Kevin Costner Wishes He Was A Better Actor In One Of His Movies

At the beginning of 1987, Kevin Costner was best known as the cocky gunslinger Jake in Lawrence Kasdan’s Western Romp “Silverado.” This was a good role from the director, who had cut Costner out of “The Big Chill” because his portrayal of the deceased Alex did not play well with test audiences; basically, the ensemble cast had done such a great job of building Alex’s significance that the then-unknown Costner couldn’t live up to the legend. And although it was a nice gesture on Kasdan’s part, “Silverado” did not catch fire at the box office during the summer of 1985.

So when Costner landed the plum role of Eliot Ness in Brian De Palma’s 1987 gangster saga “The Untouchables,” Paramount Pictures ran a publicity stunt to sell the 32-year-old appealing actor as a big-time movie star who had finally arrived. Dressed in fine Giorgio Armani threads and armed with David Mamet’s razor-sharp dialogue, Costner was essentially taking batting practice with a cork bat. How could he not rise to stardom in a feature film like Ness with De Palma behind the camera, and Sean Connery and Robert De Niro as his foils?

Most people will tell you that Costner delivered as expected, but will counter that he could have done better. How so? By bringing to his role the one thing his co-stars had in spades and he didn’t: experience.

In an interview in 2024 with GQ associated with the release of his Western epic “Horizon: An American Saga”, which was not yet completed, Costner said about making “The Untouchables.” While the film was an unattainable classic that grossed $76 million in the US (good enough to finish 6th at the box office in 1987), Costner thinks he brought a knife to a gunfight.

“‘The Untouchables’ was a very well written script,” said Costner. “David Mamet had written a really perfect script, and so I wanted to be a part of it. Brian de Palma directed it, and of course, Sean Connery was in it, you know, Robert De Niro, and it was good . a moment for me to be in that movie.” It was a good moment, but it wasn’t the right time for Costner. “I didn’t think Sean was the type of guy who was going to like me,” she said. “I don’t know why, but it did. It was good for me. And I learned a lot because my eyes were open. I wish I was a better actor when I did ‘The Untouchables’ but I was where I was to.

Some critics hated Costner back in 1987. Roger Ebert wrote“The script doesn’t give him, and (Costner) doesn’t provide, any of the little twists of character that could have made Ness an individual.” I disagree with this. Whatever we know about Ness’s post-ban life (eg that he became a barely employable drunk) has no purchase in De Palma’s film. History, in general, there is no purchase. Do you think Ness led a liquor raid between Canada and the Mounties? Pure fantasy. De Palma and Mamet’s Ness are scouts because that’s what this formula gangster movie needs. Costner does according to the cast and direction. If he had been more confident, he might have second-guessed De Palma as he has done with other directors, and that would have gone badly. De Palma got him at the right timeand Costner was the right kind of naive. Here, as Sean Connery’s Malone would say, ends the lesson.