Gales whip across the barren moors as lightning splits a sky darkened by gray clouds. Rain pelts against the slate roof and narrow windows of the Gothic Yorkshire manor, encompassed by the harsh wind and storm. Inside, characters mill about the beautiful set, overcome with lust and jealousy. Welcome to Emerald Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights.”

On Feb. 13, the newest adaptation of the popular Emily Brontë novel, “Wuthering Heights,” came to theaters. Bringing in $32.8 million on opening day, the film’s earnings fell drastically the second weekend to just $14.2 million, a 56.8% reduction that fell short of projected revenue.

Since 1920, “Wuthering Heights” has been adapted over 30 times in film and TV series.  Each release faces the challenge of honoring the original novel while creating something fresh and relevant. Wuthering Heights is among the most popular books in the high school curriculum, including in West High’s own AP English Literature and Composition course. The enduring influence of the original novel is in part why the release of this particular version has attracted a great deal of attention. However, what makes this release especially sensational is the cast’s reputation. The lineup includes A-list actress  Margot Robbie, who starred in 2023’s highest-grossing film “Barbie,” and Jacob Elordi, who rose to fame in 2019 after the hit show “Euphoria.” Elordi’s impressive filmography also includes a leading role in 2023’s “Priscilla.” 

“Wuthering Heights” marks actor and filmmaker Emerald Fennell’s third film, following the experimental and provocative “Promising Young Woman” and “Saltburn,” in which Elordi also took a leading role. Costing $80 million, “Wuthering Heights” was produced by Media Rights Capital and Robbie’s production company, LuckyChap, with Warner Bros. taking charge of distribution.

The original novel follows the toxic relationship between the wealthy Catherine Earnshaw (Cathy) and Heathcliff, a man taken in by the Earnshaw family as a young child. The story showcases a generational cycle of possessive love, class conflict and revenge in a way that was revolutionary for its 1847 publication. Brontë’s nonidyllic depiction of love’s sometimes destructive, obsessive and vengeful nature has resonated across generations, keeping “Wuthering Heights” an influential novel after almost 175 years.  

As reflected in the quotation marks surrounding the title of the most recent movie, Fennell has stressed that this adaptation is a reimagining of the original novel based on her own interpretation. Fennell’s movie adaptation cuts the entire second half of the novel and eliminates or alters several important characters to the point that some fans question its status as an adaptation. Since before its release, these significant changes have drawn immense criticism. 

Erasing race

Some critics have argued that the casting of Elordi as Heathcliff is culturally insensitive. In the novel, Brontë makes no direct reference to race, but characterizes Heathcliff as a “dark-skinned gypsy” which many readers have interpreted to mean Heathcliff is Black, South Asian or Romani. Staying true to the novel, the  2011 adaptation cast James Howson, a Black British actor. The original plot also supports this view, as Heathcliff is subject to prevalent classism, and race is a major factor in Catherine’s decision to marry Edgar Linton, the Earnshaws’ blonde, blue-eyed neighbor. As such, Heathcliff’s position as an outsider and his rejection due to his ethnicity are what drive his anger. In contrast to Howson, Elordi is proud of his Basque descent and spent his childhood in Brisbane, Australia. On the flip side, Edgar Linton is portrayed by Shazed Latif, who is of mixed Punjabi, English and Scottish ancestry. This casting ignores the complex role that racism played in the historic novel and Brontë’s exploration of how prejudice shapes identity, belonging and romantic relationships — themes that are still applicable in today’s society.

However, Elordi’s Heathcliff is not the only casting choice Fennell has been criticized for. Robbie is of book-accurate Scottish descent, but thousands of fans have agreed that her facial features are too modern for a historical film: a term deemed “iPhone face” in popular culture. Robbie has straight white veneers, bleached hair and has likely undergone Botox or other cosmetic procedures. These modern beauty treatments starkly contrast the 19th-century setting. Furthermore, Robbie is 35 years old, whereas Cathy is meant to be a 16-year-old girl. While Fennell’s Cathy and Heathcliff are both far older than their literary counterparts, Robbie is seven years older than Elordi and exceeds her character in age by nearly two decades. Aging up actors isn’t a crime in itself, but their unmarried status and the script’s youthful banter seem to suggest that Heathcliff and Cathy are meant to be much younger than they appear in Fennell’s adaptation. Conversely, the younger ages of Heathcliff and Catherine better fit the narrative that their selfish and immature impulses drive the couple’s toxic relationship.

