Variety has great news: '‘ Wuthering Heights’ Audiobook, Voiced by Aimee Lou Wood, Sees 440% Increase in Downloads Following Film Release'. Heights are indeed getting wuthered. Not only did Emerald Fennell’s bold take on the classic novel collect an impressive $83 million at the global box office this past weekend, but the Spotify audiobook version of the Emily Brontë story has also seen a dramatic revival. According to the public relations and communications firm Burson Global, “Wuthering Heights” has seen a 440% increase in audiobook consumption since the film trailer dropped last September. According to data, this increase isn’t just repeat or nostalgia fans – first-time listeners to the audiobook increased by 260%. Their reports also indicate that Gen Z (ages 13-28) is particularly drawn to this classic, with this age group experiencing a 191% increase in streaming the audiobook. (Anna Tingley)
Good news on IndieWire too as it reports that ' Wuthering Heights Puts Emerald Fennell in the Conversation for Highest-Grossing Female Directors'. Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” this weekend opened to $88.5 million over the four-day weekend ($82 million in three days), all against a production budget of $80 million (before marketing costs). It’s not exactly a record-breaker, as it’s behind the domestic opening for plenty of other female-directed films, and it’s #14 in terms of 4-day openings over Presidents’ Day weekend. It even opened a little soft compared to some projections, which originally had “Wuthering Heights” reaching $40 million or even $50 million domestic before the weekend. It is however still a boon for Warner Bros., which now has had nine straight movies open to #1 dating back to last year (suddenly a lot is riding on Maggie Gyllenhaal’s “The Bride!”). But between her debut “Promising Young Woman” ($18.8 million) and “Saltburn” ($21 million), Fennell now has three movies that will crack the Top 100 on that Annenberg Inclusion Initiative report in a year, and it puts her in the conversation among some of the other top-performing female directors at the box office of all time. (Brian Welk)
And even more reviews of Wuthering Heights 2026:
The cinematography lingers on touch, breath and silence, turning longing into something tactile. The brilliant and pulsating Charli xcx soundtrack pushes the intensity further, blending gothic atmospheres with modern pop energy in the period setting. Paired with these visuals, the music instantly makes the story feel both Victorian and defiantly modern and bold. It draws outside the lines and rejects modesty. [...] Several scenes are beautiful and deeply unsettling at once. While watching, I found myself unexpectedly shaken, even in tears at certain moments — not because the story felt softened, but because it felt magnified. Fennell does not resolve a famously problematic love story; instead, she aestheticizes it, leaving viewers to sit with something uncomfortable yet undeniably captivating. (Rachel Marlowe and Kate Rothermel)
For me, this is a very difficult film to rate. It is a noticeable departure from the source material, taking creative liberties that augment the story in such a damning way. However, on its own, if under a completely separate name, the film itself is not terrible; rather enjoyable, even. If this was a new love story about two people in the 1800s, with an overtly sexual tone, then it could have been quite an enjoyable watch. The story and plot is engaging and fun to watch unfold, and the way each actor plays off each other is very well done. That being said, it is not possible for me to keep these two works totally separate. One of the most famous and important books of the 19th century deserves a respectful and proper adaptation. If the movie was its own thing, then it would yield close to four stars, but keeping in mind all the questionable decisions and changes, I must dock it and give it three stars out of five. (Alfie Eville) Yet, sparkly bandaids can’t fix the bullet holes Fennell shot in the heart of the story. She completely assassinates the main characters and abandons the second half of the novel. Fennell turns the abused, single mother Isabella into a “girlboss” in a consensual, submissive sexual relationship with Heathcliff. Nelly, the maid, is villainized in the film as the driving force between Catherine and Heathcliff, while in the book she is a lower class hero who seeks to protect Catherine from abuse. The film itself attempts to shock the viewer — whether that be through the town’s erotic response to an execution, or Heathcliff’s sexual fascination with eggs — but consistently falls short. While the cast portrayed their respective characters well, their performances cannot throw water on the fire that is the script. Adapting a beloved classic is no easy feat, especially one that has been adapted dozens of times before, but ignoring the soul of the book in its entirety is a challenge itself. Fennell excludes the children that Catherine and Heathcliff have in the film, who in the novel go on to marry each other and break the generational cycle of abuse, instead choosing to kill Catherine after a miscarriage. While the tragedy itself was emotional, the film’s conclusion was unsatisfying. It’s as if Fennell gave a really interesting setup and walked away from the mic as soon as it was time to deliver the punchline. As “Wuthering Heights” ends, the audience is left wanting to know what the movie was about. What was the message of that movie? Or, was there a message at all? (Ava Demcher)
Is this all so Victorian booklet for children who are in danger of dying that there needs to be a message? Really?
