It's an actual staple of all high school literature. Some read it during their senior year, others during their sophomore, but there's no question about whether any high school student, at any point in their life, has read Willam Golding's Lord of the Flies.

Put simply, Lord of the Flies (or LOTF for anyone that had to complete an in-depth analysis multiple times), is about thirteen children who get marooned on a deserted island after their plane crashes. The children range from about kindergarten to thirteen years old, and are led by two key boys: Jack and Ralph. They are flanked by other supporting characters such as Piggy, Robert, Simon and Sam and Eric (otherwise known as Samneric).

The battle between domestic, orderly living and savagery ensues, splitting the group and amounting to what almost could be considered a civil war, only for it all to seem like significant child's play at the end when the boys are rescued.

For a long time, the novel has been considered to be one of the more brutal allegories in literature, maintaining the parallel that the breakdown of civility and descent into savagery was in fact an allegory for the United States after WWII. To this day, it's expanded to the idea of being an allegory for society itself - that no matter how hard humankind tries to fight it with civilty and domestic activity, it will always fall back into savagery.

There were thirteen boys on that plane for a reason - it was a greater mirror of society, with psychological reasoning that's existed for so long there doesn't seem to be a source. But two directors don't seem to understand that point; they plan to remake the novel into a movie, although this time, there are thirteen girls stranded on the island instead.

A great issue is present immediately: the directors, Scott McGehee and Evan Siegel, are male . What do they know about women, especially when they're pushed to their limits to simply survive another day? Another issue: in casting an all-female cast, the directors are completely missing the point of the novel.

At the point of the novel's publishing, the US was just off of WWII, an all-consuming conflict that took the lives of many men and a great deal of women. Nevertheless, the majority of fighters had still been men, their behavior on both sides demonstrating just how society could go to ruin in a heartbeat. The Allies can be seen in Ralph's character, constantly pushing for peace and civility; the Axis Powers can be seen in Jack's, making moves without consideration and constantly thirsting for power. All of the major players in both parties were men.

It's not how women would act.

Call it a byproduct of gender expectations or simple genetics, but women are not predispositioned (or seemingly are not) to automatically descend into savagery. They are more likely to constantly fight for domesticity rather than discard it entirely. In all actuality, a remake of Lord of the Flies made solely with women would be fraught with risk - the biggest conflict would be keeping things in order, grudges made according to the plot would be far more complicated in retaliation, and it would really just be quite boring in general.

Perhaps the directors would be better off remaking a different novel with inverted characterizations? After all, Harry Potter would surely be different from Hermione's point of view.