🔗 Share this article Unveiling the Rift Between Filmmaker and Screenwriter of the Cult Classic Film A screenplay written by the acclaimed writer and starring Christopher Lee and the lead actor could have been a dream project for filmmaker Robin Hardy while the production of The Wicker Man over 50 years ago. Although it is now revered as a cult horror masterpiece, the degree of misery it brought the film-makers is now revealed in previously unpublished correspondence and early versions of the script. The Storyline of The Wicker Man This 1973 movie centers on a devout policeman, portrayed by Edward Woodward, who arrives on a remote Scottish island in search of a missing girl, but finds mysterious pagan residents who claim she ever existed. Britt Ekland was cast as the daughter of a local innkeeper, who seduces the religious policeman, with Lee as the pagan aristocrat. Production Conflict Revealed However, the working environment was frayed and fractious, the documents show. In a letter to Shaffer, Hardy wrote: “How could you handle me like this?” The screenwriter had already made his name with masterpieces such as Sleuth, but his script of The Wicker Man shows Hardy’s brutal cuts to his work. Heavy edits feature the aristocrat’s dialogue in the final scene, which would have begun: “The child was only a small part – the part that showed. Do not reproach yourself, there was no way for you to know.” Apart from the Creative Duo Tensions boiled over outside the main pair. One of the producers wrote: “The writer’s skill has been offset by a self-indulgence that drove him to show he was overly smart.” In a note to the producers, the director expressed frustration about the film’s editor, Eric Boyd-Perkins: “I don’t think he appreciates the subject or approach of the picture … and thinks that he has had enough of it.” In a correspondence, Lee referred to the film as “alluring and mysterious”, despite “dealing with a talkative producer, an underpaid and harassed writer and a well-paid but difficult director”. Lost Papers Found A large collection of letters about the production was among multiple bags of documents forgotten in the loft of the old house of the director’s spouse, his wife. Included were unpublished drafts, storyboards, production photos and budget records, many of which show the challenges faced by the film-makers. The director’s children his two sons, currently in their sixties, have drawn on the material for a forthcoming book, titled Children of The Wicker Man. The book uncovers the intense stress faced by Hardy throughout the production of the film – from his heart attack to financial ruin. Personal Consequences Initially, the film failed commercially and, in the aftermath of its failure, Hardy abandoned his spouse and their children for a new life in the US. Legal letters reveal his wife as an unacknowledged producer and that Hardy was indebted to her as much as £1m in today’s money. She had to give up the family home and died in 1984, in her fifties, battling addiction, never knowing that the project 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 someone reached out by a resident who had moved into his mother’s old house, asking whether he wished to collect the documents, his first thought was to suggest destroying “all of it”. But afterward he and his brother opened up the sacks and realised the importance of what they held. Insights from the Papers His brother, a scholar, said: “Every key figure is represented. We found an original script by the writer, but with dad’s annotations as filmmaker, ‘controlling’ the writer’s excess. Because he was formerly a barrister, he 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 “closure”, the son said. Financial Hardships The family did not profit monetarily from the film, he added: “The bloody film has gone on to make a fortune for others. It’s beyond a joke. Dad accepted five grand. So he never received the profits. The actor also did not get payment from it either, although he performed his role for no pay, to get out of his previous studio. So, in many ways, it was a harsh experience.”