What is Hollywood’s issue with literature? A brief discussion on erasure and commerciality in cinematic adaptation.
Last week, I finally went to watch one of the year’s most highly anticipated films, with mixed expectations. I approached the film with some reservations, but with the number of notable women headlining The Odyssey, I remained cautiously optimistic. It is no secret that Nolan has somewhat of a reputation regarding his female characters, and unfortunately his latest work is no exception. In my view, Penelope (played by Anne Hathaway) is reduced from the protagonist’s intellectual equal to merely a regal placeholder awaiting her king’s return. The film appears more interested in Helen (Lupita Nyong'o) as a physical symbol of the devastating war, regarded only for her tarnished beauty rather than as Homer’s original semi-divine and politically influential character. And, for me, Calypso (Charlize Theron) is perhaps the worst deviation; being reimagined from an intelligent seductress to a submissive therapist for Nolan’s protagonist, leaving viewers wondering why she even decided to kidnap Odysseus in the first place. It seems that not even citing the works of a female translator has saved Nolan’s somewhat lacking adaptation from erasing some of Homer’s most fascinating characters.
It was watching The Odyssey, however, which reminded me of a similar issue of erasure not too long ago, this time with Emerald Fennell’s interpretation of Wuthering Heights. A novel increasingly discussed through the lenses of race and social exclusion seemed instead to have been reimagined through Fennell's own self-described teenage fantasy, replacing Emily Brontë's “dark-skinned outsider” with Jacob Elordi’s portrayal of a “tortured white male”. At the time of cinematic release, this substitution proved divisive, creating a discussion point which arguably won Fennell free publicity alongside a large profit in box office revenue. Furthermore, Heathcliff has frequently been interpreted as a figure linked to Britain's colonial history; a perspective which was silenced by changing his place of origin from Liverpool to simply ambiguous. Fennell defended her stylistic choices by claiming “colour-blindness” in her casting, but doesn’t the question of race seem crucial to Cathy’s wild and unpredictable nature? Her consistent discussion of Heathcliff’s degradation? Fennell strips Brontë's protagonist of much of the psychological complexity which makes her such a compelling narrative agent, relegating her instead into a comparatively shallow and selfish woman.
Yet just as Nolan is not the first director to diminish the role of women in adaptation, Fennell is not the first to downplay ethnicity and origin. Only in 2024 did Yorgos Lanthimos’ Poor Things win four Oscars, including that for Best Actress. Whilst Emma Stone’s portrayal of Bella Baxter is undeniably compelling, it is somewhat baffling that a text which contains Scottish political concerns and questions of national identity had its setting substituted from Glaswegian to London. In doing so, many critics have noted that Alasdair Gray’s original commentary on Scottish identity, class and imperial power through Bella’s nuanced perspective is traded in for what can only be described as a whimsical, steampunk aesthetic. Like Wuthering Heights, complex social issues are made palatable through female sensuality and, although female sexual liberation is a valuable theme, should it come at the expense of cultural and ethnic specificities that were central to the source material?
All in all, it’s safe to say that there is a recent trend in literary adaptations that chooses to sacrifice uncomfortable yet relevant tropes prevalent in classic tales in favour of blockbuster-oriented revisions which are easier for mainstream Western audiences to consume. And in an era of resurging right-wing populism and capitalist-fueled politics, is this really the right time to be muting social commentaries in cinema? It seems to me that perhaps it’s time Hollywood placed authenticity above commerciality, and moved beyond the illusion of whitewashed “neutrality”. After all, these texts became classic for a reason.
Comments