Fenell made “Wuthering Heights” not for bookworms but for cinephiles. The movie is stunningly shot. The mise en scene is just gorgeous in that it’s such a filthily excessive style that is common in Fenell movies. It’s a study of true filmmaking, but it’s not a true study of adaptation. Director Guillermo Del Toro had a famous saying during the “Frankenstein” press tour that “Adapting a book is like marrying a widow. You have to respect the late husband, but on Saturdays, you are allowed to get it on.” Emerald Fennel instead chose to spit on the husband’s grave and get it on every day instead. (Adrihanna Collins)
While the score, composed by Anthony Willis, is startlingly dark and majestic, the occasional interjection of a Charli xcx song is disappointing and jarring. It turns these scenes into what feels like a music video, adding to the never-ending list of things that make it impossible to take the film seriously. It’s evident in both her interviews and the film itself that Fennell has slapped a beloved, canonical title over a cookie-cutter tragic romance in the hopes of drawing audiences excited by the idea of watching something “cultural.” But her exclusion of any complexity in favor of numerous sex scenes make it clear that Fennell was aiming for a box-office hit instead of a literary tribute, much to the devastation of Brontë fans everywhere — and to the detriment of the story itself. (Amelia Barter)
The movie itself was good; however, instead of marketing something as an adaptation, it would’ve been better to be portrayed as a new story. In some parts, it seemed they slapped on the names of the known characters of “Wuthering Heights” and offered nothing else in similarity. (Ruby Johnson)
Glaring issues aside, “Wuthering Heights” has its moments, mainly via the lens of DP Linus Sandgren. There are some striking compositions, with Cathy’s white wedding train billowing across the crepuscular moor a highlight. And then there are the leeches… Overall, “Wuthering Heights” is a trainwreck, albeit a weirdly watchable one. It careers giddily through its run time (although one feels such a thematically weighty story should have more of a sense of gravity or heft), and you get the sense at least some of its curious absurdities are by design; that Emerald Fennell is thumbing her nose at anyone who ever took Emily Brontë’s baroque gothic fantasia seriously as a love story in the first place. (Kevin Ibbotson-Wight) Doubtless there will be more versions of Wuthering Heights. This is the more puzzling and challenging one. (Father Peter Malone) The positive standout of this film is the cinematography. The film is very visually striking, with beautiful costuming and production design in every meticulously arranged frame. From the first shots of the film, Fennell is able to maintain a dark, slimy tone. [...] However, it seems that Fennell wanted to make a movie that only works on mute. Throughout the film, composer Anthony Willis’ beautiful string-heavy score is attacked by Charli xcx’s auto-tuned vocals from the soundtrack album. While there are moments where Charli’s songs work well, such as in the opening scene of the movie, most of the time her songs feel out of place. (Thais Zboichyk)
The Independent reports that the film 'has torn the Independent’s culture desk apart' and goes on to quote the opinions of different staff members. Screen Rant claims that ' Wuthering Heights Officially Rewrites The Book’s Biggest Twist'--seriously 'officially rewrites'? Are all our copies of the novel to be requisitioned and 'officially rewritten'?
A contributor to Vox makes a point that we all know already but which may be beside the point when it comes to the film adaptation: 'Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights is a million times edgier than Emerald Fennell’s'. Brontë punishes her readers for even liking her characters. Its most charismatic and compelling characters, the doomed lovers Heathcliff and Catherine, are also two of its greatest monsters. Feral and violent, Brontë’s Heathcliff and Catherine ruin lives and inflict wanton amounts of pain for the sheer sport of it all, but they also love each other overwhelmingly, ferociously, enough to tear down the world all around each other. Reading about them, it’s both difficult to wish them well and impossible not to feel that they really should be together. That contradiction is what creates the tension that powers the reader through this brutal, bleak book, with all its misery and squalor. [...] Brontë’s Cathy beats her servants, her horses, her husband. She flies into uncontrollable rages and plots to destroy her enemies. Fennell’s Cathy offers the occasional mean girl putdown, swiftly belied by her beautiful tear-swollen eyes, which reveal her true purity of heart. She is not so much passionate and angry as she is pragmatic and a little bit petty. Brontë’s Heathcliff slowly and systematically bankrupts his abuser and then ruins the man’s son. Fennell’s Heathcliff kindly cares for his adopted father in his broken old age. Brontë’s Heathcliff tortures the feckless Isabella’s puppy, then seduces her and abuses her and their child. Fennell’s Heathcliff mostly stares in confusion as Isabella writhes in pleasure on the end of a dog’s leash, having not only enthusiastically consented to the treatment, but in fact instigated it. When onscreen Catherine tells Isabella that Heathcliff will eat her alive, the moment feels absurd: The audience knows by this point that Isabella is an oversexed weirdo who will do whatever she wants with reserved, pliant Heathcliff. (In fact, she does.) No adaptation must be absolutely faithful to its source text in order to be good, but it has to do something. It has to have an energy, a source of tension, a reason to exist. But having excised the tension of Brontë’s novel from her film, Fennell replaces it with absolutely nothing. Instead, you are asked only to watch beautiful people engage in mild BDSM play upon the beautiful moors, and then die through no fault of their own. All that gleefully perverse production design made promises, and she follows through on absolutely none of them. Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” reaches no heights at all. (Constance Grady)
Slash Film says that 'Emerald Fennell's Wuthering Heights Has Been Accused Of Going Too Far – It Should've Gone Further': This ache for trashiness is not mere prurience on my part. Indeed, the film goes out of its way to cater to the prurience in the audience. No, my frustration with the film's refusal to tip full-bore into a trashy soap-opera narrative is also implied in its heightened style. Fennell got some excellent work from her photographer and production designers to create an unreal space for her film to take place in. One might be reminded of the films of Ken Russell, complete with their sexual excess. The heightened look very much leaves the door open for a more extreme approach. Some might be upset that Fennell took her film so far from the source material. I am frustrated that she didn't take it far enough. She could have turned "Wuthering Heights" into a straight-up horror movie. What if Heathcliff and Cathy murder Edgar and can only dispose of the body by eating it? What if Nelly (Hong Chau) or Isabella (Alison Oliver) found out about the murder? The line between an angst-riddled romance like "Wuthering Heights" and 1950s issues of "Tales from the Crypt" is startlingly fine, and Fennell could easily have taken her film into EC Comics territory. And this would merely be following the path that Fennell herself laid out for us. It wouldn't have been surprising at all. And it would have certainly been more fun. By backing off and ending "Wuthering Heights" as a tragedy, it merely highlights that Heathcliff and Cathy are kind of bad people whose own actions brought nothing but pain and misery. I love a good tragedy, of course, but it's not a great tragedy at the end of the day. But if Fennell had added murder, we would have had something. (Witney Seibold)
