The cinematic world is abuzz with anticipation for Emerald Fennell’s bold new adaptation of Wuthering Heights, set to hit cinemas on February 13. However, as is often the case with such iconic literary works, the film has already sparked considerable debate and division among fans and critics alike, even before its official release.
Casting Controversies and Creative Liberties
The initial announcement of the cast – with Margot Robbie taking on the role of Catherine Earnshaw and Jacob Elordi as Heathcliff – immediately raised eyebrows. Purists of Emily Brontë’s 1847 novel voiced concerns, particularly regarding Robbie’s age and blonde hair, which deviated from traditional interpretations of Catherine. More significantly, the casting of Elordi as Heathcliff drew criticism, as the novel describes the character as a “dark-skinned gipsy,” a detail that many felt was overlooked.
Beyond the casting, Fennell’s decision to omit the latter half of the novel, which focuses on the subsequent generation of characters like young Cathy, Linton, and Hareton, has also proven to be a point of contention. This creative choice drastically alters the narrative scope, focusing solely on the tumultuous relationship between Catherine and Heathcliff.
A Soundtrack to Match the Drama
Complementing the film’s intense atmosphere is a new soundtrack curated by none other than Charli XCX. This project marks her first album release since the success of her previous work, Brat. Fans have already been treated to a taste of the album with singles such as ‘House’ (featuring John Cale), ‘Chains of Love’, and ‘Wall of Sound’. The full soundtrack is slated for release on the same day as the film, promising to amplify the emotional resonance of Fennell’s vision.
Fennell’s Vision: A “Version” of Wuthering Heights
In a candid interview with Fandango, Fennell shed light on her directorial approach, explaining the deliberate choice to place quotation marks around the film’s title. She acknowledged the immense challenge of adapting such a dense and complex novel.
“But the thing for me is you can’t adapt a book as dense and complicated and difficult as this book. I can’t say I’m making Wuthering Heights. It’s not possible,” Fennell stated. “What I can say is I’m making a version of it. There’s a version I remembered reading, which isn’t quite real. And there’s a version that I wanted to stuff to happen that never happened.”
She further elaborated on this interpretive approach: “And so it is Wuthering Heights and it isn’t. But really I’d say any adaptation of a novel, and especially a novel like this, should have, you know, quotation marks around it.” This statement underscores Fennell’s intention to present a personal and perhaps reimagined interpretation rather than a direct, faithful retelling.
Critics Weigh In: A Mixed Bag of Reviews
As the film’s release looms, critics have begun to share their verdicts, and the reception has been decidedly mixed, leaning towards favourable. On the review aggregate website Rotten Tomatoes, Wuthering Heights currently holds a 70 per cent critic score. However, individual reviews reveal a stark divergence of opinion.
The Independent’s Clarisse Loughrey delivered a scathing one-star review, labelling the film an “astonishingly bad adaptation” that evoked comparisons to a “limp Mills & Boon.” Loughrey criticised the performances, describing them as “almost pushed to the border of pantomime,” and felt Fennell’s thematic explorations of social classes were superficial.
In contrast, The Telegraph’s Robbie Collin awarded the film a perfect five stars, hailing it as a “bosom-heaving, gasp-inducing thrill ride.” Collin argued that Fennell masterfully understood that “style can be substance when you do it right,” suggesting the film’s aesthetic choices were integral to its impact.
The Guardian’s Peter Bradshaw offered a more tempered two-star assessment, deeming Fennell’s interpretation an “emotionally hollow, bodice-ripping misfire.” While acknowledging that the film “makes the most of Martin Clune,” Bradshaw felt it ultimately misused the talents of Robbie and Elordi.
The Hollywood Reporter’s David Rooney noted Fennell’s willingness to push boundaries, stating, “Fennell’s overhaul flirts with insanity, and if you can let go of preconceived notions about how this story should be told, it’s arguably the writer-director’s most purely entertaining film.”
IndieWire’s Kate Erbland gave the film a B grade, praising its visual dynamism and “insane ideas” that kept it engaging for its two-hour runtime. However, Erbland concluded that despite the lack of “boredom,” a sense of “something is still missing here” lingered.
Empire’s Beth Webb, in her three-star review, observed that Fennell “throws everything at this fever-dream adaptation,” which effectively “massages the senses and showcases Elordi’s ever-growing star power.” Yet, Webb expressed a wish that the film’s “electrically erotic energy was sustained to the end.”
These varied critical responses highlight the subjective nature of adaptation and the divisive power of Fennell’s distinctive filmmaking style. Whether audiences embrace this reimagined Wuthering Heights or find it a departure too far remains to be seen.
