Classic Lit and the Teen Screen
By Daniela Bologna
Graphic by Jas Calcitas
Back in July, @teendreamstream, who are dedicated to exclusively streaming teen films on their Twitch, ran a two-part series of movie screenings that are based on works of classic literature (aptly called English Lit 101 and 102). This got me thinking again of one of my all-time favourite sub-genres and ultimate guilty pleasures: teen flicks that are actually classic literature adaptations in disguise. Except I don’t really feel an ounce of guilt for enjoying them. Save for a few more melodramatic options, most embody your typical teen movie, with its impossible coincidences, exaggerations and mix-ups that still somehow get resolved by the end of the movie once our heroine has learnt her lesson, made amends and gotten her happily ever after – and just in time for prom! These stories are just as far-fetched and un-relatable as their respective source material, despite their settings in familiar terrain like modern high schools, but it is exactly because of their absurdism and movie magic that I watch them. No matter how many times I rewatch 10 Things I Hate About You (1999), loosely based on Shakespeare’s The Taming of The Shrew, I never fail to feel giddy by the time the credits roll, and I always know it won’t be the last time I watch it.
The Teen Dream Stream line up consisted of more known adaptations like 90s cult classic Clueless (1995), based on Emma by Jane Austen, to lesser known ones like Animal Room, starring Matthew Lillard, based on – no, not Animal Farm – A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess. Other honourable mentions of the sub-genre include Material Girls (2006) based on another of Austen’s works, Sense and Sensibility, and Whatever It Takes (2000) based on Edmond Rostand’s play Cyrano De Bergerac, and of course, Cruel Intentions (1999), a modern adaptation of Pierre Choderlos de Laclos’s Dangerous Liaisons set in the halls of a private high school for wealthy elites. With both Cruel Intentions and 10 Things I Hate About You coming out in 1999, it was a big year for adolescent classic lit adaptations. This is one thing I’ve noticed – most films of this sub-genre are from the 90s and early 00s, with the exception of a few stragglers like 2010’s Easy A, based on The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne. So why is that? It’s no secret that Hollywood has a fondness for remakes and adaptations… and then remaking those remakes and adaptations, especially during the more recent years. If that is the case, then why did Hollywood deliberately stop making adaptations of classic literature, and instead turn to making newer adaptations of films sometimes only a decade old? Just look at Disney’s ongoing mission to remake every cartoon film in their catalogue into a live action feature. Teen-acted classic lit adaptations should really make a comeback, and I’m not just saying it because I’ve personally taken to every platform to voice my opinion on this again and again.
When films are loosely based on classic works of literature, there is an added layer of depth and a sense of pleasure that comes with the uncovering of it, with its recurring themes and nods at the original source material – like easter eggs hidden in the movie, if you will. Besides, when it comes to the remaking of teen films, there is always a great online upheaval when someone touches cult classics, as recently occurred with the release of The Craft: Legacy (2020), both a remake and a loose sequel to arguably one of the most iconic embodiments of 90s adolescent alternative culture. Just the line “we are the weirdos, mister” alone cemented this.
The same thing happened when talk of a Clueless reboot in the form of a CBS TV show made the rounds on Twitter last October, especially because this reboot was going to follow character Dionne as she investigates the disappearance of her best friend and Clueless protagonist Cher in a Pretty Little Liars-esque twist. Many felt compelled to wonder why this was necessary. Why not create an unaffiliated original with the same plot? Based on the reboot’s story, there was no real need for it to have the Clueless characters thrown into this different genre. Other than perhaps some public interest - since Clueless has an established following and is recognized amongst the target audience - the link to the older movie brings nothing else to the table. Would it just be easy money? Often the fans of the originals are not too happy about remakes, so the viewers that actually invest in the show are newcomers, as occurred with teen drama Riverdale, based on the ‘Archie’ comics. The same goes for The Craft (1996). There is so much untapped potential for covens of teen girl witches in film, and being unaffiliated to other witchy movies is a strength rather than a weakness because of the freshness and originality it teases. Hollywood execs, do not be afraid! I could write a whole article exclusively on this.
Further examples of Hollywood’s love for remakes are ample. There are already 3 different versions of non-classic-literature-based Freaky Friday – the 1976 version, the 1995 version and the 2018 version. So technically, the latest one was a remake of a remake. Other than setting the story during a different era, there’s only so much you can change about the story and it does not allow for the taking of liberties and bigger bouts of creative freedom, whereas there is so much more room for additional story layers when it comes to adapting source material. Another 1999 film, She’s All That, in all its eye-roll-inducing makeover-transformation-trope-wielding glory, is actually loosely based on Bernard Shaw’s Pygmalion and is confirmed to be getting a 21st century gender-swapped remake featuring a cast of TikTokers. Remakes of remakes simply do not allow for the same amount of creative freedom granted by adapting a piece of literature which takes place in an entirely different context and time. I’ve constantly said that The Great Gatsby would make for an excellent teen film adaptation. After all, who better than a teenager to throw house parties in order to impress someone? Although Baz Luhrmann made the novel into a film only seven years ago, the factor of a modern-day high school retelling would already be enough for it to stand alone as an entirely different film. A personal favorite adaptation of mine is My Own Private Idaho (1991). Based on Shakespeare’s Henry IV Part I, Henry IV Part II, and Henry V it follows the legendary River Phoenix as a narcoleptic gay hustler on a quest with Keanu Reeves to find his mother that takes them across the nation, and eventually the world. You cannot envision a greater example of creative liberty than this.
However, I cannot ignore one drawback to classic literature adaptations: the limitations of what the academic world considers the canon of literature. Stories that do not fall under the very white and very male definition of a “classic” face exclusion. While movie adaptations have the ability to diversify the source material through their casting choices, like with Harold Perrineau playing Mercutio in Romeo + Juliet (1996), this is surely not enough. At the end of the day these are still white stories, even if the production exclusively consisted of a cast and crew of color. You might be saying “why waste time with more adaptations of white stories instead of original BIPOC stories?” and I agree. While Shakespeare’s plays do make for teen movies with the perfect amount of mix-ups and quirky misadventures, one quick look at the sheer amount of teen films based on Shakespeare’s works and it becomes clear. Joining the ranks of 10 Things I Hate About You, Romeo + Juliet and My Own Private Idaho is She’s The Man (2006), an adaptation of Twelfth Night, John Tucker Must Die (2006), an adaptation of The Merry Wives of Windsor and Get Over It (2001) based on A Midsummer Night’s Dream. There are even multiple adaptations of Romeo and Juliet, such as the more punk Tromeo and Juliet (1997).
Nevertheless, there are so many important works from different cultures that could easily be adapted into movies as the classic works of literature that they are and should be recognized as. Europeans and Americans were not the only storytellers, and by no objective means the “better” ones. The canon should no longer deem what can be considered classic literature or not. As fun as I would think a Great Gatsby high school film would be, it is more important to first focus on the vast, unexplored ocean of other works of literature that would make for playful adaptation. I say bring on the second wave, Hollywood.