Den of Geek wonders 'Why Does Book Fidelity Seem to Matter Only for Emerald Fennell?' Collider, not unfairly, surmised that Brontë is “rolling in her grave.” Brontë probably is, to which I ask… so what?! Why does it matter so much that Emerald Fennell personally deviated from an oft-adapted novel to craft her own maximalist fantasia? She is not the first filmmaker to take striking liberties with Brontë. In fact, it was not until the 2011 Andrea Arnold miniseries starring Kaya Scodelario and James Howson that a major adaptation attempted to cover the full multigenerational breadth of the book. Until then, most followed William Wyler’s lead from the classic 1939 Hollywood version starring Laurence Olivier and Merle Oberon by ending the story with Cathy’s death and Heathcliff’s plea she haunt him forevermore. Arnold’s miniseries also holds the distinction of being the first version to cast a Black actor as Heathcliff. Still, before and after we’ve had Ralph Fiennes, Tom Hardy, and Timothy Dalton, among others, play Heathcliff, and films like the ‘39 version which conspicuously soften Cathy’s selfishness or Heathcliff’s sadism. [...] It is easy to wonder whether Fennell is held to a different standard than other filmmakers, perhaps because of her tendencies for decadence and excess (and questionable class subtexts) courting acrimony from a specific, popular lens of modern online criticism. Or, perhaps, it is because she’s a woman. Truthfully, though, it might be less about Fennell than the source material. While del Toro and Villeneuve, like Fennell, had intense formative experiences growing up with the novels they adapted, Wuthering Heights is a far more universal foundational text for thousands due to being on the English curriculum of most secondary or high schools on either side of the Atlantic. But at the end of the day, art is much more fulfilling when engaged on its own terms versus comparing it side by side with a text. The best films based on books generally make mincemeat of their source material—The Godfather, Jaws, The Shining—and as del Toro himself once said, “At the end of the day, I say adapting is like marrying a widow. You can pay respect to the late husband, but on Saturdays, you gotta get it on.” Being able to get it on is one thing Fennell’s Wuthering Heights has no trouble with, especially when Charli XCX ballads drift across the 19th century moors. (David Crow)
Perhaps it’s silly to berate “Wuthering Heights” for its failures, given Hollywood has always been a big-budget exercise in the cross-pollination of celebrity. The quality of engagement makes no difference as long as the publicity machine continues to churn. Recently there has been no corner of the internet in which you couldn’t find Robbie, Fennell or Elordi answering questions you never asked, with anecdotes you never cared to hear. What is perhaps more gripping than Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” – more complex, more laden with dramatic tension and cosmic irony and more accurate to Brontë’s vision of intergenerational violence – is Hollywood’s crisis of legitimacy playing out before us. (Kasumi Borczyk)
The Spectator continues with the debate on whether Gen Z is capable of reading Wuthering Heights or not. Charlotte, Emily and Anne Brontë are rightly hailed as heroines of feminism, but their lives and works far outstrip the narrow boundaries of such fashionable causes: they are astounding evidence of the triumph of the human spirit in the face of pitiless adversity. No wonder that we find them difficult to understand in our debased age. (Nigel Jones) “Wuthering Heights” is a satisfying listen as well as a canny solution to the problem of how to follow up a breakthrough record. (Mark Richardson) Ultimately, the album makes the most sense with the context that is a backdrop to a much larger project. Many of the songs fade together when listened to in succession, and while the project is very ambient and atmospheric, it wouldn’t be in my typical listening rotation. However, the soundtrack was a very smart move for Charli xcx’s career. While “brat” achieved Charli xcx her most mainstream success, it also created expectations for her artistry centered on edgy, danceable tracks. (Jessica Johnson)
Keighley News features the local buses that take visitors to Brontë-related places. The Telegraph and Argus recommends a trip to Thornton and the Brontë Birthplace. Daily Mail goes beyond a simple visit to the area and spotlights some houses on the market in Brontë Country. Infobae (in Spanish) has an article on Viriginia Woolf's opinion of Emily Brontë.
Another partner of Wuthering Heights 2026 is the British underwear brand Lounge:
Introducing Lounge x “Wuthering Heights” - inspired by the film of the season and reimagined through the art of flattering fit. This edit captures untamed romance and quiet obsession through deep jewel-toned intimates, sculpting corsetry, and intricate embroidery. The Lounge "Wuthering Heights" inspired collection includes themed lingerie and sleepwear items like sets, bras, bodysuits, thongs, and pyjamas. Further information on The Handbook. - Dahlia Intimates Set (Navy): A complete lingerie set with bra and matching bottoms in deep navy, featuring flattering fit and subtle embroidery for an untamed romantic vibe.
- Evelyn Intimates Set (Green): Jewel-toned green set including bra and briefs, designed with sculpting elements and intricate details evoking quiet obsession on the moors.
- Dahlia Bodysuit: Versatile one-piece bodysuit in navy-inspired hues, blending corsetry-like shaping with delicate embroidery for film-themed allure.
- Elodie Corset Set (Pink): Pink corset-style bra and thong set, emphasizing structured support and romantic lacework.
- Two-Tone Blossom Balcony Bra (Hot Pink): Balcony bra in vibrant hot pink with two-tone blossom prints, offering lift and floral detailing.
- Rosebud: Ribbed balcony bra with white floral and rosebud motifs, capturing delicate, obsessive romance.
- Caia Thong (Pink): Minimalist pink thong for pairing with sets, in soft fabric with subtle accents.
- Satin Cami Pyjama Top (Floral Print): Silky sleep top with floral patterns, adding a nighttime layer to the edit's sleepwear.
- Modal Pyjama Shirt: Soft modal fabric shirt for comfortable, themed lounging.
