If you want better cultural representation
Choose Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man. It scores 5.0 vs 1.9 for cultural representation, with a 3.7 overall score.
Wuthering Heights Movie Review
Bottom Line
Choose it for lavish visuals, bold costumes, strong music, and a deliberately modern, erotic spin. Skip it if you want Brontë fidelity, deeper class-and-race themes, restrained style, or a romance that consistently lands emotionally.
Best for
Best for viewers who want a lavish, sensual, highly stylized period melodrama and are comfortable treating the novel as a launching point rather than a blueprint.
Not for
Poor fit for Brontë purists, younger viewers, or anyone who prioritizes faithful themes, restrained pacing, and a consistently convincing central romance.
Verdict
This Wuthering Heights is easiest to admire as an audacious visual object rather than a faithful literary adaptation. Reviewers repeatedly praise the cinematography, production design, costumes, score, and supporting cast, and a sizable group is swept up by its sensual, maximalist energy. The harder sell is the core drama: reactions to Robbie and Elordi’s chemistry range from electric to nonexistent, while pacing and runtime draw frequent complaints. The largest objection is what the reinterpretation leaves behind—especially class, race, revenge, character complexity, and the novel’s second-generation consequences. Even the sexual approach splits opinion, with some finding it provocative and others unexpectedly tame or troubling in its treatment of abuse. The result is visually confident, emotionally uneven, and unusually dependent on how much freedom you want an adaptation to take.
Feature Scorecards
Summary
47 reviewed features-
Very positive 4.5-5.03 (6%)
-
Positive 3.5-4.413 (28%)
-
Neutral 2.5-3.421 (45%)
-
Negative 1.5-2.49 (19%)
-
Very negative below 1.51 (2%)
Pros highlights
-
The film’s look is its broadest area of agreement: bold color, texture, gowns, weather, and heightened gothic imagery make it visually memorable even for many detractors.
-
Sets and interiors are among the most praised elements, with lavish color, texture, and scale offset by occasional criticism that spaces look artificial, over-designed, or tonally mismatched.
-
The costumes are widely admired for sumptuous color and spectacle, even by reviewers who object to their deliberate period inaccuracy or occasional excess.
-
Enjoyment is highly audience-dependent: admirers call it a blast or irresistibly watchable, while detractors describe stretches as dull, boring, or an ordeal.
-
The photography is one of the clearest strengths, repeatedly praised for sweeping Yorkshire landscapes, bold contrast, moody textures, and strikingly cinematic compositions.
-
Supporting players are a strong point, with Alison Oliver, Hong Chau, the younger actors, and several secondary performers repeatedly singled out for lively or nuanced work.
Cons highlights
-
The central romance is deeply divisive: some viewers are swept up by the yearning and toxicity, while others find it thin, hollow, awkward, or less sensual than advertised.
-
Most reviewers agree this is a very loose reinterpretation that removes major characters and themes; some welcome that freedom, but many see the departures as the film’s defining flaw.
-
The story earns much less consensus than the craft, with repeated criticism that the streamlined romance feels hollow or reductive despite isolated praise for its emotional or pulpy appeal.
-
The erotic approach divides viewers from both directions: some object to its fetishized or abusive framing, while others are surprised by how tame or chaste it feels compared with the marketing.
-
The leads are polarizing: Elordi often earns praise for brooding physicality, while Robbie has both strong supporters and repeated complaints about fit, age, or characterization.
-
The film can provoke tears, tension, and strong feeling, but a substantial group of reviewers reports emotional distance or numbness despite the lavish presentation.
Cast & Creators
-
ComposerThe original songs are often described as electric, immersive, or perfectly matched to the film’s heightened mood, though a minority find the modern cues distracting or out of place.
-
CinematographerSandgren’s cinematography is one of the film’s strongest consensus wins, repeatedly praised for sweeping moorland imagery, dramatic contrast, and immersive visual scale.
-
HeathcliffElordi generally fares well, with frequent praise for his physicality, brooding intensity, and screen presence, although some critics still object to the casting or find the characterization too limited.
-
IsabellaOliver is one of the most dependable supporting standouts, repeatedly praised for comic timing, scene-stealing energy, and the strange vitality she brings to Isabella.
-
ComposerWillis’s score earns strong approval for its haunting, sweeping emotional force, even from critics who think the movie itself fails to deliver comparable feeling.
-
Mr. EarnshawClunes draws strong notices for turning Mr. Earnshaw into a vivid, cruel, and sometimes darkly entertaining presence.
Compared With Category Average
Compared with other Movies, this product is above average in makeup quality, cinematography, score quality, near average in costume design, entertainment value, below average in theme depth, cultural representation, realism.
