(By Justine Castellon / for Just Reading Nook) Why it took me so long to watch this? I’ll be honest: I put off watching this for months. The early reviews were all over the place. Some critics called it “astonishingly bad,” while others said it was a “gasp-inducing thrill ride.” Plus, I’ve always been loyal to Emily Brontë’s novel, so I wasn’t eager to spend two hours on someone else’s take on a book I care about. Wuthering Heights isn’t just something I’ve read; I’ve defended it, debated it, and come back to it many times. Seeing an adaptation that critics called either a masterpiece or a total misreading felt risky. So I waited. I let the conversation die down, ignored the hot takes, and finally watched it when I felt ready.

Here’s what I found.

The Basics

Emerald Fennell, the Oscar-winning filmmaker known for Promising Young Woman and Saltburn, wrote and directed this adaptation. It was produced by Fennell, Josey McNamara, and Margot Robbie, who also stars in the film. The movie was released in theaters on February 13, 2026, by Warner Bros. It runs for 136 minutes, cost about $80 million to make, and earned over $242 million at the box office, making it a clear commercial success. You can now watch it on HBO Max.

The Cast

• Margot Robbie as Catherine “Cathy” Earnshaw
• Jacob Elordi as Heathcliff
• Hong Chau as Nelly Dean
• Shazad Latif as Edgar Linton
• Alison Oliver as Isabella Linton
• Martin Clunes and Ewan Mitchell complete the supporting cast.

The film’s visuals are by cinematographer Linus Sandgren. The score is by Anthony Willis, who has worked with Fennell before, and there are original songs from Charli XCX..

Is It Faithful to the Book?

Short answer: not really, and that’s intentional.

Fennell has said openly that this is the Wuthering Heights she imagined when she was fourteen. The story is almost entirely focused on the doomed romantic obsession between Cathy and Heathcliff, and much of the novel’s second half is left out. That second half is important. It’s where Brontë’s main ideas come through: the generational cruelty, how Heathcliff’s trauma turns into revenge and affects Hareton and the younger Catherine, and the slow, difficult path to healing. Without that, you get a love story that is intense, physical, and beautiful to watch, but it lacks the moral depth that makes the novel more than just a tragic romance.

The film also removes the novel’s racial subtext. In the book, Heathcliff’s unclear background is both a class and a racial issue, but in the film, that tension is mostly left out. Some reviewers criticized this choice, saying it took away one of the book’s more radical themes. Nelly Dean, who is the narrator and moral center in the novel, is more of a supporting character here. She is present, but she no longer has the narrative authority that makes her such a complex and unreliable guide in Brontë’s original.

What the film really focuses on is the feeling of obsession, shown through Fennell’s style of eroticism, class tension, and gothic excess. Several critics pointed out how much screen time is given to sex and physical intensity. They argued that the film replaces Brontë’s “spite, cruelty, and emotional violence” with something more stylized and modern, more like a collection of 19th-century rebellious images than a true psychological portrait. Others disagreed, saying the sensuality is the point. They believe Fennell turned the novel’s intensity into something physical instead of literary, and that this is a valid, if loose, way to adapt the story rather than betray it.

So, are the film and the book “almost the same”? No. This is a reinterpretation, not a direct translation. If you want a faithful adaptation, you’ll be disappointed. But if you see it as Fennell’s response to the novel instead of a retelling, there’s more to enjoy.

The Direction

Most people agree that Fennell’s visual style is the film’s biggest strength. The half-ruined Earnshaw house and the lush, overly bright Linton estate are shown almost like two different states of mind, not just places. One is raw and stormy, the other is polished to the point of feeling stifling. This is a clever way to show the novel’s class divide, even though the film leaves out some other themes. Sandgren’s cinematography got a lot of praise, even from critics who didn’t like the rest of the film. The score, along with Charli XCX’s songs, gives the movie a moody, modern-gothic feel that fits with Fennell’s Saltburn style.

The biggest disagreement is about the film’s tone. Some reviewers thought Fennell didn’t understand, or didn’t want to deal with, the harshness of Brontë’s original, turning a brutal book into more of a “swoony” romance. Others said the opposite: that Fennell actually focused even more on the story’s cruelty than most adaptations, but showed it through open sexuality and kink instead of the quieter psychological cruelty in the book. Either way, Fennell puts her own strong point of view on the story instead of fading into the background. Depending on your taste, that’s either what makes the film interesting or what makes it frustrating.

The Performances

As a film, it isn’t perfect. Some reviewers have said the plot is a bit loose, and I agree that sometimes it relies more on nostalgia than on real story tension. But as a look at what happened to a whole generation of Andys, it’s surprisingly, maybe even unintentionally, one of the most honest studio films about the media industry in years.

Robbie and Elordi carry the film, and their chemistry is where critical opinion actually converges the most: even reviewers who hated everything else about the movie tended to admit the two leads generate real heat together. Elordi’s Heathcliff, though, drew a specific and recurring criticism — that casting him makes Heathcliff too conventionally sympathetic and appealing, sanding down the character’s essential menace. Brontë’s Heathcliff is supposed to repel you a little even as he pulls you in; several critics felt Elordi’s version skips the repulsion and goes straight to smolder, which changes the emotional math of the whole story.

Robbie’s performance as Cathy got mixed reviews. Some praised her for showing the character’s wildness and self-destructive side, while others thought she wasn’t the right fit for a role that needs someone less polished and more raw. Hong Chau’s Nelly was a highlight for many critics, bringing depth to a role that the script doesn’t always support. Alison Oliver’s Isabella Linton also stands out, especially in the darker second half of the film, where her story becomes one of the most unsettling parts of the movie.

Critical Reception, in Brief

The film’s Rotten Tomatoes score ranged from the high 50s to low 70s, depending on when you looked. That tells you how divisive it was. This wasn’t a movie everyone agreed on; it sparked a lot of debate. Most critics said it was visually striking and full of energy, but not exactly “high literature.” It’s a film with real style, but not always a lot of depth.

My Verdict

Was the wait worth it? Honestly, I’m glad I waited until the buzz faded, because it let me watch the film on its own terms instead of comparing it directly to Brontë. Seen that way, it’s a good-looking, well-acted, and truly divisive film. As an adaptation—as the Wuthering Heights—it falls short, and it doesn’t really try not to. Fennell made her own version, not Brontë’s. Whether that’s a good thing depends on what you want from the film.

If you love the novel like I do, expect this film to be a companion piece, not a direct translation. You’ll probably still find things to debate. I definitely did.

Wuthering Heights is now streaming on Max

---

---

---

---