Betwixt The Sheets: The History of Sex, Scandal & Society Wuthering Heights is a story full of passion, violence and sexual tension. So it's no surprise that it shocked Victorian readers when it first came out. How did Emily Brontë, the daughter of a clergyman, create such a provocative world? How did the Brontê sisters write about sex and sexuality in their work? And how accurate is the new film to the original story?! Joining Kate today is Dr Claire O'Callaghan, author and Brontë scholar, to take us back to Victorian England at the peak of the Industrial Revolution, and find out more about this scandalous story. This episode was edited by Hannah Feodorov. The producer was Stuart Beckwith. The senior producer was Freddy Chick.
A lot more reviews of Wuthering Heights 2026:
Wuthering Heights adaptation is what happens when no one reads. (...) The latest work from English filmmaker Emerald Fennell — who cultivated a sizable following with her tawdry 2023 dark comedy Saltburn — is a loose adaptation of Emily Brontë’s 1847 Wuthering Heights — loose being a charitable term doing more than its share of heavy lifting — and a reflection of a stark literary crisis plaguing our modern age. ( Harry Khachatrian in Washington Examiner)
Emerald Fennell's adaptation of "Wuthering Heights" ultimately falls flat, trading significant characters and emotional intimacy for awkward erotica. (...) However, even if the film is reviewed as an independent entity, it still relies on montages, shock value and awkward erotica, which do not make up for underdeveloped protagonists and a complete lack of story development. (1 of 5) ( Mia Colangelo in Pipe Dreams)
There’s something undeniably Shakespearean about Fennell’s Wuthering Heights. Like Romeo, Heathcliff is “fortune’s fool,” undone by a love so infinite he’ll destroy everything and everyone just so he won’t be without it. But in some ways, this story is even more gut-wrenching. Romeo and Juliet’s romance was impulsive and short, kept apart by family drama; Catherine and Heathcliff torture themselves slowly through their pride and insistence on possessing one another completely. So yes, the film is provocative. It’s romantic. It’s erotic, and even gross at times. And in that way, it lives up to the hype because it’s so deliciously, unapologetically an Emerald Fennell film. And I loved every second of it. (Liana Minassian in The Everygirl)
Ultimately, Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of prioritizing aesthetic over substance. In its attempt to modernize the moors for a commercial audience, the adaptation loses the very soul of the novel, turning a classic into a cheesy romance. (Madelyn Stewart in The News Record)
To her credit, Fennell understands that it’s more fun to smash a dollhouse than to construct one meticulously. Her sledgehammer approach to party scenes in her previous films is rivaled by Wuthering Heights’s opening sequence of a public hanging. Though we are supposed to be in the late 18th century, the mood is more medieval. After a few moments of the hanged man’s dying gasps, a Charli xcx song floods the soundtrack (the truly terrifying track “House,” which she recorded with John Cale), and the crowd erupts in a carnal frenzy. People roar, some start fucking, a nun closes her eyes, and parents pull away their children. The scene does not exist in Brontë’s novel, but it’s somehow closest to the monstrous vitality of that world, a place where the dead refuse to die. Too bad that Fennell never gives her characters the chance to live. (Genevieve Yue in Film Comment) In lieu of Bronte’s original tale, Fennell offers an odd mix of campy Harlequin-esque romance and weird Gothic horror. Within this concoction, sumptuous sets, flashy costumes and wild weather turn out to be the real stars. (...) It all adds up to an overheated mess. Thus, in the end, this “ Wuthering Heights” might more aptly be titled “Withering Lows.” ( Joseph McAleer in Catholic Review)
Fennell wields overacting from the lead as a strategy for preserving a classical tone. However, the choice to cast modern A-listers in a period piece set to the music of a Gen Z chart-topper already forgoes the chances of being perceived as authentically vintage. Once the story reaches its climactic change of ownership of the Wuthering Heights estate, this ability-to-go-viral tone takes a turn for the better. This pick-up in momentum and quality improves the impact of Robbie’s acting because her whimsical runs across the moors come off more genuine than performative. At this moment, Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” redeems itself as an entertaining spectacle, no matter how far removed from its blueprint. Luckily, it does not always take itself seriously at times, like the ridiculously tall mountain of empty beer bottles that surround Cathy’s father, who turns to alcohol in his isolation. This admission of dramatization welcomes laughs and critiques all the same. Clearly, Fennell was not looking to be conventional. (Georgie Gassaron in The Ithacan)
Millennial Fennell may be tapping into a dark romance zeitgeist with “Wuthering Heights”, but she’s also going against the grain when it comes to younger viewers. Despite Gen Z’s pornography habits, headlines proclaim that Zoomers are uninterested in sex or even sex scenes in movies and television. The perception is so pervasive that actress Olivia Wilde is practically begging Gen Z to buy tickets to her new film I Want Your Sex. One of Wilde’s younger costars said she hopes the film inspires risk-averse Zoomers to have sex, adding, “Sex can be lighthearted. It doesn’t have to stare. (Evie Solheim in First Things)
In contrast, Wuthering Heights is a little late to the party. The mix of contemporary culture and period drama on which it relies has become an established trope, from the appearance of a Converse trainer in Sophia Copolla’s Marie Antoinette back in 2006 to orchestras playing Ariana Grande in the more recent Bridgerton (2020–). Perhaps in time, Fennell’s oeuvre will be appreciated for its encapsulation of our present, an era in which the distinction between a film and its promotion has all but evaporated, both transformed into tools for creating a blitz of images designed to dominate social media feeds. But for now, as pleasant as it is to see Margot Robbie in a bodice and a pair of red sunglasses à la late 90s Britney Spears, this is not, on its own, enough to own the moment – or to fill more than two hours of cinema. (Rosanna McLaughlin in ArtReview) Ultimately, this “Wuthering Heights” adaptation succeeds most when it’s viewed not as a translation of the novel but as a reimagined, loose version of it. It’s understandable why some viewers feel protective of the original source material. But treating adaptations as creative conversations rather than sacred reproductions opens the door for something more interesting — and sometimes more memorable. Fennell’s version may not replace the classic in anyone’s mind. But it does prove that even a story told countless times can still feel new when someone is willing to take risks with it. (Kamdyn Sargent in The Suffolk Journal)
