Filmmaker Emerald Finnel’s highly-anticipated adaptation of “Wuthering Heights” released on Feb. 13 after weeks of promotional content.
The film is currently ranked as the number one film globally. It debuted at the top of the box office with over $88.5 million in global ticket sales during its opening weekend.
The gothic tale portrays an intense, captivating and visually-appealing love story between Heathcliff (Jacob Elordi) and Catherine Earshaw (Margot Robbie). The story follows the two from adolescence to adulthood as they yearn for one another through a highly-sexualized, destructive connection. Exploring themes of class, the film depicts the divide between the landed gentry and the marginalized groups. The adaptation provides audiences with an almost offputting feel as characters are visceral and at times, psychologically manipulative.
Viewers watching the movie for the erotic romance will leave disappointed; the movie holds darker themes which contrast the love-story-focused promotional content. In this sense, the film’s marketing was misleading. While it did have romantic scenes it was not particularly graphic in that sense.
The acting was phenomenal. However, the script was somewhat disjointed, while carrying such heavy topics the dialogue seemed flat, making it a bit hard to follow and fully grasp. Despite this, the actors’ talent shone through, curating connections that allowed viewers to empathize with the character.
Although the characters were fascitating, it felt like we knew them, but not why they were the way that they were. Although the characters were assuming, they were not compelling, and they often acted without reason, yet I enjoyed how you could not really pinpoint a villain. Many characters felt detached from the audience, especially Heathcliff. Particular standouts were Owen Cooper, who plays a young Heathcliff, and Alison Oliver, who plays Isabella. Every time they were on screen, they stole the show.
As for the connection of the two lovers, the acts of the tumultuous couple are solely lust driven, making the story feel not so much as one of love but one of lust.
The cinematography, directed by the creative Linus Sandgren, who is known for projects like “Lala Land” and working on “Dune: Part Three.” “Saltburn” shares a similar provocative and unique style so distinct it was obvious that they were both produced by the same woman.
The color and costume appeal was a work of art featuring an anachronistic aesthetic designed by Jacqueline Durran. Margot Robbie’s Cathy wears costumes inspired by Victorian, Georgian and 1950s styles with modern, vibrant and synthetic fabrics. Making bold choices such as a plastic dress, these artistic incorporations were beautiful but also a bit confusing when trying to pinpoint the time period in which the story takes place.
Many critics believe this film is an embarrassment and disrespect to Emily Bronte’s “literary masterpiece.” However, people reserve the right to create an adaptation but not remain fully faithful to the source. Despite the disappointment of many original novel enthusiasts, adaptations are permitted to reimagine and draw inspiration, however, respect to the original text is still due. In the original text Heathcliff is a colored man, and in the readaptation Heathcliff is Elordi. Although Elordi is a wonderful and talented actor, this change was distasteful. Some argue that the entire movie on a larger scale reflects society’s disproportionate emphasis on aesthetics. Additionally, the fact that the people in the movie are all conventionally attractive diminishes the film’s message to a parade of “pretty people” and “pretty things.” Rather than a search for an accurate representation it focuses solely on the doomed romance between Cathy and Heathcliff and omitting any subsequent plotline.
Beyond comparison to the original novel, Emerald Finnell made a beautiful film, but it lacks a clear representation of what the movie is really trying to tell you, the underlying theme, it felt a bit aimless. Normally when making a reimagining you take some and leave some, given that you added substance, but the movie lacked substance. At surface level the movie was great, but if you are a more intellectual person chances are you will be questioning. The closest thing I could come to a meaning or definitive reasoning was a deep dive on classism, which is interesting yes, but doesn’t necessarily
One of the film’s most unexpected creative choices is its use of Charli XCX’s album “Wuthering Heights”, which contrasts sharply with the setting of the Yorkshire Moors. Rather than leaning fully into the traditional time period appropriate and orchestral scoring, the film waves in a modern sort of synth heavy iconic tact sound to highlight the emotional chaos at the heart of the story.
Compelling songs within the album mirror the volatile relationship between Heathcliff and Catherine. The lyrics intertwine with the plot, wonderfully coinciding with the characters desires.
Overall, “Wuthering Heights” was encapsulating and almost felt like a fever dream. It was a passionate watch. However, fans of the original book might be trumped by a sense of comparison.
Rating: 3.5/5
