Wuthering Heights (2026) Review: Emerald Fennell Made the Most Gorgeous Bad Movie of the Year
Let me be straight with you. I walked into this film fully prepared to love it. Emerald Fennell. Margot Robbie. Jacob Elordi. Charli XCX on the soundtrack. Shot on 35mm VistaVision. A Valentine's Day release that turned down a $150 million Netflix cheque just to stay in cinemas. On paper, this is a love letter to moviegoing itself. And then I sat down and watched it, and I felt nothing. Not rage — which would at least be something. Just a beautiful, aching, expensive nothing. Here's the real hot take: Wuthering Heights (2026) is the most visually stunning film you will struggle to emotionally survive in the best possible way — because Fennell traded the soul of Brontë's novel for the aesthetics of a luxury perfume ad.
Quick Verdict: Should You Watch Wuthering Heights (2026)?
- Is it worth it? Yes — but for the wrong reasons. Go for the visuals and Jacob Elordi. Stay for Charli XCX. Don't go expecting Brontë.
- Who is it for? People who loved Saltburn's vibe. Fans of Baz Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet energy. Anyone who's ever had a toxic relationship they didn't leave soon enough.
- Who should skip it? Brontë purists. Anyone expecting the haunting psychological depth of the 1939 Laurence Olivier version. People who need their romantic leads to have actual conversations.
- Naresh's Rating: 6.5/10 — A gorgeous, hollow, utterly watchable mistake.
Plot Overview: What Is Wuthering Heights (2026) About? (No Spoilers)
You probably already know the story in broad strokes — it's one of the most taught novels in the English-speaking world. But here's the setup for the uninitiated: it's 18th-century England. Catherine Earnshaw (Margot Robbie) is a wild, impulsive woman from a wealthy Yorkshire family. Heathcliff (Jacob Elordi) is an orphan her father brought home, a brooding outsider who grows up alongside her on the bleak Yorkshire moors. They fall catastrophically in love. Class, cruelty, and a breathtaking lack of communication tear them apart. Heathcliff disappears. He comes back. Chaos ensues.
That much, Fennell keeps. What she changes is everything else — the tone, the pacing, the moral framing. This is not a novel adaptation. Fennell herself said as much. Her intention was to "recreate the feeling of a teenage girl reading this book for the first time" — the overwhelming, almost irrational sensation of it. That's an interesting artistic choice. The problem is that feeling and story are not the same thing, and Fennell very visibly chose one at the expense of the other.
The Hot Take: Fennell Chose the Perfume Ad Over the Novel — And She's Not Entirely Wrong
Here's the thing — I don't think Emerald Fennell is a bad filmmaker. I think she's a tremendously talented filmmaker who made a very deliberate choice, and that choice happens to be wrong. Let me explain.
The visuals are, without question, extraordinary. Shot on 35mm VistaVision — the same large-format film stock used on The Brutalist — every frame of this movie looks like a Victorian oil painting that someone set on fire. The production design is extraordinary. The costumes are extraordinary. The Charli XCX soundtrack, which should by all logic be a ridiculous idea for a period romance, somehow works in ways I cannot entirely explain. The track "House" with John Cale? Give it an Oscar nomination right now. I mean it.
But here's where I have to be honest with you. The problem is Jacob Elordi and Margot Robbie. Not their performances individually — Elordi is genuinely magnetic here, carrying a rockstar intensity that makes the camera fall in love with him every single time. The problem is that together, on screen, they generate almost no romantic electricity whatsoever. And that is a fatal flaw in a film that is built entirely around the premise that their love is so consuming it survives death itself.
Compare this to Andrea Arnold's lean, raw 2011 version — a film that had no budget, no stars, and no Charli XCX, but made me genuinely feel like I was watching two people destroy each other from the inside out. Or the Ralph Fiennes and Juliette Binoche version from 1992, which had problems of its own but at least made you feel the heat. Fennell's version gives you the weather without the storm.
Trust me on this: the film's biggest irony is that for a movie which reportedly features some very bold carnality, the love scenes between the two leads are among the least convincing moments on screen. The film is erotically staged but emotionally cold. Like watching someone describe a feeling they read about in a book — which, technically, is exactly what Fennell said she was going for. So at least she's consistent.
Where the film genuinely earns its place is in its sheer audacity. Fennell is not making a heritage film. She's making the Baz Luhrmann of Brontë adaptations — the one critics will argue about, the one film students will analyse, the one that makes you angry enough to re-read the novel. In that sense, the film does exactly what great provocations do: it makes you care about the source material all over again. That counts for something.