They cry and mewl and pout at each other, break for a costume change, and then do it all again, striking postures of indignance and hurt as they growl about their feelings and heave their respective bosoms. They stand stoically by Cathy’s father’s grave, the wind tearing camply at her black veil, then, practically within sight of the funeral party, reunite with animal intensity. Occasionally in fits of love-stricken anger Robbie will beat her girly fists on Elordi’s manly chest. When all other ways of communicating their profound bond have been exhausted, they stick their fingers in each other’s mouths. (John Maier in UnHerd)
“I have not broken your heart,” sighs Heathcliff during one sweaty, tear-streaked moment of truth with Cathy. “You have broken it, and in breaking it, you have broken mine.” That’s a great line, and Fennell is smart enough to retain it and many others; brave, too, considering the inevitable and palpable clash between her dialogue and Brontë’s. The hearts most likely to be broken by Wuthering Heights are those set, however sincerely (or foolishly), on the prospect of a faithful cinematic translation of a classic. For viewers at the skeptical end of the spectrum about Fennell’s filmmaking to date, the dubious choices on display may play less like disappointment than a grueling but finally gratifying kind of validation: It’s “very enjoyable.” (Adam Nayman in The Ringer) Film as a medium requires compression and most subplots do not survive, but Brontë’s novel was never meant to be easily digested. When adaptations oversexualize characters, viewers are offered something more consumable. Was this a missed opportunity for Fennell to make a social commentary on race and class? Do modern adaptations assume viewers cannot comprehend depth? Or, do viewers prefer it that way? “Wuthering Heights,” the movie, is a hit. It is ambitious and emotionally resonant. But it still calls into question our modern appetite for complexity. Do audiences still crave the sharpness of a classic, or is the pretense of sophistication enough to sell? ( Aditi Allam in The Flat Hat)
I was astonished. I was mesmerized. I was in profound thought. The realization of how much human connection can mean hit me deeply during Wuthering Heights. The theme of a forever-relationship taking place in the late 1800s spoke to me, especially in an era in which there were no technological advancements. Instead, only-face-to-face interactions which resulted in immersive moments of love. Fennell brings audiences on a journey that is one-of-a-kind. Not everyone may understand it at first, but the dramatics are a wild adventure that is all about love and how much it can hurt. ( Tarek Fayoumi in Positively Naperville)
A sensual, stylised and satiric interpretation of Brontë's classic novel. (Jane Freebury in The Daily Advertiser)
Do I recommend this movie? Well, not to my mother. But if you’re anything like me and you enjoy stylized period adaptations that lean more into fantasy than accuracy, then go for it. (Steven Leatherwood in Indiana Daily Student)
It's dangerous to see the movie with your mother, as this fellow warns you.
The Mirror thinks that Emerald Fennell has romanticized Heathcliff too much, and the author has a point: This movie plays with the erotic - but never quite gets it right. The reason for this is Wuthering Heights is not a vehicle for sexual fantasies. Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” has all the porno tropes: choking; quickies in the back of a car (or in this case, a carriage); dirty talk. There’s even a peeping tom scene as Cathy ventures into voyeurism as she watches through the floorboards as two servants do the deed. One says to the other: “Have you been a bad girl?” as his amour walks through horse bridles, before it is placed on her head. Yet there is one sexualisation of the text that sits very uncomfortably with me. Heathcliff in the original text murders dogs for the hell of it. He imprisons and rapes Isabella (played by Alison Oliver). He is a character of untold evil, brooding for literally years over his hatred at Cathy’s rejection of him. Yet, his treatment of Isabella is portrayed as a dominant/submissive relationship. He climbs in Isabella’s window and tells her exactly what he will do: he will not love her. He will hurt her. Throughout he asks: “Do you want me to stop?” Isabella nods her consent. This act of consent neuters the evil that Heathcliff is known for. Brontë’s text shows his acts as calculated, deliberate, and completely abhorrent. Yet, in Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights”, this evil is boiled down to a kink. Young viewers, who may not have read the text, may understand Heathcliff as Fennell shows him to be: a romantic hero striving at all costs to be with his one true love. When they eventually pick up Brontë’s Wuthering Heights, will they read his sadism as acts of love to be tolerated? Incel culture and misogyny is on the rise. We could do without translating it into something to be doe-eyed about. (Aimée Walsh)
Wuthering Heights is at its heart a story of class and race. Emerald Fennell has got it all wrong. By turning the novel into just a corset-heaving love story, the director has stripped it of what made it so boundary-pushing. (...) It’s difficult, when watching Emerald Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights”, not to imagine what Emily Brontë would have made of it. Before I get into it, I feel obliged to state that although I love the book I am not a purist. I often relish creative reinterpretations of classics. Admittedly, this one came with a fair few red flags, from the casting of Margot Robbie (simply too old, Cathy is a teenager) and Jacob Elordi (simply too white, Heathcliff, while his origins are uncertain, is described as darker skinned) to the unhinged marketing and crass brand tie-ins. Nevertheless, I was still excited to see it. So why did I leave the cinema not only bored, but feeling a little bit sad? Fennell said she wanted to make the film she imagined at 14, the age at which many of us read the novel in English class. Fennell focuses almost entirely on the “love story” at the expense of almost all of the novel’s other themes. Of course, if you’re a teenager in love, the doomed connection between Cathy and Heathcliff does captivate, although as an abuser who hangs a dog, Heathcliff is not exactly fanciable. I do understand the impulse behind Fennell’s fan-fictiony desire to have them consummate their love, when Brontë, who probably never touched a man her entire life, left all that desire unrealised. Horniness at the expense of all else, however, can feel terribly hollow. (...) Ultimately, the film was an act of cynical co-option by someone who didn’t understand the molten core of this novel and its groundbreaking approach to class, race and gender, or chose not to. And that’s why it made me feel so bored, and sad.
