Cruel Summer

I watched Cruel Summer and I found the first episode to be promising but flawed. I did finish the series but… her are my abundant complaints. Let me start with some biographical information to set the stage. I was 10 years old in 1994, I had two teenage sisters, an abundance of friends with older siblings, and cousins. Teenagers in small town America, in 1994 informed a great deal more of my identity than I would like to admit. I am going to graciously say that the creators of Cruel Summer really tried to create a satisfying period piece, but they missed some important marks. The clothing, fashion, slang, and music just brush up against greatness.

Beyond my more frivolous critiques of the show, I do take issue with the way the show presents grooming, and presents Kate Wallis as being older than she is. Kate Wallis is supposed to be 15 when she meets her new vice principle, Martin Harris, he tells her he thought she was one of the adults. She hangs out with her mom as a friend, her relationships are immediately presented in a more adult way than Jeanette Turner. The issue I have is that as a viewer, I am also not sure if she is supposed to be 15. This sort of lets the show off the hook for its overall story, in which there is an opening for victim blaming. Kate Wallis even while she is living in Harris's house as his 15 year old student, is dangerously close to being an antagonist . She was groomed by Harris, and is 15 just like Jeanette Taylor, whom she is juxtaposed with. The writers semi get away with it by never explicitly depicting a sexual relationship, so I as a viewer did not think too deeply about this until after I got to the end of the series. Ultimately Kate was lying about much of the events that happened between her and Harris in the aftermath and maybe in a meta way you can conclude that she was still a victim even if she lied about the nature of her victimization, fundamentally who Martin Harris is does not change, if she looks older, or she was not forthcoming. I just feel like making that commentary in subtext, is so dangerous. Especially since I am not confident that my conclusion on the subtext is correct.

Cruel Summer does weakly what Stranger Things did spectacularly. Which maybe isnt the best comparison, but I feel like they tried to weave 90's archetypes into the show, and I catch what I htink are I am yet to feel nostalgic for the actual 90’s, and this didnt give me the thrown back feeling. They failed to use major current events to demarcate the passing of time. Much of the music is hipster coffee shop remakes, that while I am sure it saved freeform money, but pulling out the big bucks would have paid off. The fashion and hair are clearly a 2020 interpretation of the style at the time, but it just ends up feeling too modern. This is all rounded off with a really problematic, and yet 90’s message. Maybe I am missing some deeper meaning, but at face value I am not getting it.

Let us start with the smattering references that were not delivered on. There was a reference to Nirvana, Boyz II Men. They are essentially thrown out to establish the era and not delivered on. In the summer of 1993 alone, there would have been ample time references that would have enriched the story line, Bill Clinton was President, world Youth Day, the Uni Bomber and thats only 1993. 1994, 1995 were equally neglected which leaves this hole in the story especially since its jumping from time to time in every episode. The lighting and the hairstyles are used to demonstrate the time jumps, but it would have been more engaging to also use events to illustrate that there was a transition. For example, if I were transitioning from summer of 94, to summer of 95, I would have examined and rolled through some current events between those 2 times, Rwandan genocide, Bosnia, Oklahoma City Bombing, Speed and Jurassic Park were released, Fresh Prince of Belaire. The whole thing is a series of missed opportunities. Jeanette says, “the governor of Texas called me a disgrace.” in episode 1, You know who the Governor of Texas was in 1995? George W. Bush. Just adding a name would have dated the scene. If you want to write period pieces you have to be willing to write a period piece. Its half baked to want to write a true crime like story not attached to time, you dont attach it to time.

So, the music and fashion are all inauthentic. I think they lean more early 2000’s than 90’s and it might seem like it is all the same, but from someone who was there it matters. Some of the fashion they get, the sets are sort of generic, dont strike a chord with me at all. There are no futons, that I noticed. There isn't enough big hair or flannel for it to be the mid 90’s. Jeanette Turner has a Clueless vibe, embodying Tai, and Cher as well as maybe Drew Barrymore in Mad Love. The thing is that there is not anything more concrete than a vibe. Kate Wallis is given a definite Reese Witherspoon edge, which may be that the actress resembles Witherspoon, it is like watching Reese in Cruel Intentions. The men’s bowl cuts are not uniform enough, the patterns are not erratic paint streaks or random patterns. Honestly, everyone is way too clean. It just feels like a cleansed and palatable 90’s no one remembers. The most egregious moment was when Jeanette Turner is scrubbing slurs off her car, and the slur is “slam pig”. Forgive me but what is a slam pig, and who used that in the 90’s? Stranger Things, Mad Men, The Queens Gambit, or even That 70’s Show , all really committed to their periods, and even if they were imperfect, those shows committed in ways I didnt feel in Cruel Summer.

I do not hold a high bar for Freeform. I knew what I was getting into. I think this show did just well enough from the onset that I had hope. By the end when all pretense of being a period piece had vanished, and there were lines “I’m sitting out here, like a sitting duck”, I am a mediocre writing at best and could have written that line better. I think I wanted it to be good, I wanted it to capture something I could remember all the tastes and smells, and they got some things right such as the roller-skating rink. There is so much more to discuss, LGBTQ representation, there were all these present parents, which was not my experience of the 90’s. Many of us were supervised by our GenX siblings who had been latch key kids. Even the on the ball moms weren’t doing step-aerobics with their daughters and home after school with a drink.

If you do watch the show could you get back to me on why you think Kate Wallis is depicted as more mature when she is indeed a 15 y/o character. Is it supposed to be commentary on the fact that no matter what Martin Harris is a problem? Or is it supposed to make the story more palatable?