The supporting cast is criminally underused. Hong Chau, one of the most interesting actors working today, barely registers. Alison Oliver — who was absolutely devastating in Conversations with Friends — gets a handful of scenes that do nothing with her range. It feels like Fennell was so consumed by the look of the thing that she forgot everyone who wasn't in the poster.
Cast & Characters
| Actor | Character | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Margot Robbie | Catherine Earnshaw (Cathy) | Passionate, impulsive Yorkshire heiress; the emotional centre of the story |
| Jacob Elordi | Heathcliff | Brooding orphan turned obsessive lover; the film's magnetic force |
| Hong Chau | Nelly Dean | Catherine's paid companion and illegitimate daughter of a lord |
| Shazad Latif | Edgar Linton | Catherine's respectable but dull suitor |
| Alison Oliver | Isabella Linton | Edgar's naive sister who falls for Heathcliff |
| Martin Clunes | Mr. Earnshaw | Catherine's father who brings Heathcliff home |
| Ewan Mitchell | Hindley Earnshaw | Catherine's brother; Heathcliff's chief tormentor |
Box Office Performance & Critical Reception
Let's be real — audiences did not care about the critics on this one. The film pulled the best domestic opening weekend of 2026 so far, earned over 75% of its opening weekend audience from women, and crossed the $150 million global mark in under 10 days. The box office is not lying. People want to watch these two beautiful people destroy each other on a rain-soaked moor. I get it. I really do.
| Region | Opening Weekend | Total Gross (as of Feb 22, 2026) |
|---|---|---|
| USA & Canada (Domestic) | $32.8 million | $60 million |
| International | ~$40 million | $92 million |
| India (Day 1) | ₹2.40 crore | Growing |
| Worldwide Total | ~$72.8 million | $152 million |
| Platform | Score | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| Rotten Tomatoes (Critics) | 59% | Rotten — "Visually vibrant but emotionally hollow" |
| Rotten Tomatoes (Audience) | 77% | Audiences disagree with critics — significantly |
| Metacritic | 55/100 | Mixed or average reviews |
| IMDb | 6.3/10 | Divisive audience reaction |
| CinemaScore | B | Decent audience satisfaction on opening weekend |
The critic-vs-audience split on this film is one of the most interesting cultural stories of the early 2026 box office. Critics are largely calling it hollow. Audiences — overwhelmingly female, overwhelmingly there for Elordi and the romance — are having a very different experience. This is not unlike what happened with Baz Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet in 1996, which critics dismissed and audiences turned into a cult classic. History may be kinder to this one than its 59% RT score suggests.
If You Liked These, Here's Where Wuthering Heights (2026) Fits
If you loved Saltburn (2023) — Fennell's own previous film — you will find this familiar territory. The same obsessive gaze, the same class tension, the same overwhelming visual beauty masking something uncomfortable underneath. Saltburn worked better because it had a tighter, more controlled script. This one sprawls.
If you loved Baz Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet (1996), this is essentially that film's British cousin. Style elevated to the point of religion. Anachronistic music choices that somehow work. Beautiful people suffering beautifully.
If you loved Guillermo del Toro's Frankenstein (2025) — which also starred Jacob Elordi and was set in a similar gothic universe — you may find this one a step down. Del Toro's film had emotional depth to match its visual ambition. Fennell's does not quite get there.
If you loved the 1939 Wuthering Heights with Laurence Olivier, stay away. It will only make you sad.
Frequently Asked Questions About Wuthering Heights (2026)
1. Is Wuthering Heights (2026) faithful to the Emily Brontë novel?
ANS. No — and Emerald Fennell is upfront about this. She described her intention as recreating "the feeling of a teenage girl reading this book for the first time," not a faithful literary adaptation. The film condenses, restructures, and reimagines significant portions of the novel. If you want something close to the book, the 1939 version is your best option.
2. Who plays Heathcliff in Wuthering Heights (2026)?
ANS. Jacob Elordi plays Heathcliff. He brings a brooding, almost rockstar intensity to the role — physically commanding and genuinely magnetic on screen. His performance is one of the film's undeniable strengths, even where the script lets him down.