Which, of course, is true. The novel is all about that. But not only that. There are many Wuthering Heights in Wuthering Heights and what happens is that yours is not Emerald Fennell's. Angelika May wonders in The Guardian why film directors are afraid of casting Yorkshire actors as Cathy Earnshaw. She stops short of calling it cultural appropriation. Amber Barry, a PhD researcher in Victorian literature at King’s College London, says: “The Yorkshire moors illuminate Cathy and Heathcliff’s story particularly within the context of working-class demonstrations at the time. Can we call this Wuthering Heights if such a crucial setting is reduced to a flat, vaguely gothic backdrop?” As a Bradford-born actor, I have experienced barriers in the arts first-hand, and I believe casting choices such as Fennell’s preserve a system that undervalues northern women. Of course, acting is a transformational craft – performers are expected to inhabit lives far removed from their own, myself included. But the issue is not that actors shouldn’t extend beyond their lived experience. The question is far broader: when a major production depicts a didactic novel steeped in landscape, dialect and cultural identity, why should those from that region be denied such life-changing opportunities? It’s not about choosing between A-listers and regionally authentic actors, it’s about asking why so few actors from Bradford have ever reached the visibility necessary to be considered at all.
Motion Pictures interviews Suzie Davis, production designer for Wuthering Heights 2026: With this hyper-stylized and hyper-sexualized interpretation of the literary classic, Fennell has said that she “wanted to make something that was the book that I experienced when I was 14.” Davies was intrigued as soon as she read the script. “When I read her stage directions, I remember thinking, ‘Oh my God, I can’t believe she wants to do this! How am I going to do it?’” Davies’ second project with Fennell, after Saltburn, has been “one of the most exciting experiences as a production designer. There were so many unusual yet wondrous ideas on every page, from the dollhouse to the skin room [Catherine’s bedroom]. I felt immensely privileged that we were going to try to create that subconscious vision that everyone has when they read a book or listen to a story. Everyone has their own visuals in their mind, but very rarely do you get the opportunity to bring that to life.” (...) That top shot when Heathcliff goes to see Catherine after she dies is beautifully shot, as he lumbers up that rectangular staircase to her bedroom. What does that symbolize? We nearly didn’t do those stairs. I could’ve gone with a Regency or Georgian-shaped staircase; a spiral might’ve been the obvious choice. But in this case, necessity being the mother of invention, I had one space where I could build that staircase, and I wanted to fill it as much as possible. The rectangular staircase is really unusual and makes you feel uneasy. It’s a white marble staircase with red fur hanging from the bottom to give it different textures. He slowly goes up those stairs to find Cathy dead — the power of that scene. As [Cinematographer] Linus [Sandgren] and Emerald held that shot, you hold your breath until you can’t hold it anymore. As he walks into the light at the end of the bedroom, up those stairs, that’s such a powerful moment. (Su Fang Tham)
Glamour thinks that period dramas don't need period costumes – and “Wuthering Heights” is the proof. Them explores the queerness in Nelly's character: Nelly is not a canonically queer character, and though she used queer content for shock value in Saltburn, Fennell shies away from most queer subtext in Wuthering Heights, with exceptions like a sapphic crush disappointingly framed as a jokey signifier of mental instability. But while not explicitly queer, Nelly is in a marginalized position as a servant and an unmarried woman. (In the novel, she’s sometimes called “Mrs. Dean,” but this appears to be simply an honorific; no husband is ever seen.) Though she’s surrounded by people desperately trying to negotiate marriages like business transactions, Nelly doesn't have the option to marry up, and her class status informs her view of the people and dynamics around her. (Megan Burbank) Infobae (Argentina) thinks that the film is an (intolerable) fiftyshadesofgreyfication of Wuthering Heights. Also on Infobae, Wuthering Heights (the novel) is among Amazon Mexico's best-sellers. Now, some Charli XCX's Wuthering Heights reviews: The soundtrack is an exercise in experimentation for the artist, to which she is lyrically attached above all. For long-time fans of the British artist, Wuthering Heights is a great body of work that sees her return to her earliest sound but incorporating everything she’s learned over the years and her expansive, ever-changing career. Charli reminds us again that she’s an incredible lyricist and producer, that she knows what she wants to sound and look like, and the worlds she’d like to inhabit and explore through music and art. (Toni Casal in Metal)
Overall, “Wuthering Heights” is a bold and compelling addition to xcx’s discography, highlighting her growth as an artist. From haunting lyrics to high-energy instrumentals, xcx demonstrates her versatility, blending her signature pop sound with a darker, more cinematic edge. The album makes the perfect soundtrack for the film, immersing listeners in the passion, obsession and heartbreak of the story. (Lexi Bunting in Indiana Daily Student)
But at least since Kate Bush’s ‘Wuthering Heights’, the prospect of musically reimagining the story of Catherine Earnshaw and Heathcliff – if you want to reduce it to that – must have been all too daunting. Not for Charli XCX, who, after reading Emerald Fennell’s screenplay and being asked to contribute an original song for her inevitably steamy adaptation, decided to do a full album – not a soundtrack, certainly not a score dotted with a couple of pop songs, but a conceptual record attempting to match the infernal yearning Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi arguably bring to the screen. It does – makes it more convincing, even – but the album is so front-loaded it eventually stops sounding like a passion project, which is worse than having it tumble into madness. (Konstantinos Pappis in Our Culture)
Wuthering Heights was directly inspired by the film of the same name, and I applaud Charli XCX for taking a leap of faith here by stretching her creative muscles into uncharted waters for her. I really enjoyed the majority of this album, but the last few songs were a bit too “samey” to fully realize her vision for this record. The best news from this record is that Charli XCX has rekindled her creativity and seems poised for another big breakout when she drops her next LP. (Adam Grundy in Chrous.fm)
The album that could’ve been is spelled out there: one that, like the most feverish and unrelenting of love, tortures and tears you open in delight, challenges you and takes you out of yourself, leaving you open, lacerated, raw, and dripping like a wound. Yet so many of Wuthering Heights’s songs feel too easy, especially for Charli XCX of all people. Love is a dangerous game, after all, but here you can’t help feeling Charli is playing it safe. (Lydia Wei in Paste) Infobae recommends The Tenant of Wildfell Hall.
