Twitter is roasting the hell out of this all-female reboot of Lord of the Flies
There’s another all-female reboot of a classic movie coming our way, and this time, it’s women who can’t handle it.
Lord of the Flies, the classic 1964 novel that has already had movie iterations released in 1963 and 1990, is getting a female-centric makeover, and the whole internet is raising an eyebrow at the news.
In case you were never an eighth grader in the American public school system, Lord of the Flies is about a group of British schoolboys who get stranded on a deserted island and then struggle to govern themselves. They resort to worshipping a conch shell and things get really intense and they start killing each other. Also, the whole novel is one long allegory for toxic masculinity, so there’s that. Obviously, telling the story with female characters feels a little like missing the point.
Oh, and wouldn’t you know — two men are at the helm of this project.
Since the reboot was announced, though, the internet has been hard at work pointing out just how hugely the filmmakers missed the whole point of the story — namely, that it centered around the effects of toxic masculinity.
Others pointed out that women stranded together on a desert island might just get along, thus subverting the whole plot of the book.
Others had some predictions for how the lady version might go down.
But only one figured out what’s actually happening here:
Scott McGehee and David Siegel, who will write and direct the new version, told Deadline that they want to stay true to the original story because they’re both huge fans.
“We want to do a very faithful but contemporized adaptation of the book, but our idea was to do it with all girls rather than boys,” Siegel said. “It is a timeless story that is especially relevant today, with the interpersonal conflicts and bullying, and the idea of children forming a society and replicating the behavior they saw in grownups before they were marooned.”
We’re all for better representation of women in Hollywood. But is this really the way to accomplish that? We’re going with no.
This article was originally published on