The Only Reason Kevin Costner Agreed To Star In Robin Hood: Prince Of Thieves

As long as there are rapacious billionaires and corrupt politicians hoarding wealth and making life miserable for the less fortunate, there will always be a need for the Robin Hood folk tale. The Sherwood Forest-dwelling outlaw who stole from the rich and gave to the poor has been depicted in films since Douglas Fairbanks slung a bow over his shoulder and strapped on a spiffy pair of tights in the 1922 landmark silent production "Robin Hood." Michael Curtiz delivered what still stands as the platonic ideal of a Robin Hood movie in 1938 with the Errol Flynn-starring "The Adventures of Robin Hood," but there have been other worthy takes on the character over the years, most notably Disney's 1973 animated film "Robin Hood" and Richard Lester's poignant 1976 romance "Robin and Marian" starring Sean Connery and Audrey Hepburn.

For most modern audiences, the most well-known rendition of the Robin Hood saga is 1991's "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves." Kevin Costner was arguably the most in-demand star in Hollywood at the time of its release, and he delivered in a big way for Warner Bros. with a worldwide box office gross of $391 million ($905 million in 2024 dollars) — this despite the actual film not being any good (Michael Kamen's heroic score excepted)!

The problem is quite clearly the screenplay, which was so awful Alan Rickman secretly recruited playwright Peter Barnes and comedian Ruby Wax to concoct some good villainous lines for his portrayal of the wicked Sheriff of Nottingham. Costner also had problems with the "Prince of Thieves" script and initially turned the film down before a certain element of the production proved attractive enough to get him to sign on.

In a 1991 Entertainment Weekly feature on the turbulent making of "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves," Costner revealed that the hiring of director Kevin Reynolds was the clincher for him. According to the star:

"I felt Kevin was such a good filmmaker I would do it. I'd never dreamed of doing a movie like this, but I thought this was a different Robin Hood. It told the story in a new way, without repeating it or making a joke of it."

If you're wondering why Reynolds, who would go on to direct Costner in another troubled-yet-successful film, "Waterworld," was such a draw for him, you have to go back to his pre-stardom appearance in "Fandango" ( which made /Film's list of Costner's top 14 performances ). The 1985 fraternity comedy was Reynolds' feature-directing debut barely got a theatrical release 39 years ago because Steven Spielberg, whose Amblin Entertainment backed it, was unhappy with the finished movie. It's since acquired a cult following, but the failure hurt Reynolds. Also injurious to his career was the also barely-released "The Beast," a gripping adventure about a Soviet soldier who assists a Afghani combatant in hunting down the tank that destroyed the latter's village.

Costner still believed in Reynolds, who knew he needed his former star's assistance if he wanted to continue on with his directing career. "I'd done two pictures that hadn't made a dime," Reynolds told EW, "So I kind of knew they wanted me because of my connections with Kevin."

The good news is that the success broke Reynolds out of director jail and allowed him to helm the infinitely superior "Waterworld" four years later. Does that offset the wretchedness of "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves," one of the worst blockbusters of its era? I'll happily listen to arguments for and against, but only if they're articulated in a hilariously awful British accent.