A few more reviews of Wuthering Heights 2026:
The Age thinks ' Wuthering Heights is many things, but it’s not the novel Emily Brontë wrote". If you want a flashy romance with all the stops out, go and see the film. Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi certainly make a sizzling pair. But if you want a darker, more complex story that echoes down the generations, read the book. And by the way, it has a happy ending. (Jane Sullivan) The ending of Wuthering Heights is very sad and I cried a few actual tears, which would have been embarrassing but all of the other ladies in the theater also appeared to be crying. By the time the credits rolled to Charli XCX’s “Always Everywhere,” I needed a few minutes to get myself together before stumbling out into the lobby. True love, sex and death; I had gone through a lot. And you know what? I could probably go again. (Rachel Saslow)
To a book lover, this adaptation may seem superficial as compared to the intricate details of the novel. However, there’s only so much two hours of screen time can include. The film capitalizes on the passion and yearning in Catherine and Heathcliff’s tale and makes full use of its duration in the best way. Through her film, Fennel emphasizes the importance of emotion and message over precise accuracy. She prioritizes making the audience feel something. And it works. By foregrounding longing, chemistry, and passion, she reframes the story less as a bleak tragedy and more as an intense romance. Only a robot could watch this film and remain unaffected. Its romance is undeniable, making it a fitting Valentine’s Day watch—if you don’t mind a touch of tragedy. (Susannah Hughes) The Daily Iowan considers it 'not only an insult to the source, but to viewers’ intelligence'. I have seen my fair share of women online exclaiming how much they actually enjoyed the movie, mostly coming down to how the characters “yearn” for each other. Everyone is allowed to have their own opinions, of course. But please, I am begging you, if you’d like to watch a movie about yearning, spend your money to watch “Dracula” in theaters instead. The crumbs of these terrible people obsessing over each other are not enough to justify giving Fennel and her ego more money. (Madisyn Hunt)
The film is definitely entertaining, and I was never bored during my viewing. But I could not overcome my grievances with Fennell’s narrative and casting choices. Her version tries to turn a gothic horror into a contemporary love story with a Charli xcx soundtrack, which ultimately translates as hollow and devoid of substance on the screen. (P.B. Jernigan) The costumes were also on point, with standouts being the ones Catherine wore, specifically the red gowns that were beautiful and her bulky jewelry that some would die to wear. Charli XCX’s ambient music and flowing melodies highlighted the scenes they were set in, and made each interaction feel genuine – something that was hard for the two leading actors. It was a pleasurable surprise to hear when viewing. Although these standouts are present, it was hard to ignore the overt sexuality throughout. We get it. This is supposed to be “primal,” “sexual,” “cynical,” even. Do we really need to see Elordi’s tongue licking what’s supposed to be a wall of Catherine’s skin? Robbie was all right, but didn't really have the appeal of Catherine, and Elordi's performance was reminiscent of his Euphoria days playing the toxic teenage boyfriend, Nate Jacobs. All in all, ok, but missing the passionate mark of the book. (Lily Cole)
I walked into the theater this past weekend, cautiously optimistic but left confused and hollow. The movie’s only highlight was the cinematography. There were gorgeous shots of Catherine Earnshaw's (Margot Robbie) and Edgar Linton's (Shazad Latif) home and the northern England countryside. Emerald Fennell, the film's director, can have her tens for that — and that’s it. (Dayna Wilkerson)
The result is chaotic, confusing, and more absurd than erotic. Each of these scenes are performative, edgy moments that ultimately distract from any real storytelling or sensual tension. It’s all supposedly designed to make you gasp, and yet it’s unbearably boring. There’s greater titillation watching Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth brush hands in Pride and Prejudice. (Kirsten Saylor) Behind a paywall, The Canberra Times describes it as 'A sensual, stylised and satiric interpretation of Brontë's classic novel'. TodoLiteratura (in Spanish) has a lukewarm review.
A contributor to Mamamia says that, 'As a woman of colour, watching the new Wuthering Heights movie is a complicated experience'. GQ thinks that 'Horny Isabella Linton is the Best Part of Wuthering Heights'.
Screen Rant has the ' Wuthering Heights Family Tree Explained: How All The Characters Are Related'. 'Six Ways Emerald Fennell’s Film Differs From Brontë’s Wuthering Heights' on Grazia. Esquire has an article 'Explaining (and Debating) The Wild, Bloody Ending of “ Wuthering Heights”'. Secom has an article on the differences between Wuthering Heights 2026 and the actual novel. Elle has two editors discuss the changes.
