"WUTHERING HEIGHTS"

(2026), directed by Emerald Fennell

An exercise in self-indulgence

My expectations had not been very high, but still, while going to see the newest adaptation of Emily Brontë’s "Wuthering Heights", I had hoped for something interesting and worthwhile. The 1847 novel is a brutal and  brooding piece of fiction: very complex and psychologically rich. So far, none of  the cinematic adaptations has managed to depict  all the nuances and subtexts. Many chose to omit the whole second part, concentrating only on the Heathcliff and Cathy’s story.  Yet, even the longer TV adaptations that did include the second generation of characters still didn’t succeed in conveying the book’s depth and intensity. Could this new version be different?

The first red flag was to market the film as “the greatest love story of all time’. Everyone who has read the book knows it is a misconception. To me, the story has always revolved around obsession and, most of all, revenge. Heathcliff’s every action is driven by wrath. Cathy and Heathcliff’s relationship is very intense and passionate, but there’s never a mention of sex.  The tension between them is so palpable just because they cannot have one another. And their deep connection is the connection of the souls. They want to possess these whole. In one if the most iconic and pivotal moments in the novel, Cathy says,  "He is more myself than I am. Whatever our souls are made of, his and mine are the same". Of course, you might say,  a clergyman’s daughter in the Victorian times couldn't have written an openly sexual novel,  but I truly think that the book’s central relation was too profound and consuming to be reduced to mere sexual lust. Heathcliff and Cathy were soulmates in the most brutal and most profound meaning of this word. So it is very unsatisfying to see that for Emerald Fennel everything in the story is motivated by sensual and sexual drive.  Why, even Joseph, a grumpy and devout old man in the book, is here a horny young chap, very much into BDSM. That is probably why one of the most iconic scenes in the novel was totally not included in the movie – when Cathy’s ghost haunts the Wuthering Heights and wants to be let in through the window. One would think that this scene would fit into the film’s fairy tale visuals, but no… Emerald Fennel purely concentrates on bodily experiences.

While watching the film, I was constantly asking myself these two questions: why did Fennell choose to adapt the novel? And for whom was it made?  If you are a fan of the book, then I reckon you want to do the book justice in your own adaptation. You want to respect the original material that so inspired you that you choose to present it on screen…. That’s why I think Fennel misunderstood the novel. Why would she otherwise present it as an erotic fever dream? I also think she predominately made it for herself , indulging in every flashy and lustful moment she could put into her film. She probably thinks it all bold and edgy - her sexed-up and kinky script, her casting choices, the ethnicity mismatch, the costume choices and the production design. Yes, the novel was definitely bold and edgy as well. But sadly, in so many different ways.

I am absolutely no purist. I love artistic playfulness and some bold and original takes on the classics. Some work surprisingly well – the modern Sherlock Holmes TV series with Benedict Cumberbatch. Or "Clueless", a tongue in cheek modern retelling of Jane Austen’s "Emma". However, all should be done with class, subtlety and respect for the original material and its characters. This most recent version of "Wuthering Heights" lacks all these elements. It is superficial and mono-thematic, bordering on parody. Moreover, it changes the very essence of certain personages (for example Nelly - the manipulator, the quirky masochist Isabella and the aforementioned Joseph).

Were there absolutely no redeeming qualities? Well, I did like some of the misty cinematography and some of Jacob Elordi’s (Heathcliff) wounded and brooding glances. However, I seriously cannot think of any more positive elements. Margot Robbie’s Tirol milkmaid as Cathy didn’t work for me. She did possess some of Cathy’s spirit and haughtiness, but her presence and acting had  too much of a modern vibe.

Fennel’s adaptation is not as preposterous as the 2022 Netflix adaptation of Austen’s "Persuasion (starring Dakota Johnson), but it does come dangerously close…. I think I might end by encouraging everyone to put Kate Bush’s haunting single "Wuthering Heights" on, as it is the only right adaptation of Emily Jane’s novel to date. And that says a lot!

12 February 2026
Marta Oliehoek-Samitowska