🔗 Share this article

A script crafted by the acclaimed writer and featuring a horror icon and Edward Woodward should have been an ideal venture for filmmaker Robin Hardy during the production of The Wicker Man more than half a century ago.

Even though it is now revered as a cult horror masterpiece, the degree of misery it brought the film-makers has now been revealed in newly discovered correspondence and early versions of the script.

The Plot of The Wicker Man

This 1973 movie revolves around a devout policeman, portrayed by Edward Woodward, who arrives on a remote Scottish island in search of a missing girl, only to encounter sinister local pagans who deny the girl was real. the actress appeared as an innkeeper’s sexually liberated daughter, who seduces the religious policeman, with Lee as the pagan aristocrat.

Production Conflict Revealed

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

Shaffer had already made his name with masterpieces like Sleuth, but his typed draft of The Wicker Man reveals the director’s harsh edits to the screenplay.

Extensive crossings-out feature the aristocrat’s dialogue in the ending, originally starting: “The girl was only a small part – the visible element. Do not reproach yourself, it was impossible for you to know.”

Beyond Writer and Director

Conflict escalated outside the writer and director. One of the producers commented: “The writer’s skill was marred by a self-indulgence that drove him to prove himself too clever by half.”

In a note to the producers, the director complained about the editor, Eric Boyd-Perkins: “I don’t think he likes the subject or approach of the picture … and thinks that he has had enough of it.”

In one letter, Lee described the film as “appealing and mysterious”, despite “having to cope with a talkative producer, a stressed screenwriter and an overpaid and hostile director”.

Lost Documents Uncovered

An extensive correspondence relating to the production was part of six sack-loads of documents forgotten in the attic of the old house of the director’s spouse, Caroline. There were also previously unseen scripts, visual plans, on-set photographs and budget records, many of which reflect the struggles faced by the film-makers.

Hardy’s sons Justin and Dominic, currently in their sixties, have drawn on the material for an upcoming publication, called Children of The Wicker Man. The book uncovers the intense stress on the director during the making of the film – from his heart attack to financial ruin.

Personal Consequences

Initially, the film was a box office flop and, in the aftermath of its failure, Hardy abandoned his wife and his family for a new life in America. Court documents reveal his wife as an unacknowledged producer and that he owed her as much as £1m in today’s money. She was forced to give up their house and died in the 1980s, aged 51, battling alcoholism, unaware that the project eventually became a global hit.

Justin, an acclaimed documentary maker, described The Wicker Man as “the film that ruined our family”.

When someone reached out by a resident who had moved into his mother’s old house, asking whether he wanted to collect the sacks of papers, his first thought was to suggest destroying “all of it”.

But afterward he and his stepbrother Dominic opened up the sacks and understood the significance of what they held.

Revelations from the Documents

His brother, an art historian, commented: “All the big players are in there. We found an original script by Shaffer, but with his father’s notes as filmmaker, ‘containing’ the writer’s excess. Because he was formerly a barrister, he tended to overwrite and dad just went ‘cut, cut, cut’. They sort of loved each other and clashed frequently.”

Writing the book provided some “closure”, the son said.

Monetary Struggles

His family never benefited financially from the film, he added: “This movie has gone on to make a fortune for others. It’s beyond a joke. Dad agreed to take five grand. So he never received any of the upside. The actor never received any money from it as well, although he performed his role for zero, to leave his previous studio. So, in many ways, it was a very unkind film.”