The latest film adaptation of Emily Brontë’s novel, Wuthering Heights, directed by Emerald Fennell and starring Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi, opened in theatres on February 13. This version, promoted by Warner Bros., has drawn sharp criticism for its departure from the original text and questionable artistic choices, a reaction that centers heavily on Jacob Elordi Wuthering Heights portrayal and the film’s overall tone and vision.
Studio’s Unusual Guidelines Highlight the Film’s Distance from Its Source
Just before release, Warner Bros. instructed critics not to refer to the film simply as Wuthering Heights, but to include quotation marks, signaling the adaptation’s significant divergence from the 1847 novel. This unusual request hinted that the film was not intended as a faithful representation but rather as a creative reinterpretation that plays loosely with the source material. Critics responded with similar skepticism, viewing the directive as a foreshadowing of the film’s strange and disjointed approach.
Fennell’s Narrative Focus Omits Key Themes of the Original
Emerald Fennell’s version cuts the second half of Brontë’s novel, removing critical themes surrounding inherited cruelty and redemption. Instead, the film centers almost exclusively on the tempestuous relationship between Catherine, portrayed by Margot Robbie, and Heathcliff, played by Jacob Elordi. This choice narrows the story, concentrating on their dysfunctional bond but losing the complexity and depth that make the original enduringly powerful.
Tonally Conflicted and Often Unconvincing Performances
The film’s first half leans toward a farcical tone, undermining the intended emotional weight of the story. The interactions between Robbie and Elordi are marked by awkwardness and unintended humor, such as the scene where Heathcliff shoves grass into Catherine’s mouth, which the audience greeted with nervous laughter. Hong Chau’s portrayal of the servant Nelly provides a constant observer to their antics, but it is little relief from the film’s uncertain mood, as it struggles to balance its darker material with misguided attempts at sensuality and levity.
Poor Casting Choices Undermine Key Characters
Jacob Elordi’s performance as Heathcliff is a modest effort, attempting to portray both the character’s bitterness and a yearning soul. However, Margot Robbie is widely regarded as miscast, particularly given her age and the youthful naivety required for Catherine’s early scenes. The decision to cast Elordi, whose original character in the novel is described as a “dark-skinned gypsy,” as a distinctly white figure, raises questions about the film’s racial representation. Furthermore, the film casts Shazad Latif, an actor of color, as Edgar—traditionally a white, privileged character—adding to the problematic recasting decisions.
Visual Style Offers Lavish but Distracting Aesthetics
Fennell serves up visuals drenched in excess, with elaborate costumes and opulent set designs that border on overwhelming. The film’s visual maximalism includes meticulous close-ups of extravagant foods and ornate settings that draw attention, yet fail to compensate for the film’s numerous narrative flaws. This emphasis on aesthetics over substance creates moments that feel more decorative than meaningful, amplifying the film’s lack of cohesion. Even frequent rain-soaked scenes, intended to enhance atmosphere, feel like another attempt to distract from the story’s weaknesses.
Second Half’s Shift to Melodrama Falls Flat
As the story progresses, it shifts into a melodramatic tragedy marked by toxic romance. After Catherine chooses Edgar over Heathcliff, the film follows Heathcliff taking Edgar’s sister Isabella as a wife, but this plot development is portrayed in a shallow and clichéd manner that prompts eye-rolls rather than emotional engagement. The film fails to effectively explore Heathcliff’s darker, vengeful side or the complicated dynamics between characters, resulting in a shallow narrative swamp that leaves little impact on viewers.
Fennell’s Approach Spurs Frustration and Disbelief Among Audiences
From the opening scene’s darkly humorous execution gag to the overall tonal inconsistencies, the film often feels like it is at odds with itself and its audience. Critics suggest that Fennell’s vision lacks seriousness, leading to a disjointed adaptation that mocks its own source material. The film’s blend of farce, failed sensuality, and over-the-top visual elements alienates viewers who expect a more thoughtful or faithful retelling of Brontë’s work.
Implications for Future Adaptations and Actor Reputations
The widely panned reception of this version of Wuthering Heights poses questions about the viability of such radical reinterpretations of classic literature, especially when they risk alienating both fans and new audiences. Jacob Elordi’s involvement, marking a reunion with Fennell after their prior collaboration, adds a layer of scrutiny to his rising career, as his portrayal struggles to convince critics. Moving forward, filmmakers and actors may face increased pressure to respect the core elements of cherished stories while balancing creative ambition.
“I’m no stickler for literary fidelity, and for any film to match or surpass its source material, a filmmaker has to make their own bold choices. Yet Fennell seems to possess a fundamental misunderstanding of what kind of story, whether it’s Brontë‘s or her own, she is exactly trying to tell here.” – unnamed film critic
“You’ll roll your eyes so hard that you’ll injure your head.” – unnamed film critic
“Perhaps Fennell is trying to channel the absurd comedic magic of the 1994 cult film Clifford, in which the fortysomething Martin Short plays a hyperactive 10-year-old boy.” – unnamed film critic
“The film’s opening scene, set at a public execution, in which Fennell constructs a gallows-humour gag whose mileage depends on your appreciation for the appropriate usage of the words hang and hung. But that joke, like the rest of this adaptation, is ultimately on the audience.” – unnamed film critic
