And the press delighted in cataloguing its many miseries as the release date approached. In the end, Waterworld ended up shooting for 166 days at a then-staggering cost of $175 million, making it the most expensive movie ever made at the time. And Kevin just left Hollywood at that point.” I was also reading stuff in the press and it appeared like Costner took over the editing and locked out. “I was in peripheral contact with various producers, and they would share stories at various points.
“Costner was having to carry the movie, while his marriage was falling apart,” Rader says. The ship docks in a scene from the film 'Waterworld', 1995. Do all of your coverage in a tank or a stage.’”
Do you have any advice for me?’ And Spielberg was unequivocal: ‘Do not shoot on water! You’re going to need a couple of shots on water, so use second unit for that.
“Kevin said, ‘Steven, I’m doing this Waterworld movie, and we’re shooting on water. Read more: Films that lost their stars a fortune
The writer adds that Spielberg - who barely survived his own trial by water during the legendarily difficult production of his 1975 blockbuster Jaws - warned Reynolds of those complications during a pre-production phone call. “The complications of producing this movie in a practical environment were staggering,” Rader tells Yahoo Entertainment ahead of the film’s silver anniversary on July 28. But when Waterworld washed ashore in cinemas 25 years ago this summer, all anyone could talk about was the out-of-control budget and behind-the-scenes creative battles that culminated with Costner replacing Reynolds in the editing room.Īccording to Waterworld screenwriter, Peter Rader, the source of the movie’s many troubles stemmed from one fateful decision: the choice to shoot the entire film on the open water rather than in a controlled environment like a studio water tank. Set in a dystopian tomorrow where the polar ice caps have melted, erasing “dryland” and bathing the world in water, the movie was conceived as an ambitious aquatic Western with a science-fiction twist. Kevin Costner and Kevin Reynolds learned that lesson the hard way during the production of their 1995 action epic, Waterworld. One can watch it on Peacock.Memo to all aspiring filmmakers: When Steven Spielberg tells you not to do something, you’d be wise to listen. Costner played a mutant known only as the Mariner - a drifter who happens to have gills, and who helps out some nice people against some evil people, who are known as the Smokers, after their love for inhaling nicotine. Waterworld is set in far-flung 2500, when sea levels have risen so high that all seven continents are under water.
The Waterworld series has yet to find a home, though Davis names Peacock as a possible destination. Trachtenberg is currently helming the Predator prequel Skull, also for Davis. All those people, 20 years later.”ĭoes that mean Costner’s back? Or co-stars Jeanne Tripplehorn and Tina Majorino? Who knows at this point! But the series already has a director: Dan Trachtenberg, of 10 Cloverfield Lane as well as the pilot of The Boys and the freaky Black Mirror episode with Wyatt Russell.
It may have even aged well - or so claims the producer who’s exhuming it for today’s IP revival craze, giving it a sequel, albeit in the form of a TV series, not a super pricey blockbuster that’s a bear to make.Īs first reported by Collider, John Davis, one of the original film’s producers, is looking to return to the sizeable Waterworld well, saying he’s working on “he streaming version of that movie, the continuation of that movie.” What does that mean exactly? Well, Davis says it’s all in the early stages, but the hope is to catch up with the characters “20 years later. But Waterworld, the first post-apocalyptic fiasco starring Kevin Costner did better than the second such film, namely 1997’s The Postman. It was once the most expensive movie ever made - and of course it didn’t make much of a profit.