Wuthering Heights has once again become a subject of national debate following early UK screenings of the Wuthering Heights movie, Emerald Fennell’s highly unconventional screen interpretation of Emily Brontë’s 1847 novel, due for release in 2026. The strongest and most unexpected defence of the film has come from staff at the Brontë Parsonage Museum in Haworth, who have publicly praised the adaptation despite its extensive departures from the original book, setting them apart from many academics and traditionalists who have questioned the scale of the changes. This is reported by The WP Times, citing The Guardian.
The film, directed by Emerald Fennell, has been deliberately positioned as a reinterpretation rather than a faithful literary adaptation. Early viewers report that the narrative structure has been heavily revised, with several characters removed or merged, major plot developments altered and much of the novel’s second half omitted altogether. At the same time, the film introduces explicit material not present in the original text, a creative decision that has driven much of the public and critical discussion surrounding its release.
Preview screenings and early reaction
Museum staff viewed the film at a private preview screening organised by Warner Bros. in Keighley, West Yorkshire, ahead of its wider release. Their responses, later shared publicly, have attracted attention because of the museum’s role as a guardian of the Brontë literary legacy. While acknowledging that the film is not faithful to the novel in a traditional sense, staff repeatedly emphasised its emotional impact and technical execution. Zoe, who works in housekeeping at the museum, described the screening as moving and said she “loved it”, adding that the film made her emotional. Mia, from the museum’s digital engagement team, highlighted the production design and soundtrack, describing the film as visually immersive and noting that, in her view, the central themes of obsession and intensity that define Wuthering Heights remain visible despite the narrative changes.
A divided but measured response
Other staff members offered more cautious assessments while still defending the film’s value. Ruth, a visitor experience coordinator, said the adaptation captured “essential truths” about the relationship between Heathcliff and Cathy, even though it diverges sharply from the book’s structure. She also framed the film as a deliberate alternative to earlier adaptations, including the 1939 version starring Merle Oberon and Laurence Olivier, the 1992 film with Juliette Binoche and Ralph Fiennes, and Andrea Arnold’s 2011 interpretation.
Sam, from the museum’s programming department, said he hoped the film would encourage audiences to read or re-read the novel, rather than replace it. Sue, who works in the learning wing, acknowledged that “a lot of changes” had been made to the original text and that some viewers would not welcome them, but described the film as engaging when viewed on its own terms.
Diane, the museum’s outreach officer, summarised the collective position succinctly: the film is not faithful, it is not designed for purists, but it is an entertaining and provocative interpretation of the novel. She also defended the casting of Jacob Elordi as Heathcliff, a choice that has generated considerable discussion online. While Brontë’s novel describes Heathcliff as “dark-skinned”, Diane said Elordi’s performance worked within the film’s framework and praised his accent and physical presence.
The director’s intent
Emerald Fennell has been explicit about her approach to Wuthering Heights, describing the film not as a faithful adaptation but as a personal interpretation shaped by her first encounter with the novel in adolescence. Speaking about the project, Fennell has said she was less interested in reproducing Emily Brontë’s narrative structure than in translating what she describes as the book’s “emotional violence, obsession and intensity” into cinematic form. The focus, she has argued, was on atmosphere, physicality and psychological extremes rather than plot precision.
As a result, early Wuthering Heights review coverage has concentrated less on questions of textual accuracy and more on tone, visual language and audience response. Critics and viewers have noted that the film signals its intentions early, positioning itself clearly as a reinterpretation rather than a period drama in the traditional sense. This framing has shaped much of the debate around the film, particularly among those assessing it against previous screen versions. That perspective was echoed by Dr Claire O’Callaghan, described as Emily Brontë’s most recent biographer, who attended the first public screening in Leeds. O’Callaghan said she enjoyed the film and praised the performances, calling the adaptation “a lot of fun” despite — or because of — its distance from the source text. She noted that the film makes no attempt at fidelity, adding that this clarity of intent reduced the risk of misunderstanding. “If it were trying to be a conventional period drama, people might be more upset,” she said, arguing that the film’s exaggerated and stylised approach made its position clear from the outset.
Haworth and literary authority
Reaction from Haworth has carried particular weight because of the cultural authority of the Brontë Parsonage Museum, which occupies the former home where Charlotte, Emily and Anne Brontë lived and produced their most important work. The building was purchased in 1928 by industrialist Sir James Roberts and donated to the Brontë Society, which continues to operate the site as a centre for literary research, preservation and public education.
Emily Brontë died in the house in 1848 at the age of 30, just one year after Wuthering Heights was published under the pen name Ellis Bell. That proximity to the novel’s creation has made the museum a key reference point in discussions of Brontë’s legacy. For that reason, the decision by museum staff to publicly defend a radical reinterpretation of the book has been widely noted within literary and cultural circles. Rebecca Yorke, director of the museum and the Brontë Society, has stressed that staff were not involved in the making of the film. She confirmed that Fennell had previously attended the museum’s Brontë women’s writing festival as a guest speaker, where she discussed her personal connection to the novel. Yorke said that new interpretations of Wuthering Heights inevitably resonate differently with different audiences, adding that debate and disagreement have long been part of the book’s reception history.
Commercial impact and renewed interest
Beyond critical discussion, the film is already producing measurable effects. Museum representatives say visitor numbers are expected to rise, while sales of Wuthering Heights in the museum shop have increased sharply in the weeks leading up to the film’s release. In response, the museum has extended opening hours and introduced additional merchandise linked to Emily Brontë’s work. From a commercial standpoint, the film is reported to be tracking opening-weekend takings of more than $80m (£58.7m), a figure broadly in line with its reported production budget. Warner Bros. has supported the release with a wide-ranging marketing campaign, including licensed products and brand partnerships, positioning the film as a major cultural release rather than a niche literary adaptation.
A familiar controversy
The intensity of the current debate mirrors the reaction that greeted Wuthering Heights on its original publication. Victorian reviewers criticised the novel for what they described as cruelty, moral excess and emotional brutality, language that has resurfaced in some contemporary responses to Fennell’s film. In that sense, controversy appears less an accidental by-product of the adaptation than a recurring feature of the story’s reception.
What distinguishes the present moment is the contrast between institutional endorsement from Haworth and scepticism elsewhere. Museum staff are not arguing that the film reflects Emily Brontë’s intentions in a literal sense. Instead, they suggest that its emotional force and cultural visibility may strengthen, rather than weaken, engagement with the original novel. As Wuthering Heights enters another phase of reinterpretation, questions of fidelity, provocation and relevance are likely to persist. What is already clear is that Fennell’s film has reopened a long-running conversation about one of English literature’s most contested works — and, in doing so, has drawn renewed attention back to the novel itself.
Read about the life of Westminster and Pimlico district, London and the world. 24/7 news with fresh and useful updates on culture, business, technology and city life: Wuthering Heights Review: Margot Robbie, Jacob Elordi in Emerald Fennell Adaptation