New “Wuthering Heights” Adaptation Sparks Divided Critical Reception
A bold new cinematic reimagining of Emily Brontë’s seminal gothic novel, Wuthering Heights, has hit cinemas, starring Australian actors Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi in the iconic roles of Cathy Earnshaw and Heathcliff. Directed by Emerald Fennell, the filmmaker behind the critically acclaimed Saltburn and the Oscar-winning Promising Young Woman, this latest iteration has been met with a starkly divided response from critics. Some have labelled it an “emotionally hollow, bodice-ripping misfire,” while others are heralding it as “resplendently lurid, oozy and wild.”
Fennell herself has described the film as a “very loose adaptation,” drawing inspiration from her own adolescent experiences reading the classic text. This approach has clearly resonated with some reviewers, who see it as a fresh and audacious reinvention rather than a faithful translation.
Praise for Audacity and Thematic Depth
The BBC, awarding the film four stars, suggested that Fennell has managed to channel the “essential” core of Brontë’s novel: the corrosive power of thwarted desire. The review highlighted how jealousy, anger, and vengeance are depicted as intrinsic to Cathy and Heathcliff’s characters, existing alongside their profound passion.
- The BBC noted that if audiences embrace the film’s audacious style and view it as a reinvention, it becomes an “utterly absorbing” and “bold, artful” take on Wuthering Heights.
- The review commended Fennell for capturing the “corrosive behaviour that can result from thwarted desire,” a central theme of the original novel.
- The passion between the lead characters, according to this assessment, is palpable and drives the narrative forward with intensity.
Robbie Collin of The Daily Telegraph was particularly effusive, bestowing a five-star rating and praising the film as “resplendently lurid, oozy and wild.” He described it as an “obsessive film about obsession,” which successfully immerses the viewer in its “own mad compulsions.” Collin went on to compare its intensity to Saltburn, suggesting this new Wuthering Heights is “lewder, if slightly less graphic.” He argued that while it might appear to be a traditional “bodice-ripper,” the film delves deeper, savouring bodily fluids and allowing the characters’ passions to “vibrate through their dress, their surroundings, and everything else within reach.” He concluded that Fennell understands that “style can be substance when you do it right,” leaving the audience “quivering on their own private frequency.”
Criticisms of Superficiality and Lack of Impact
Conversely, a significant number of critics found the adaptation lacking in substance and emotional depth. Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian awarded the film a mere two stars, suggesting it failed to deliver the “live-ammo impact” of Fennell’s previous works. He characterised the film as a “luxurious pose of unserious abandon,” deeming it “quasi-erotic, pseudo-romantic and then ersatz-sad, a club night of mock emotion.”
- Bradshaw lamented the film’s perceived superficiality, describing it as an attempt at a “club night of mock emotion.”
- He felt that Fennell’s distinctive directorial voice, which shone in earlier films, was less impactful here.
Kevin Maher from The Times also gave it two stars, specifically criticising the “chemistry-free central romance” between a Heathcliff and Cathy he found “bizarrely uninteresting.” Maher pointed to “conspicuous longueurs” and characterisations that he felt barely scratched the surface, comparing them unfavourably to the complexity of even a brief social media post, let alone Brontë’s literary masterpiece. He described Robbie’s Cathy as “Bronte Barbie,” living “entirely on the surface” and never burning “from the core.” Elordi’s Heathcliff was dismissed as a “fatally shallow characterisation,” a “pouty man-candy with a shaky Yorkshire accent and, by chuffing ’eck, an alarmingly overexposed tongue.”
Adding to the negative sentiment, Clarisse Loughrey of The Independent gave the film just one star, calling it an “astonishingly hollow work.” She accused the film of using “the guise of interpretation to gut one of the most impassioned, emotionally violent novels ever written, and then toss its flayed skin over whatever romance tropes seem most marketable.” Loughrey felt that Heathcliff had been reduced to a “wet-eyed, Mills & Boon mirage” designed solely to elicit swooning, a far cry from the “complicated, challenging figure” in the book. While acknowledging that Robbie and Elordi don’t entirely lack chemistry, she felt their characters were so “thinned out” that their performances bordered on “pantomime.”
The Film’s Artistic Choices
Despite the differing opinions, it’s clear that Fennell has opted for a stylised and provocative interpretation. The film’s aesthetic, as highlighted by Collin, is a significant element, with passions and emotions supposedly conveyed through visual cues and the environment. The inclusion of Alison Oliver, who starred in Saltburn, as Miss Isabella Linton has also been noted as a devilishly funny and unsettling return.
The debate surrounding this adaptation highlights the perennial challenge of bringing such beloved and complex literary works to the screen. Whether Fennell’s bold reimagining will be remembered as a groundbreaking reinvention or a superficial misstep remains to be seen, but it has certainly ignited a passionate discussion among both critics and audiences.
Wuthering Heights is now showing in UK cinemas.
