Bunny O'Hare (1971) became less a quaint caper than a flashpoint in the long decline of Golden Age star clout. Bette Davis signed onto the American International Pictures vehicle with a contractual right of script approval and a view of the picture as a "humorous social commentary." During post-production, AIP boss Samuel Z. Arkoff and his company made editorial changes that outraged Davis: she had insisted on an expletive in one scene that would have pushed the picture into an R rating, and studio management chose to override her performance rather than accept the rating. Rather than negotiate with Davis, Arkoff hired a voice actress who could do a Bette Davis impression and used her to re-loop the line with a milder word — a crude, studio-level alteration of an actor's recorded performance that directly undercut Davis's contractual approval rights and public persona.
Davis responded with a high-profile $3.3 million lawsuit charging loss of income and damage to her career, arguing that AIP had turned the film into broad slapstick instead of the sharper piece she had signed for. The suit exposed the ugly reality of the era: veteran stars could still demand approvals on paper but often found themselves powerless against low‑budget companies that specialized in aggressive editing and marketing maneuvers. The litigation was eventually dropped, but it left a bitter aftertaste — publicly airing how an exploitation-minded studio treated a legendary actor's voice and image as a malleable commodity rather than a protected performance. In the same swirl of legal grievances, writer Stanley Z. Cherry (credited as Stanley Z.) sued AIP for the unpaid balance of his fee ($13,400) and demanded 5% of net profits; that case's outcome remains undocumented. Together these suits illustrate AIP's hardball post-production practices and the shrinking leverage of old‑studio stars when they tangled with the new independent exploitation outfits of the early 1970s.
Follow the sources
Status and citations are supplied by the archive. AI concept art is an interpretation, not historical evidence.