Erica Gonzales, deputy digital editor: What did you think of Wuthering Heights, as someone who hasn’t read the book? Lauren Puckett-Pope, senior culture editor: I found it an easy, pleasurable viewing experience—no pun intended—but I did not find it a particularly enriching one. And I think that’s fascinating, given that Wuthering Heights, the novel, is the subject of such intense and lasting study. There’s a reason the book has the reputation it does both in and outside literary circles. So, even as someone who hasn’t read the whole thing—I’ve started Wuthering Heights many times, and I’ve just never made the commitment all the way to the end, forgive me—I came away from this adaptation thinking, There’s no way this is even close to what the book was going for. But Emerald Fennell, to her credit, has made it clear she’s not trying to directly translate the book to the screen. What did you think? You’ve read the book and love it. EG: This is one book I love and have reread many times. I tried going into the film not being too attached and being open-minded. I have nothing against anachronistic visuals or fashion; I loved Marie Antoinette, and I also saw parallels here to Baz Luhrmann’s Romeo + Juliet. And even though I appreciated those anachronisms in this film, I was kind of waiting to be grabbed by them.
The Guardian recommends the first ever episode of Dominic Sandbrook's new podcast, The Book Club: The Book Club The latest release from Goalhanger hears historian Dominic Sandbrook in English teacher mode, as he dissects classic novels with producer Tabitha Syrett. Luckily, it doesn’t feel like homework: their first episode, on Wuthering Heights, revels in Emily Brontë’s dark themes, confusingly-named protagonists, and the author herself – from her tragically tiny coffin to the graveyard water that may have led to her premature death. (Hannah J Davies)
ArtReview discusses ' Wuthering Heights and the Aesthetics of Surface'. LBB has an article on 'New Romantics: The ‘ Wuthering Heights’ Effect'. The Oxford Student discusses 'where consumerism overpowers Yorkshire winds'.
Treble reviews Charli XCX's Wuthering Heights album. Does it achieve the same heights (ha!) as its predecessor? Not quite; it is too intimate, perhaps, lacking in the anthemic heft that made “brat summer” inevitable. Is it a shockingly potent vision of what her artistic growth might yet be? Absolutely. (Langdon Hickman) “Wuthering Heights” may not always dazzle lyrically, but, as a mood piece connecting her old sound to something more haunted, it’s a striking triumph. More than a follow-up to “BRAT,” the album signifies a repositioning. It offers evidence that Charli xcx can weaponize both vulnerability and bravado and that sometimes the scariest place is not underground but the very house once believed to be escaped. (Presley Liu) A 17th-century manor in Yorkshire that boasts links to the Brontë sisters has been put up for sale. Hidden behind a 3m-tall stone wall, the grade I listed West Riddlesden Hall near Keighley is on the market for £1.15 million. The manor was home to a family who employed Charlotte Brontë as governess to their children in 1839, although she spent more time at another property they owned a few miles away. John Pennington, who has owned the house since 2001, said he was looking to downsize from the six-bedroom, 2.3-acre property. His timing could be fortuitous, considering the resurgence of interest in the Brontë sisters following the film adaptation of Wuthering Heights. West Riddlesden Hall was completed in 1687 for Thomas Leach, a local businessman, although some sections are believed to date to the early 15th century. John Sidgwick, who later owned the home and employed Brontë, is widely believed to have been her inspiration for the Byronic hero of Jane Eyre, Edward Rochester. [...] Jane Eyre was published in 1847 and was Brontë’s first major literary success after several ventures into poetry. During her short employment with the Sidgwicks, Brontë found she disliked childminding, often lamenting the behaviour of the “riotous, perverse, unmanageable cubs”. The author’s strained relationship with John Sidgwick’s wife Sarah can perhaps also be detected in the novel. In a letter written while she was still the family’s governess, Brontë described Sarah as devoid of “every fine feeling of every gentle and delicate sentiment”. In Jane Eyre, Rochester’s wife, Bertha Mason, dies by suicide after committing arson. West Riddlesden Hall’s sister property, East Riddlesden Hall, which was donated to the National Trust in 1934, also boasts a Brontë connection. Its dark stone walls and rose windows made up one of the primary sets for the television series of Wuthering Heights (2009), starring Tom Hardy as Heathcliff and Charlotte Riley as Catherine Earnshaw, as well as a range of other screen adaptations of the Emily Brontë book. The National Trust is currently hosting an exhibition, Lights, Camera, Brontë, about the manor’s prominence in film and television interpretations of the novel since the 1920s. (Fintan Hogan)
The Indian Express has an account of a recent trip to the moors by an Oxford scholar. El País (Spain) recommends a trip to Yorkshire. Infobae (in Spanish) features Anne Brontë.
A couple of Brontë Parsonage alerts for today and tomorrow, February 17 and 18:
Tues 17 Feb, 10am - 4pm Servant's Room, Brontë Parsonage Museum
Join storyteller Sophia Hatfield for entertaining stories and songs inspired by the ordinary folk who lived, worked and walked amidst the Brontë landscape. Featuring famous Yorkshire folk tales inspired by the servants who lived and worked at the Brontë Parsonage, choose an object to uncover a short story, featuring original live music, a curious collection of Victorian props and a whole host of charming characters. Whatever your age, expect to be transported to a world of fairies, boggarts, magic and mayhem!
Wild Wednesday: Haunt me! craft workshop
Wed 18 Feb, 10am - 3pm Brontë Event Space in the Old School Room
To mark the release of the new cinema adaptation of Wuthering Heights, join artist Julia Ogden in creating some mini film posters in celebration. Be as wild as you like! Everyone welcome. Suitable for ages 7+, with some simpler activities for younger children.
More Recent Articles
|
%20(1).v1.jpg)