Comparison summary
47 compared features-
Above average 0.4+ pts higher4 (9%)
-
Same as average within 0.3 pts21 (45%)
-
Below average 0.4+ pts lower22 (47%)
Largest category differences
| Attribute | This product | Category average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| theme depth | 2.2 | 3.7 | -1.5 |
| cultural representation | 1.9 | 3.5 | -1.6 |
| realism | 1.8 | 3.5 | -1.7 |
| age appropriateness | 1.0 | 2.7 | -1.7 |
| cast chemistry | 2.9 | 4.2 | -1.2 |
| rewatch value | 2.0 | 3.6 | -1.6 |
| lead performance | 3.4 | 4.4 | -1.0 |
| faithfulness to source material | 2.6 | 3.6 | -1.0 |
Consider This Instead
If you want better lead performance
Choose Wicked: For Good. It scores 4.9 vs 3.4 for lead performance, with a 3.5 overall score.
If you want better world-building
Choose Project Hail Mary. It scores 5.0 vs 3.6 for world-building, with a 4.3 overall score.
If you want better sexual content level
Choose How to Make a Killing. It scores 5.0 vs 2.8 for sexual content level, with a 3.5 overall score.
Compared in Reviews
Products reviewers directly compared with this model, grouped into quick takeaways.
1939 version starring Laurence Olivier
- Alternative: faithfulness to story The older version is recommended as a better take on the story.
Andrea Arnold’s 2011 adaptation
- Alternative: faithfulness and casting The reviewer recommends Andrea Arnold’s 2011 adaptation for a version that does not whitewash Heathcliff.
Crimson Peak
- Alternative: gothic alternative The reviewer recommends Crimson Peak instead of this adaptation.
FAQ
Is this a faithful adaptation of Emily Brontë’s novel?
Mostly no. Many reviewers emphasize major omissions, altered character dynamics, and reduced class, race, revenge, and second-generation material, though some enjoy the freedom of the reinterpretation.
Do Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi have good chemistry?
Opinion is sharply split. Some reviewers call their chemistry electric, palpable, or undeniable, while others describe the central pairing as awkward, cold, or chemistry-free.
What is the movie’s biggest strength?
The visual and technical craft. Cinematography, costumes, production design, score, and supporting performances receive the most consistent praise.
Is it as sexually explicit as the marketing suggests?
It is clearly adult and sensual, with explicit or BDSM-tinged material, but several reviewers still find it surprisingly tame, chaste, or less provocative than advertised.
Does the movie drag?
For many reviewers, yes. Pacing and runtime are recurring complaints, especially in later sections where the romance can feel repetitive or overextended.
Who is most likely to enjoy it?
Viewers open to a bold, visually maximalist reinterpretation are the best fit; Brontë purists and viewers seeking deeper thematic fidelity are much more likely to be frustrated.
Sample Expert Reviews We Analyzed
These are a few of the reviews included in our analysis.
Video Reviews
YouTube - Amanda the Jedi
- Review score
- 3.9
Article Reviews
voicemag.uk
Emerald Fennell's steamy modernisation on Emily Brontë's novel might be divisive for good reason, but it's breathtaking enough in both it's...
- Review score
- 3.4
moviereviewmom.com
MOVIE TITLE: Wuthering Heights (2026) This smutty adaptation of Emily Bronte's classic story is now available on digital platforms. RATING: R...
- Review score
- 3.4
magpiebyjenshoop.com
A review of Emerald Fennell's "Wuthering Heights" movie, including what it means to be an adaptation, the Jacob Elordi effect, and more.
- Review score
- 3.6
cinelinx.com
A gorgeous set design is not enough to make up for a flawed production that badly misinterprets the story Emily Bronte set forth to tell in...
- Review score
- 2.8
chicagoreader.com
The racism of Emerald Fennell’s Wuthering Heights overwhelms the film’s virtues.
- Review score
- 3.8
Top Movies to Consider
Choose this inventive, unsettling documentary for fearless questioning, dark humor, and unpredictable storytelling. Skip it if you want a short, straightforward exposé with definitive answers.
Pros: originality, humor
Best for a hypnotic, bookish mystery with tactile visuals and cerebral chills. Skip it if reading-heavy, attention-demanding storytelling sounds more exhausting than exciting.
Pros: Atmosphere, cinematography
Cons: audience appeal
Best for an intimate, searching documentary that rewards focused attention and invites discussion. Skip it when devastating grief, addiction footage, and unresolved family tensions would be too much.
Pros: emotional impact, theme depth
Best for patient suspense, an unforgettable score, and an unsettling masked killer. Skip it for very young children or if you want to avoid intense scares; its restrained kills also...
Pros: directing quality, score quality
Cons: message quality