3. Who plays Catherine Earnshaw in Wuthering Heights (2026)?
ANS. Margot Robbie plays Catherine Earnshaw. This is a significant departure from her Barbie-era persona — the role is raw, impulsive, and deliberately unglamorous at times. Many critics feel she's been miscast; I think she's working with a script that doesn't give her enough to truly sink her teeth into.
4. Did Margot Robbie direct Wuthering Heights (2026)?
ANS. No — Margot Robbie is a producer on the film, not the director. The film was written and directed by Emerald Fennell (Promising Young Woman, Saltburn). Robbie produces through her LuckyChap Entertainment company, which previously produced both of Fennell's earlier films.
5. Why did Wuthering Heights (2026) turn down Netflix?
ANS. Netflix reportedly offered $150 million for distribution rights. Robbie and Fennell turned it down in favour of a lower $80 million deal with Warner Bros. because Warner guaranteed a full theatrical release and a major publicity push. The bet paid off — the film became Robbie's first to cross $150 million globally since Barbie.
6. What is the Charli XCX connection to Wuthering Heights (2026)?
ANS. Charli XCX composed and performed an album of original songs for the film's soundtrack, working alongside composer Anthony Willis. The lead single "House" (featuring Welsh musician John Cale) dropped in November 2025. Anachronistic as it sounds for a period film set in 18th-century Yorkshire, the music is one of the film's most genuinely effective elements.
7. Is Wuthering Heights (2026) appropriate for children?
ANS. No. The film is rated R and contains strong sexual content, adult themes of obsession and class violence, and the kind of gothic carnality that Emerald Fennell specialises in. This is very much an adult film.
9. How does Wuthering Heights (2026) compare to the 2011 version?
ANS. Andrea Arnold's 2011 version is leaner, rawer, and in my opinion more emotionally honest — even though it had a fraction of the budget. Fennell's version is bigger, louder, more beautiful, and more hollow. They are almost opposites of each other in approach.
10. What is VistaVision and why does it matter for this film?
ANS. VistaVision is a large-format 35mm film stock that produces an exceptionally wide, high-resolution image. Wuthering Heights (2026) is only the fourth 21st-century film shot primarily in VistaVision, after The Brutalist (2024), One Battle After Another (2025), and Bugonia (2025). The format gives the film its extraordinary visual quality — every frame feels enormous and painterly.
11. Will Wuthering Heights (2026) be on streaming? What is the OTT release date?
ANS. As of February 2026, the film is still in its theatrical run. Given that Robbie and Fennell specifically rejected a Netflix deal to keep this in cinemas, expect a longer-than-average theatrical window before any streaming announcement. Warner Bros. typically moves films to Max streaming after 45 days, so an OTT release around late March or April 2026 is likely.
Final Verdict: The Most Beautiful Disappointment You'll See This Year
Here's where I land. Wuthering Heights (2026) is exactly what it promised to be and nothing more. It promised a sensory experience — and it delivers one. It promised two impossibly beautiful people suffering on the moors — and it delivers that too. What it never promised, anywhere in any trailer or interview, was emotional depth. Fennell told you exactly what she was making. A feeling, not a story.
The frustrating part is how close it comes to greatness. Elordi alone could carry a better-scripted version of this film on his back. The VistaVision photography deserves to be studied in film schools. The Charli XCX music will outlast the film itself. And there are individual scenes — maybe fifteen minutes of screen time scattered across 136 minutes — where the whole thing clicks and you feel what Fennell was reaching for.
But in the end, Emerald Fennell made the most gorgeous bad movie of 2026 — a film where style and substance had a violent, consuming love affair, and style won. Just like Heathcliff. Just like Catherine. Just like the novel always said it would.
See it in IMAX if you can. Just don't expect to cry.
Rating: 6.5/10
So here's my question for you — do you think Emerald Fennell made the right call prioritising the sensory experience over story fidelity? Or should a filmmaker always serve the source material first? Let me know in the comments below.
Sources & References
- Wuthering Heights (2026 Film) — Wikipedia
- Wuthering Heights (2026) — Rotten Tomatoes
- Wuthering Heights (2026) — IMDb
- Wuthering Heights First Reactions — Variety
- Wuthering Heights $150M Box Office Milestone — Screen Rant
- Wuthering Heights $100M Milestone Despite Divisive Reviews — Collider
- Emerald Fennell's Wuthering Heights: First Reactions — Hollywood Reporter
- Wuthering Heights Opening Day Box Office — Variety
- Wuthering Heights 2026 Collection, Budget & OTT — Tenvow
Post a Comment