Feb 10, 2026 11:56am IST
‘Wuthering Heights’ Leaves Critics Polarized With Its Overtly Sensual Appeal
"Wuthering Heights" lands in theaters February 13, and critics are already divided over Emerald Fennell’s wild spin on Emily Brontë’s classic. The early reviews, out this week just ahead of Valentine’s weekend, paint a picture of a movie that really splits the room. Some folks love its wild streak. Others say it’s just surface-level flash.
Let’s talk numbers. On Rotten Tomatoes, the film sits at 72% from 58 reviews, so, in the green, but nowhere near the 96% the 1939 Laurence Olivier version pulled off. Over on Metacritic, it’s got a 60 out of 100 from 31 critics. Not terrible, but definitely mixed.
Variety's Jazz Tangcay points out the fiery chemistry between Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi, plus the knockout costumes and set design. She called “Wuthering Heights” a “scorching hot twisted tale” and lauded the chemistry between stars Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi as “a whole other level of HOT!” She also wrote, “Only Emerald could take a classic, turn it on its head, make you fall completely in lust, and then utterly destroy your soul. An exquisite spectacle of craftsmanship that left me salivating over the costumes, cinematography and production design. Obsessively in love with it.”
Some critics are all-in. David Sims at The Atlantic calls this Fennell’s best film yet, a wild, messy, but seriously entertaining ride. He wrote, “Wuthering Heights, the writer-director Emerald Fennell’s new adaptation of Emily Brontë’s groundbreaking Gothic novel, is her best film to date, a heaving, rip-snortingly carnal good time at the cinema. It is also a gooey, grimy mess. The camera lingers on dripping egg yolks and squishy, bubbling dough; the protagonist, Cathy Earnshaw (played by Margot Robbie), must wade through pig’s blood on her way to the moors near her home, leaving a trim of viscera on her gorgeously anachronistic dress. This is Fennell’s aesthetic throughout: loudly stylish on top, and just as loudly nasty right below the surface.”
But then you have got the critics who are just not feeling it. Peter Bradshaw at The Guardian says the movie is emotionally hollow and squanders both Robbie and Elordi. He wrote in his review, “Emerald Fennell cranks up the campery as she reinvents Emily Brontë’s tale of Cathy and Heathcliff on the windswept Yorkshire moor as a 20-page fashion shoot of relentless silliness, with bodices ripped to shreds and a saucy slap of BDSM. Margot Robbie’s Cathy at one stage secretly heads off to the moor for a hilarious bit of self-pleasuring, although, sadly, there are no audaciously intercut scenes of thirst-trap Heathcliff, played by Jacob Elordi, simultaneously doing the same thing in the stable, while muttering gruffly in that Yerrrrrkshire accent of his.”
New York Post’s Johnny Oleksinski wrote in his review, “Traditionalists will moan that Fennell has turned Brontë’s book into a sweeping romance. And, yes, she has. Music swells, tears flow, faces are perfect. But what makes the movie so enthralling is that she hits on a powerful tug-of-war: We root hard for Heathcliff and Cathy, even though we know full well we shouldn’t.”
The cast is stacked: Margot Robbie takes on Catherine Earnshaw, Jacob Elordi is Heathcliff, with Hong Chau as Nelly Dean, Shazad Latif playing Edgar Linton and Martin Clunes as Mr. Earnshaw.
Fennell shot the whole thing on 35mm, out in the Yorkshire Dales. It runs 136 minutes and blends old-school period-style with modern touches, including a Charli XCX soundtrack. After Saltburn, Fennell is making it clear: this is her own version of "Wuthering Heights", not a straight retelling.
Box office predictions? Opening weekend is pegged at $40 million. No word yet on audience scores, but with critics this divided, you can bet there will be some arguments once the lights come up.
Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.