Thursday, October 1, 2026
®
The World's Local News Source®
Cherryville, NC (WNN) - Welcome to the Wise News Network Monday Movie Review, our new series where we take a closer look at the films that became box office hits over the weekend. We'll tell you what movie everyone was talking about, as well as a closer look at the storytelling aspects of the film itself (spoiler-free, of course). Afterwards, we will rate it, and you can decide whether it's worth adding to your watchlist this week.
Ahead of Valentine's Day weekend, "Wuthering Heights" (2026), directed by Emerald Fennell, premiered on Friday, February 13th. The R-rated drama is a loose adaptation of Emily Brontë's 1874 novel, the sister of Charlotte Brontë, author of Jane Eyre.
The film, in short, focuses on the relationship between Cathrine, played by Margot Robbie, and Heathcliff, played by Jacob Elordi, as they navigate life together and apart during the Victorian era. Entangled in an intense love-and-tragedy story, these characters endure emotional and social hardships as they fight for what they believe in.
Before we get into logistics, let's discuss how many versions of Wuthering Heights there are. There have been several adaptations over the years, and according to Rotten Tomatoes, there are 35 screen adaptations of the novel, making it one of the most adapted novels in history.
The film grossed $34.8M domestically and $83M globally, against a $80M production budget. While the debut was strong internationally, the film failed to meet higher expectations given the A-list cast and holiday release window.
One of the biggest debates surrounding this film over the last two weeks centers on how closely it follows Brontë's original novel (which is not by much).
A still frame of Heathcliff and Cathrine in the film "Wuthering Heights"
During the press tour, director Fennell made it clear that it is not meant to be a faithful adaptation, hence the quotation marks around the title, "Wuthering Heights". The film reimagines its tones, themes, and character dynamics through a contemporary cinematic lens. This raises the question:
When adapting a novel, should filmmakers remain loyal to the source material or reshape it to reflect their own artistic vision?
In this case, Fennell embraces a subjective approach that favors aesthetics and mood over strict adherence to the novel. Various sources are calling it "teen angst" representation, as it has been heavily marketed to Gen Z through social media, casting A-list actors, and intertwining a score of synth-pop by Charlie XCX with the Victorian era. Readers argue that the movie is uninteresting when reduced to the "doomed romance" that Fennell portrays it as. Whether you perceive these characters as emotionally abusive or overly passionate, this film lacks any depth in explaining why we should feel attached to them.
Apart from the film's narrative, the cinematography, lighting, and set design are really well crafted.
Now that you have reached the end of the review, we will rate it on a scale of 1-5 hoots.
Movie Rating System (Owl-Hoot Scale):
While every review is subjective, the storytelling choices and the casting choices did not resonate with me. From a critic's standpoint, it's not one I'd be eager to rewatch, but it remains an intriguing and stylistically bold interpretation of the novel.
