Company Town : Tensions Under ‘Waterworld’ Come to the Surface in the Press

They say it’s never wise to mix business and pleasure. But, in most businesses, people who work together often play together. In the movie business, relationships tend to intensify especially quickly, since cast and crew are often sequestered on location shoots for long periods of time.

But, just as professional circumstances can throw people together, they can just as easily tear friendships apart.

When actor Kevin Costner and director Kevin Reynolds kissed and made up after feuding creatively on “Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves” and agreed to team again on “Waterworld,” it was all in the name of a decade-old friendship. But now their relationship is again in tatters--and this time the rupture is almost certainly irreparable thanks to Costner’s unusually public airing of grievances.

The two Kevins thought they shared the same vision about the movie they were about to embark on. But it was evident even before cameras rolled last year in Hawaii that their personal and working relationship would once again be in jeopardy. Costner told Reynolds he was unhappy with the script, particularly the way his “Waterworld” character, Mariner, was drawn.

Costner took control of the script, thus setting the stage for tension throughout the production, and the problems were exacerbated by the monumental logistic difficulties involved in shooting on the water. The budget mushroomed to a reported $175 million, giving “Waterworld” the dubious distinction of being the most expensive movie ever made.

Relations between the two intensified in April with Reynolds walking off the project during post-production when it became clear that Costner--with the support of Universal Pictures--had then taken control of the editing process.

Feelings remain badly bruised on both sides.

Costner is angry Reynolds left him holding the bag. Reynolds blames Costner for usurping his role and power as director. But, instead of confronting each other privately, the two decided to duke it out publicly in the press.

Both are quoted [Costner extensively] in Premiere magazine’s upcoming feature story on “Waterworld” and, to a lesser extent, in the current issue of Entertainment Weekly.

“I haven’t talked to Costner for weeks, since the last day when we wrapped,” Reynolds told The Times. The director, who gave Costner his first starring role in the 1985 film “Fandango,” claims it’s not his style to publicly air dirty laundry and that he wouldn’t have done so if Costner hadn’t taken him to task so brutally in print.

“There’s an unwritten rule in town--a code--that you don’t talk about your professional problems publicly,” says Reynolds. “But I will not stand by silently and be the scapegoat.”

Costner declined to be interviewed.

“I don’t really understand his need to attack me or fabricate false scenarios,” says Reynolds, adding, “I never felt the kind of animosity I feel now after reading things [Costner said about him] in the press.”

Of his decision to pick Reynolds as his director, Costner tells Premiere, “There was a huge, huge mistake in judging character.” As for his longtime relationship with Reynolds, the star says: “I don’t think we were friends, actually. We were friendly.” Costner also discloses something else he never personally told Reynolds: “I wasn’t happy with ‘Rapa Nui,’ ” a box office flop about Easter Island directed by Reynolds and funded by Costner’s Tig Productions that went over budget.

It’s highly unusual for big stars and power players to dump on their Hollywood brethren on the record, though recently music mogul David Geffen let loose on Disney honcho Michael Eisner in a Los Angeles magazine article.

Corie Brown, a senior writer for Premiere and author of the “Waterworld” piece, acknowledged that “[Costner] is sticking the dagger in the heart of this friendship. He clearly doesn’t want this friendship to survive.”

And Reynolds says he is mystified and hurt by Costner’s lashing out.

At the same time, he says he was “disappointed to see a magazine like Premiere allow itself to be used as a tool in Costner’s effort to rehabilitate his image.”

Brown’s response: “I don’t know how he could say that when he had every opportunity to give his side of the story. I interviewed dozens of people involved in the movie, and there was little controversy over what the story was. And Kevin Reynolds has had every opportunity to respond to everyone’s comments.”

What Reynolds says he takes most issue with is Costner’s characterization of his departure from the project.

“He shouldn’t have walked away. He had a responsibility to help this movie,” Premiere quotes Costner.

“What irritates me is Costner’s suggestion that my walking off was irresponsible when he was the one who caused it to happen,” says Reynolds.

He’s also angry over the article’s implication that Universal brass was unhappy with his cut and suggested re-shoot list, and that’s why management reneged on its promise to preview his version with a test audience. After he screened his first cut for Universal, which he agreed to deliver in five weeks rather than the contractual 10, Reynolds says he got a call from then MCA President Sidney Sheinberg, who told him, “ ‘We’re pleased.’ ”

The next day, Reynolds received notes from a Universal executive to “put back shot of Mariner here, put back a line of Mariner dialogue here.” Says Reynolds: “It was apparent who was behind them . . . and I was stunned. I thought the goal was to cut it down, and this made it a reel [about nine minutes] longer.”

Time was running out before the film’s preview dates. Universal, which has final cut, asked Reynolds if he minded if Costner, as one of the film’s producers, would come in and work on the first screening cut. The director acquiesced. Reynolds also agreed the first screening would be the version reflecting all of Universal’s requested changes, but he simultaneously continued to work on his own cut for the second screening, which he was contractually entitled to under his contract with the Directors Guild of America.

“A week later they were still cutting,” says Reynolds. “I was then called [by a Universal executive] and told that because they were taking too long, my DGA screening would be sacrificed. I said, ‘I’m not going to work like this.’ ” And he walked.

Sheinberg, a longtime advocate of directors’ rights who said he was “very pleased with Kevin Reynolds’ cut,” says: “If we had the time we would have gone through the process of previewing, but the calendar didn’t permit it.”

With all the hoopla around this film, the big question is how audiences will receive the movie when it’s released July 28. Equally interesting: Who will take the credit if the film is a big hit, and who will distance himself if “Waterworld” tanks?

“If it is a hit, we all deserve credit and if it is not, we all deserve the blame,” says Sheinberg, who earlier this week officially resigned his MCA post and can now look forward to the trials and tribulations of running his own new production company.