Wuthering Heights

[GCAcademic]

Anyone planning to see this? From the trailer I was expecting it to be marmite and not in any way a straight adaptation of the novel, but the reviews I've seen so far are universally uncomplimentary. I'd already booked to see it, so will go in with an open mind!

I enjoyed it was certainly different to the original adaptation. Liked Robbie and Eloudi. Clunes was good tho he didn’t seem to age as she got older he still looked the same which was a bit silly. Thought the BDSM was unnecessary tbh again a bit silly but all in all was good. Gotta say Robbie is naturally beautiful.

I just saw this, and I did enjoy it, but….
i agree that the visuals were stunning in a Disney sort of way (no doubt the US market will think that’s what real Yorkshire women wore and how they decorated their houses) and Margot Robbie as Disney princess nails it (and no trace of a Yorkshire accent!) Also thought she was too old for Jacob as Heathcliff, who, though very sexy, was not remotely swarthy looking. Whitewashed.
Martin Clunes was comical, particularly when his teeth went bad 🤣
The beautiful N Yorks moors were not showcased as they could have been and they must have blown the budget on artificial torrential rain.
The characters weren’t gritty enough for me and there were definitely 50shades of grey in the sex scenes!

Just home from the cinema now and thought it was brilliant; aesthetically stunning, camp, funny and dramatic. Jacob Elordi was very hot, but the sex scenes did start to feel gratuitous.

@bigTillyMint I kept thinking the same about the rain generation and then wondered if anyone else would think about such a weird aspect, so glad to see I’m in good company.

Alison Oliver as Isabella stood out for me…E.F. does love to reuse actors across her films.

I don't think any production has had actors of the right age. When Cathy dies she's about 19 and Heathcliff is 20.

But MR is 39!
At least JE is only 28

I have just seen it and I absolutely adored it!!!

I watched the 1939 version when I was about 14 and I fell in love with Lawrence olivier, wuthering heights and all classic literature and old films at once, so it was a big deal for me. The book is absolutely stunning, I can't believe it was written by an isolated young woman.

I read all the reviews and saw and the internet chatter, and went looking forward to really hating it, but i was brilliantly, amazingly surprised. I thought it was a beautiful, haunting, astonishing homage to the book, the earlier film and the author.

I guess the whole thing hits people differently, that's all. Currently struggling with unrequited love might have helped......

And I don't even fancy Jacob elordi, which i guess would help sway many.

As an extra note, Martin clunes was extraordinary and he's not even mentioned in any of the reviews, I didn't even know he was in it. His role is a mix of Mr earnshaw - who was kindly, generous and loved- and Hindley, a pathetic demon. He encapsulated both brilliantly.

Yes, they changed things - i do wish they'd left heathcliff and Cathy unrequited, but it's 2026. And for all the talk of sex scenes and BDSM, not one single nipple or buttock. That must have been a conscious decision.

Thank you to the pp who suggested the BBC player version. That's the rest of my week sorted!!

She’s 35, not 39.

Oh yes! My bad.
still 16 years older than 19 though!

I think JE looks as old as MR. Both absolutely beautiful. It’s Hollywood, they always use older actor to play young roles-Grease anybody? It’s also good to see sex scenes written by a woman for a change.
The young Heathcliff was fabulous. I didn’t realise it was the actor who was in Adolescence.

@RipplePleaseIt’s « you are more myself than I am »

I enjoyed the sex scenes, I actually found them sexy unlike a lot of scenes in films/on TV.

It’s Hollywood, they always use older actor to play young roles-Grease anybody

Grease was nearly 50 years ago. It’s more the other way around for female actresses!

@Words
Thank you for that.
A deeply beautiful quote.

I found it refreshing to have an actress in her 30’s play the role, I’m sick of older men starring with much younger women in films.

There's nothing refreshing about it. The character dies at the age of 19. Margot is almost twice that age.

I saw this on Monday with my book group - we went thinking we’d hate it, but we all emerged really liking it!

I think this film is a litmus test - if you ONLY want the original author’s voice and accept no modern remixing/interpretations, you should probably stick to the 1978 tv series on iPlayer and save yourself the aggro.

But if you don’t mind seeing classic stories filtered through someone else’s lens as long as they’re trying to do something interesting, this interpretation is pretty enjoyable. Either way, it’s not just a fake Bridgerton version of WH. You can see Fennell knows the book and all the literary analysis/ discourse about it, AND she’s worked quite a bit of it into the film even as she’s altering and merging some of the characters. The casting and repositioning of Nelly and Edgar also give quite a strong modern commentary on race, class, and agency in a way that I thought was stronger for not being yet another aspect of the Heathcliff/Cathy relationship.

As for downsides - for me the sex scenes (which I agree are just suggestive, compared to what’s on Netflix) slowed the pace and I was glad when they petered out so the plot could resume. But then I also loved all the knowing allusions to art and cinema throughout - “L’Escarpolette” appearing as it did was especially droll.

😄are you from Fennell's pr team

this has to be the most pretentious review I have read

Meow, @HRTQueen. What a charmer you are.

I saw it today.

Thought it was rubbish.

If you are going to take liberties with a classic book, at least make an interesting and original version. Even the sex scenes were dull. The casting of Cathy and Heathcliff were misjudged.

Martin Clunes was good fun and the music was good, otherwise no thanks

I loved it. I thought it was an immersive experience and a new lens for the book. I would have been more disappointed if it was just a faithful remake—-we’ve seen those before. I don’t agree with the critics who say it’s presented romantically. It’s dark and touches on themes of family trauma and class and how they shape decisions. I liked the stylised sets —I thought it was original. I thought thr chemistry between C and H was electric and I think the saucy bits elevated the tension. It was different, creative and thought provoking. Mind I didn’t want a faithful remake. I could see it as a natural step after Saltburn as I think it shared some familiar themes

A Guardian writer’s view:

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2026/feb/20/rough-sex-defence-emerald-fennell-wuthering-heights-isabella-linton

It’s all shock value and provocation, but at the cost of the story’s emotional core. EB wrote a tragedy about how violence repeats itself generationally that Fennell ignored. Fennell turns it into something sexy and tries to make it palatable and fails dismally. I don’t think it’s bold. I think it’s cheap. Fennell is just a shock jock.

I saw it tonight -loved it ❤️

It just stops being interesting when adaptations are always unfaithful in the same way. When they always focus on the Heathcliff-Cathy relationship, artificially inflate it to being the main plot, and delete the second generation. I mean, do something new, for fuck’s sake. Follow Heathcliff for his missing three years. Focus more on the second generation than the first. Make Edgar more attractive than Heathcliff.

I just saw this one last night. Ho hum. The one bit I thought really worked was the Isabella-Heathcliff relationship, because Alison Oliver was funny and unnerving, but it took away from H’s viciousness, because he’s not violent to her, even when she insults his illiteracy. Heathcliff isn’t vicious or cruel in this version — he doesn’t kill anyone, beat up anyone, hang any puppies, dig up any coffins. Cathy is more monstrous than he is in this version. I also quite liked a duplicitous Nelly being given a reason for her actions, although she’s essentially a completely different character.

Follow Heathcliff for his missing three years.

I just bought a book that does this - Ill Will by Michael Stewart.

@Couronne Making Heathcliff illiterate was just stupid, of course Heathcliff can read and write. There was no Hareton in this adaptation, which was handy for Fennell to ignore, because if there were it made a nonsense of Heathcliff stopping Hareton from learning to read and write, because if he didn't value himself then it would be pointless denying someone something for spite he thought was worthless anyway.

How could he have understood property law, succession law, bought the properties and so on whilst not being able to read?