Beyond the controversial casting, several major characters have been removed entirely — including Hindley, Cathy’s older brother. As children, Hindley cruelly mistreats Heathcliff, and later, through reckless behavior and gambling, loses the Wuthering Heights estate to him. His downfall leaves his son, Hareton — another erased character — effectively in Heathcliff’s control. In the film, Hindley’s bitter, alcoholic nature is instead transferred to Mr. Earnshaw, who in the original novel is a compassionate figure and the first to show Heathcliff genuine kindness and support. Fennell hoped the cuts would streamline the film and bring focus to the relationship between Heathcliff and Cathy, but many believe that their relationship is not strong enough to carry a meaningful plot.

Nuance or nymphomania?

Since the film’s early stages of production, its “erotic” marketing has raised questions. Many high schoolers — and even middle schoolers — read Wuthering Heights, yet the movie is rated R, meaning viewers under 17 must be accompanied by a parent or guardian in theaters.

Even in the trailer, the film seems highly sexual, with suggestive symbols, partial nudity, tense music and heavy breathing. The movie follows through on these characteristics right from the beginning: the opening scene depicts a man hanging from a pole and townspeople taking pleasure in his death. While it contains few graphic displays, there are consistent scenes implying sexual acts. For instance, Heathcliff and Cathy are regularly intimate in public places, and Isabella, Cathy’s sister-in-law, is even chained to the floor and made to act like a dog. Critics claim that this “hypersexualism” is distasteful and a betrayal of the original novel that contains no explicit content. 

In her work, Brontë portrays passion and toxic love without eroticism. This asexual portrayal helps to emphasize her theme of how emotional and spiritual connections transcend physical desire. Toxicity isn’t just about sexual desires, like it’s portrayed in the modern world, but also about the way selfishness, jealousy and possessiveness are displayed in regular interactions. While the sexual innuendos may be meant to create sensation and shock, they risk overshadowing the complexities within relationships. There was rarely a scene that wasn’t sexual, and as a result, the characters felt shallow and limited to desire rather than the motivation or ambition they possessed in the novel.

Technicolor tones

In fact, eliciting certain feelings and sensations may have been the main reasoning behind many aspects of the film’s production. The vivid costumes stray far from historical accuracy, with Robbie dressed in everything from Tudor fashion to 1950s cellophane wrappings. In an interview with Vogue, Fennell explained that she picked inspiration from a variety of internet looks that she thought suited different characters and evoked awe rather than a specific period of time. While beautifully done, historical film experts argue that they pull audiences out of the historical setting while failing to convey a meaning beyond aesthetics. Makeup follows the same trend, with Robbie regularly appearing in full modern glam complete with blush, matte lipstick and eyeliner.

In her quest for flashy costuming, Fennell seems to have forgotten a vital aspect of filmmaking: making viewers care about the characters. With only a few moments of non-sexual interaction between Heathcliff and Cathy, their intense relationship feels confusing and out of place — it’s as if Fennell expected the audience’s “horniness” alone to carry them through the two-hour-and-16-minute runtime. Upon finishing the film, it feels as if the audience still does not know the characters, their personalities or motivations. 

Despite all the criticism, there is one unifier among critics of “Wuthering Heights”: the gorgeous cinematography. Sweeping shots of the Yorkshire moors accompany unique angles and vibrant color grading that turn the film into a visual feast. Director of Photography Linus Sandgren chose to shoot on 35mm film, giving each frame a unique grain that is often missing from modern, digitally-shot productions. The vibrant visuals bring to life the passionate yet toxic relationship between Heathcliff and Catherine. 

The “height” of cinema?

Ultimately, “Wuthering Heights” is a film caught between modern spectacle and literary tradition. From a historical and literary perspective, the movie falls short—stripping away the psychological nuance, social tensions and emotional complexity that gave Brontë’s Wuthering Heights its lasting power. For viewers familiar with Emily Brontë’s original vision, the result can feel less like reinterpretation and more like reduction. Yet judged on modern terms, the emphasis on spectacle may be exactly what gives the film its appeal. It is bold, visually intoxicating and designed to provoke reaction rather than reflection. While it may lack historical authenticity and literary depth, it delivers intensity, glamour and shock — qualities that resonate strongly with contemporary audiences.