🔗 Share this article

A script crafted by the acclaimed writer and featuring Christopher Lee and the lead actor should have been a dream project for filmmaker Robin Hardy during the filming of The Wicker Man over 50 years ago.

Although it is now revered as an iconic horror film, the degree of turmoil it caused the production team has now been uncovered in newly discovered correspondence and script drafts.

The Storyline of The Wicker Man

This 1973 movie revolves around a puritan police officer, played by the actor, who travels on an isolated Scottish isle in search of a missing girl, only to encounter mysterious pagan residents who claim the girl was real. the actress appeared as an innkeeper’s sexually liberated daughter, who seduces the God-fearing officer, with Christopher Lee as Lord Summerisle.

Creative Tensions Uncovered

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

The screenwriter had already made his name with masterpieces such as Sleuth, but his typed draft of The Wicker Man shows the director’s harsh edits to the screenplay.

Heavy edits feature the aristocrat’s dialogue in the ending, originally starting: “The girl was but the tip of the iceberg – the visible element. Do not reproach yourself, it was impossible for you to know.”

Beyond Writer and Director

Tensions boiled over outside the writer and director. A producer wrote: “The writer’s skill has been offset by excessive indulgence that impels him to show he was overly smart.”

In a letter to the producers, Hardy expressed frustration about the film’s editor, Eric Boyd-Perkins: “I believe he likes the subject or approach of the film … and thinks that he has had enough of it.”

In a correspondence, Lee referred to the film as “alluring and enigmatic”, despite “dealing with a garrulous producer, an underpaid and harassed writer and an overpaid and hostile director”.

Lost Documents Found

A large collection of letters relating to the film was part of multiple bags of papers forgotten in the attic of the former home of the director’s spouse, Caroline. Included were unpublished drafts, visual plans, on-set photographs and financial accounts, which reflect the challenges faced by the team.

The director’s children his two sons, now 60 and 63, used the material for a forthcoming book, called Children of The Wicker Man. The book uncovers the extreme pressures on Hardy during the production of the film – including a health crisis to bankruptcy.

Family Consequences

Initially, the movie failed commercially and, in the aftermath of its failure, the director abandoned his spouse and his family for a fresh start in the US. Legal letters show his wife as the film’s uncredited executive producer and that he owed her up to a large sum. She was forced to give up the family home and died in the 1980s, aged 51, battling alcoholism, never knowing that the project later turned into an international success.

His son, an acclaimed documentary maker, described The Wicker Man as “the movie that messed up our family”.

When someone reached out by a woman who had moved into his mother’s old house, inquiring if he wanted to collect the sacks of papers, his first thought was to suggest destroying “the bloody things”.

But then he and his stepbrother Dominic opened up the bags and realised the importance of what they held.

Insights from the Papers

Dominic, an art historian, commented: “All the big players are in there. We discovered the first draft by Shaffer, but with his father’s notes as director, ‘controlling’ Shaffer’s overexuberance. Due to his legal background, he did a lot of overexplaining and his father just went ‘edit, edit, edit’. They loved each other and clashed frequently.”

Writing the book provided some “resolution”, Justin said.

Financial Hardships

His family never benefited financially from the production, he added: “This movie has gone on to make a fortune for other people. It’s unfair. Dad agreed to take five grand. Thus, he missed out on the profits. Christopher Lee never received any money from it either, although that he did the film for zero, to get out of his previous studio. So, in many ways, it’s been a very unkind film.”