In 1993, “Super Mario Bros.” became the first live-action feature film to be based on a video game. It didn’t go well. Budgeted at somewhere just south of $50 million, “Super Mario Bros.” grossed a meager $20 million in the United States and performed poorly overseas. Its failure was essentially a fait accompli given the behind-the-scenes turmoil that found directors Annabel Jankel and Rocky Morton briefly getting locked out of the editing room, but the film itself was the kind of Hollywood debacle that was too weird to disregard. The production design was striking, the creature effects inventive, and the casting utterly bizarre. Bob Hoskins as Mario facing off against Dennis Hopper as King Koopa? This might not seem outré today, but at the time it was bizarre to see respected actors seemingly slumming in what many considered to be a glorified piece of advertising.

As a fervent gamer at the time, I found it odd. Yes, I was obsessed with beating “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” on my Sega Genesis, but, as a theater major in my freshman year of college, I never once paused to think how awesome it would be to watch a movie of Sonic and Tails collecting rings for two hours. The same held true for Nintendo’s Mario-verse. In theory, I could see how rescuing Princess Peach could be grist for a narrative feature, but I didn’t play the game for the story. I played it for the thrill of beating the game. (And not doing classwork.)

My tune would’ve changed had Jeffrey Katzenberg kicked down my dorm room door and thrown $1 million on my unmade bed while I was busy whipping some fool on EA’s “NHLPA Hockey ’93.” For that money, I would’ve treated “Super Mario Bros.” like it was “War and Peace.” But if I didn’t need the money, why would I bother? Evidently, some of Hollywood’s biggest actors were thinking the same thing when they were offered millions of dollars to actually star in the movie.

According to a 1992 Los Angeles Times postmortem on the bombing of “Super Mario Bros.,” Disney had a wildly ambitious wish list throughout the development of the film. Early on, it zeroed in on Danny DeVito to play Mario, and tried to sweeten the deal by offering him the director’s chair. He declined. At one point, Tom Hanks became attached to play Luigi, but the studio moved on after the star hit some serious box office turbulence in 1990 with “Joe Versus the Volcano” and “Bonfire of the Vanities” (which, judging from their production dates, likely freed Hanks up to appear in “Sleepless in Seattle”).

The studio aimed just as high when it came to the part of Koopa. They approached none other than Arnold Schwarzenegger to play Mario and Luigi’s archenemy, who at the time had just starred in the groundbreaking action/sci-fi blockbuster “Terminator 2: Judgment Day.” The Austrian Oak passed, though it’s hard to say he chose wisely by opting for John McTiernan’s muddled flop “Last Action Hero” (which took some of the 1993 box office heat off “Super Mario Bros.” as far as entertainment industry reporting was concerned). Disney also checked in on Michael Keaton’s availability, but the “Batman” and “Batman Returns” star wasn’t looking to go franchise double-dipping.

Casting any of the aforementioned stars (especially Schwarzenegger and Keaton in that moment) in “Super Mario Bros.” probably would’ve kicked the production budget up by $15 million to $20 million, thus making the film a flop for the ages. Instead, it’s an oddly-cast curiosity, a cinematic mutt so hobbled you want to fight for it.