At one point in Emerald Fennell's movie adaptation of “Wuthering Heights,” a tale of jealousy and obsession, Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi play mind games, attempting to grab the other's attention.
This is done in several ways, from passionately kissing their partner to sending letters with embellished stories. In many ways, this adaptation of “Wuthering Heights” reinforces that neither Robbie nor Elordi's characters really understand what love is. Their actions appear childish, desperately seeking attention by going to extremes.
That's also what it feels like watching Fennell's directorial feature, whose “Wuthering Heights” adaptation is following up the solid Promising Young Woman and the disastrous Saltburn.
Fennell is a very strong visionary, and her visual language remains her best asset as a filmmaker. However, “Wuthering Heights” struggles to commit to any one idea. Fennell makes her changes to the source material, but the romantic scenes — which are destined to be the talking point of the movie — feel repetitive and desperate to be attention-grabbing.
“Wuthering Heights” cements Fennell's status as a visionary, which makes it a conflicting watch. There's no doubt that she should continue making films, as Hollywood lacks new voices with a strong voice. More often than not, though, “Wuthering Heights” feels like it's desperately trying to call for attention to reach Saltburn levels of shock factor.
“Wuthering Heights” review
From the start, Fennell subverts viewers' expectations. It's almost poetic that she pulls off the first of many twists and turns in the opening seconds.
“Wuthering Heights” begins with the sound of a man panting. Presumably, this indicates an intimate scene, but viewers have to wait a little bit longer to see plenty of that. However, what it really is shocks you and immediately sets the tone of the movie.
This should have been the first warning sign given by Fennell. It only gets more intense from here. For better or worse, Fennell plays by her own rules.
There's obvious tension between Cathy (Margot Robbie) and Heathcliff (Jacob Elordi). After witnessing a public hanging, Cathy's abusive father, Mr. Earnshaw (Martin Clunes), saves a young Heathcliff from his own abusive father.
Things start out okay, though Heathcliff (who's named by Cathy) is designated the role of Cathy's “pet.” The dynamic shifts after Heathcliff and Cathy are late on Mr. Earnshaw's birthday, causing the young boy to be beaten so badly that it leaves permanent scars. They promise to never leave each other's sides, no matter what, but things get complicated years later.
Their promise is eventually challenged when Cathy eventually marries the wealthy Edgar Linton (Shazad Latif), causing Heathcliff to spiral.
Emerald Fennell takes liberties with the story
The groundwork of Fennell's “Wuthering Heights” remains intact, though Fennell certainly takes liberties with the story. After a very exhaustive first hour, it becomes very Saltburn-like.
There's nothing wrong with intimate scenes, though. It's as if the dam has broken once Cathy and Heathcliff inevitably act on their impulses. Sometimes less can be more, but it feels like they crammed in as many intimate scenes as possible once the first kiss happens.
Maybe that was the point, but after a while, it begins to lose its effectiveness. Yes, Cathy having an affair is bad, and that inevitably ups the stakes whenever they hook up, but the characters never feel in danger.
Is it possible that despite Robbie and Elodri's charm, their characters are impossible to root for? Obviously, that's what Fennell is trying to accomplish, but it doesn't work. The characters are inherently bad, and their back-and-forth mind games become redundant.
Fennell's best attribute is her eye for filmmaking. “Wuthering Heights” toes the line between fantasy and reality with its gorgeous sets. The shots of the countryside are breathtaking. The atmosphere and sets alone make the movie worth watching.
This is what makes Fennell's last two disappointing movies a tough pill to swallow. She has grown so much behind the camera since Promising Young Woman, as Saltburn and “Wuthering Heights” both had stunning visuals and distinctive aesthetics. The scripts of both movies are the hardest thing to connect with. She's a bold voice with maybe too many ideas to cram into a two-hour movie.
Things just tend to go a bit too far. In Saltburn, there's the “vampire” scene, and in “Wuthering Heights,” there's a very kinky, intimate scene between two servants. It works to show the lengths Heathcliff will go to protect Cathy, but the whole scene felt jarring.
How are Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi's performances?
Even if Fennell's script may over-indulge, Robbie and Elordi bring it. That's to be expected, as it's fair to assume most are seeing “Wuthering Heights” for them alone.
Elordi picks up where he left off with Fennell in Saltburn, with a little bit of residue in his mannerisms from his performance as Frankenstein. It's hard not to wonder why Elordi wasn't cast as Paul McCartney in Sam Mendes' upcoming biopics, especially when he's sporting long hair and a beard that looks somewhat like McCartney circa the Let It Be sessions.
Anyway, he's grown a lot as a performer after gaining notoriety for his role in Netflix's Kissing Booth movies. Elordi has a very commanding screen presence, especially since “Wuthering Heights” fits in his wheelhouse a lot better than Saltburn did.
They also did a fantastic job casting the young actors who play Cathy and Heathcliff. Charlotte Mellington and Owen Cooper deserve a shoutout for their work.
Robbie is reliably good, though her character really gets going in the latter half of the movie. She brings a sense of wit to a script that would feel dry in its humorous moments without her.
It's cool that Robbie finally got to appear in one of Fennell's movies. She produced her last two projects, but did not appear in them. While “Wuthering Heights” is far from perfect, it did feel like a passion project for Fennell and Robbie. They got to make the dream a reality together.
Should you watch “Wuthering Heights”?
Fennell seems to have conviction in her choices with this adaptation of “Wuthering Heights.” It's certainly a bold swing, if nothing else, but that's par for the course with Fennell.
At this stage of her career, Fennell doesn't have to fight for viewers' attention. Her films are bold, even if you don't like them, but “Wuthering Heights” oftentimes felt like it was trying to prove its boldness by throwing as many shocking scenes at the wall and seeing what stuck.
A more focused script would do wonders for her projects, as movies like Saltburn and especially “Wuthering Heights” get caught up in the minutia, especially in the first hour. There's a rhythm to her latest movie, and it follows that pattern for 136 minutes.
The best part of “Wuthering Heights,” though, is Charli XCX's music. While Brat launched undoubtedly one of the most insufferable “eras” from a pop star (that wasn't even justified with the music), Charli's music actually showcases her vocal talents while retaining her synth roots.
It wasn't nearly as jarring as expected. For once, being subtle works to the benefit of an Emerald Fennell project.
Grade: C-
“Wuthering Heights” is in theaters now.
