Exposing the Struggle Between Director and Screenwriter of the Cult Classic Film

A script penned by Anthony Shaffer and starring Christopher Lee and Edward Woodward could have been a dream project for filmmaker Robin Hardy during the filming of The Wicker Man more than 50 years ago.

Although today it is revered as an iconic horror film, the degree of misery it brought the film-makers has now been uncovered in previously unpublished letters and early versions of the script.

The Storyline of This Classic Film

This 1973 movie centers on a devout policeman, portrayed by the actor, who arrives on a remote Scottish island looking for a lost child, only to encounter mysterious pagan residents who deny she ever existed. Britt Ekland appeared as the daughter of a local innkeeper, who seduces the God-fearing officer, with Lee as Lord Summerisle.

Production Tensions Revealed

But the creative atmosphere was tense and fractious, according to the letters. In a letter to the writer, Hardy stated: “How could you treat me this way?”

Shaffer was already famous with masterpieces like Sleuth, but his script of The Wicker Man shows the director’s harsh edits to his work.

Heavy edits include the aristocrat’s dialogue in the final scene, which would have begun: “The child was only a small part – the part that showed. Don’t blame yourself, there was no way for you to know.”

Apart from the Creative Duo

Tensions boiled over beyond the writer and director. A producer wrote: “The writer’s skill was marred by a self-indulgence that drove him to prove himself overly smart.”

In a note to the production team, the director expressed frustration about the editor, Eric Boyd-Perkins: “I believe he likes the subject or approach of the picture … and thinks that he is tired of it.”

In a correspondence, Christopher Lee referred to the movie as “appealing and enigmatic”, even with “dealing with a garrulous producer, a stressed screenwriter and a well-paid but difficult director”.

Lost Papers Found

An extensive correspondence relating to the production was among six sack-loads of papers left in the attic of the old house of the director’s spouse, his wife. Included were unpublished drafts, visual plans, production photos and budget records, which reflect the struggles experienced by the film-makers.

The director’s children his two sons, now 60 and 63, used the material for an upcoming publication, called Children of The Wicker Man. The book uncovers the intense stress on Hardy during the production of the film – from his heart attack to bankruptcy.

Personal Consequences

At first, the film was a box office flop and, following of its failure, the director left his wife and their children for a fresh start in America. Legal letters show his wife as the film’s uncredited executive producer and that he owed her up to £1m in today’s money. She was forced to give up their house and passed away in the 1980s, in her fifties, battling alcoholism, never knowing that her film later turned into an international success.

Justin, a Bafta-nominated historian film-maker, called The Wicker Man as “the film that messed up my family”.

When he was contacted by a resident living in his mother’s old house, asking whether he wanted to collect the sacks of papers, his initial reaction was to propose burning “all of it”.

But afterward he and his brother opened up the sacks and understood the importance of their contents.

Revelations from the Documents

Dominic, an art historian, commented: “Every key figure are in there. We discovered the first draft by Shaffer, but with dad’s annotations as director, ‘controlling’ the writer’s excess. Because he was formerly a barrister, Shaffer tended to overwrite and his father just went ‘edit, edit, edit’. They respected each other and hated each other.”

Writing the book has brought some “resolution”, the son stated.

Monetary Hardships

The family never benefited monetarily from the production, he explained: “The bloody film has gone on to make so much money for others. It’s beyond a joke. Dad accepted a small fee. So he never received any of the upside. Christopher Lee also did not get any money from it as well, despite the fact that he did the film for zero, to leave his previous studio. Therefore, it was a harsh experience.”