“Wuthering Heights” opens with a public execution, a bold variation from the original text. The new addition to director Emerald Fennell’s catalog quickly captures the characteristically dark, fantastical and disturbing tone of her films.
A strange pick for a Valentine’s Day release, “Wuthering Heights” hit theaters on Feb. 13 and quickly became a topic of debate. Like many literary adaptations, Fennell’s film tackles only the first half of Emily Brontë’s dense novel. Chronicling the volatile and codependent relationship between Catherine (Margot Robbie) and Heathcliff (Jacob Elordi) from childhood to adulthood, the film boldly portrays Brontë’s 1847 tragedy.
While questionable casting picks for their age and race (Heathcliff is notably not white in the novel), Robbie and Elordi portray the main characters well. Catherine and Heathcliff are easily recognizable to any fans of the book and bring to life the comedy and disturbing nature of their relationship. Robbie, especially, portrays Catherine’s antagonizing need for Heathcliff’s attention beautifully.
In true Fennell fashion, their relationship is accentuated by bright hues, intense close-ups and a dramatic, echoing score that exaggerates the couple’s consuming, “doomed” love. A bright red sky frames Heathcliff’s silhouette when he first leaves Catherine, Catherine’s bedroom is wallpapered with close-ups of Robbie’s skin, and a large, eerie doll house mimics Catherine’s entrapment in her marriage.
These controversial artistic liberties serve the story well; the passionate love and tragedy of the ending are well evoked through the not-so-historically accurate gowns and signature electronic beat drops of dance-pop artist Charli XCX. They do take away from the story at times; the film clearly favors flair and shock-value over substance, but the small cast, narrow scope of the setting, and Fennell’s choice to use extreme close-ups throughout most of the film work to accentuate the claustrophobic attraction between Catherine and Heathcliff.
Fennell’s laser focus on the couple does, however, highlight “‘Wuthering Heights” limited success as an adaptation. While an adaptation cannot be judged entirely on its fidelity, a good adaptation should, in theory, try to honor its source material. On that front, the 2026 “‘Wuthering Heights’” fails. Fennell entirely dilutes the epic Brontë intended to create, trading the novel’s exploration of generational trauma, class differences and gender roles for scenic views, grotesque imagery and physical intimacy. Fennell truly adapts only one element of Brontë’s novel: the destructive love between Heathcliff and Cathy, and disregards all else.
“Wuthering Heights” only truly fails as an adaptation; not on its own terms. After all, no one critiques “Clueless” or “10 Things I Hate About You” for their infidelity to the original Austen or Shakespeare. Like those iconic films (though perhaps in a less comedic manner), “Wuthering Heights” simply takes a strikingly loose interpretation of its source, making it not a lesser film, but a lesser adaptation.
It is up to audiences, then, to interpret the quality of “Wuthering Heights.” For die-hard Brontë fans, Fennell’s film is a provocative, sensationalist attempt at adaptation that fails even to scratch the surface of the novel’s brilliance and significance. However, for more lenient movie-lovers, Fennell’s romance is thankfully unique, and her unsettling additions and controversial artistic license, though they might fall flat at times, defy expectations and challenge ae—exactly what creativity should do.
