt.
But what is it about Pratt? As far as I can see, there are three main camps into which the backlash can be organised. Firstly, some have questioned Pratt’s bona fides, that is, Pratt’s ability to animate such a fun, lively character as a voice actor.
In recent years, Pratt has moved away from the kinds of lovable, bumbling characters he played earlier in his career. Shooting to stardom for his role in the 2014 oddball Marvel smash-hit, Guardians of the Galaxy, Pratt’s career trajectory seemed to shift there and then. Though Peter Quill was a character still tinged with a distinct humour, the roles that followed became progressively more dour, more resemblant of the typically-masculine Hollywood action star – less Andy Dwyer and more of an unironic Burt Macklin.
But I don’t see this argument as particularly convincing. Pratt’s recent roles have certainly become increasingly stale – particularly that in the wincingly banal The Tomorrow War – but I think critics arguing along these lines are neglecting two important realities.
For one, they’re entirely ignoring that Pratt’s work in The Lego Movie and its sequel – bringing to life a new character and making it his own – drew widespread acclaim and a heaving box-office return.
Adding to this, in recent years we’ve also had an abundance of confusing casting decisions that have ended up not just working but also drawing huge crowds. Ryan Reynolds’ confusingly glib portrayal of the eponymous mouse in Detective Pikachu, springs to mind, and that ended up becoming the highest-grossing video-game adaptation of all time, surpassed the following year by the bizarre Sonic the Hedgehog, which also touted not just an initially-ugly character design, but also, most forget, a rather drab cast.
This isn’t all that’s been levied, however.
The second camp I’ve noticed is one that appears to me slightly less credible, that Pratt’s portrayal is a form of appropriation; Mario being a role that should have gone to someone of Italian descent or heritage.
I’d like to preface my reaction to this by saying that I, personally, am not of Italian descent – but Mario has only ever been a caricature of Italian culture, an Italian plumber designed by a Japanese video-game designer, originally voiced by a French-American man. There’s something to be said for reclaiming pop-culture figures and reshaping them, but Mario seems one so inextricably tied to this verbosely not-Italian history that this seems an odd hill to die on for those wishing to fight the good fight for proper cinematic representation.
And this brings me to what I see as the most important sticking point: Pratt’s own personal controversy.
It was during a fundraiser for the Biden-Harris presidential campaign that Pratt first came into public scrutiny. What was notable about that event was not anything said or done, but Pratt’s noticeable absence from the list of fellow actors featured in the MCU who showed out. Pratt’s history has, since then, been thoroughly sifted through and it has been suggested that the guy is likely very middle-of-the-road, if not outright conservative.
In and of itself, I’d contend that these aren’t grounds for his excommunication, but it seems understandable to me that, when this is taken in conjunction with Pratt’s connection to the Hillsong megachurch – infamous for its anti-LGBTQ attitudes (the church infamously will not “affirm a gay lifestyle”) – many would be upset by Pratt’s continued privileged status within the industry. Though Pratt has since defended himself, stating that his church does not define him, I remain sympathetic to those that think that an ongoing affiliation with such an organisation is suggestive enough of the man’s personal values to form a strong opinion about him.
Pratt as a voice-actor is likely to be just… fine. The film itself, produced by Illumination Studios (responsible for Despicable Me and its cavalcade of sequels and spin-offs), is also probably going to be just fine, if not below-average, and is certainly going to, at least financially, justify a sequel.
What’s frustrating isn’t that Pratt has been cast, it’s that (social views notwithstanding) the backlash has been so dramatic that this film is going to hold more cultural weight than it ever would have warranted. This film should have been a mediocre blip on the pop-culture radar, but the internet’s (hive)mindless outrage will mean that when that December 2022 release date finally rolls around, there will be more eyes on this than there ever should have been.