logo80lv
Articlesclick_arrow
Research
Talentsclick_arrow
Events
Workshops
Aboutclick_arrow
profile_loginLogIn

Mario's Iconic Voice Actor Isn't Allowed To Do Voices of Nintendo Characters

According to Ricky Berwick, Mario Ambassador Charles Martinet is not allowed to perform Mario's voice on camera.

Yuri Lowenthal, Roger Clark, Steven Ogg, Tom McKay, Wes Johnson, Carolina Ravassa, Tracy Wiles – it's well-known that many voice actors, whether from video games or other media, can be hired for a small fee on sites like Cameo to perform the voices of fan-favorite characters, providing you with a personalized birthday greeting from Sheogorath, putting some money in the actor's pocket, and giving the original IP some extra recognition – a win for everyone!

Apparently, though, not every game studio is on board with the practice, with a recent report highlighting that Nintendo has seemingly prohibited Charles Martinet – the former voice of Mario, Luigi, and many other characters – from performing any of those voices on camera, despite him still being an official Mario Ambassador.

The information comes from none other than Ricky Berwick, a renowned comedian and content creator, who had the chance to spend some time with Martinet during the Phoenix Fan Fusion convention, held last weekend.

According to Berwick, the voice actor wasn't allowed to do the voice of Mario or any of his iconic characters on camera, saying he could only perform them when the cameras were off. This suggests that, despite portraying Mario for over 30 years, Martinet wasn't given any leniency by Nintendo and is contractually forbidden from doing the voices – despite it being a common practice, as mentioned earlier – once again highlighting the bizarre lengths Nintendo will go to protect its copyrighted material.

Compounding the account is a 2024 report from The Gamer, which spotlighted that The Legend of Zelda's voice actors are also prohibited by "very strict NDAs" from saying custom lines in character, at least as long as there's any chance the performance could be recorded.

Additionally, the comedian mentioned that when Martinet stepped away from the role of Mario in 2023, it wasn't a decision he made willingly, opening up an entirely new can of worms and raising questions about why Nintendo would push him out of the role. That said, take this information with a grain of salt, for until Charles himself voices the reason out loud, any explanation for his retirement – or "retirement" – is pure speculation and shouldn't be treated as fact.

And what's your take on Nintendo copyrighting Martinet's Mario voice? Was the actor's retirement actually forced? Share your thoughts down in the comments below!

Don't forget to join our 80 Level Talent platform and our new Discord server, follow us on InstagramTwitterLinkedInTelegramTikTok, and Threads, where we share breakdowns, the latest news, awesome artworks, and more.

Join discussion

Comments 5

  • Anonymous user

    I think Nintendo is out their fucking minds! They're completely domineering their fan base and loyal employees! I haven't bought Nintendo in years and will continue to not support them. Im fact pokemon TCG is completely dead to me too. A beloved childhood hobby completely ruined by scalpers and the constant flow of new sets. Impossible to keep up let alone afford. I used to just get a few packs or a box or two for the boosters for fun. Now can't even find them. And I'll die before I buy from a scalper.

    1

    Anonymous user

    ·11 days ago·
  • Anonymous user

    Wow that's crazy really truly not surprised nintendo did this i have   a feeling its not just him but some of the other characters too we just know about him .

    0

    Anonymous user

    ·10 days ago·
  • Anonymous user

    In reply to the previous comment: one good reason? "Fair Use".

    Or how about this, let me flip this: give me one good reason they SHOULDN'T be able to use their own voice to imitate the character. Because you can't have it both ways; either the voice actor is an integral part of the character, or isn't. I could go right now to Fiver and sell my services saying things in my best Mario voice, as long as I don't advertise it as being affiliated with Nintendo. Why shouldn't the previous VA be able to do the same.

    > "Nintendo isn't consumer "unfriendly" because they don't allow voice actors  but because they make their games inaccessible unless you buy a specific console."

    They're anti-consumer for a myriad of reasons. This is just another one.

    0

    Anonymous user

    ·10 days ago·
  • Anonymous user

    My personal opinion is that it is a good thing. It is precisely because of how tightfisted Nintendo is with their IP's that the studio remains worthy of our children today. Too many other studios lose their vision; Nintendo is just as family friendly today as it was during my childhood. And that's not something every other studio can say. Also, Nintendo isn't consumer "unfriendly" because they don't allow voice actors  but because they make their games inaccessible unless you buy a specific console. They don't play well with others.

    That being said; these voice actors did not create these characters that they are voicing. They do not own them. They did nothing more than show up to record some lines. They had literally nothing to do with the creation of the characters, ESPECIALLY the English VA's.  So give me one good reason that they are somehow entitled to be able to make money off of someone else's creation for eternity....

    0

    Anonymous user

    ·11 days ago·
  • Anonymous user

    Nintendo is so obnoxiously corporate and anti-consumer. I wish more people would realize this.

    1

    Anonymous user

    ·11 days ago·

You might also like

We need your consent

We use cookies on this website to make your browsing experience better. By using the site you agree to our use of cookies.Learn more