Brontë museum staff applaud racy new Wuthering Heights film despite fierce departures from the novel

Emerald Fennell’s bold, sexually charged reworking of Wuthering Heights has split audiences — but staff at the Brontë Parsonage Museum in Haworth have largely embraced the film, calling it exciting and emotionally affecting even as scholars and fans raise objections to the adaptation’s many alterations.

Museum workers welcome a fresh, fever-dream take

At a preview screening in Keighley on Thursday (all times ET), numerous museum employees described the film as a visceral, immersive reimagining rather than a faithful retelling. “I loved it, ” said Zoe, who works in housekeeping, adding that the screening left her quite emotional. Colleagues echoed that sentiment: “It really does feel like a fever dream, ” said Mia from digital engagement, praising the costumes, sets and dramatic soundtrack.

Other staff felt the film captured core elements of the central relationship even while departing strongly from the source material. “It captures some essential truths to the book and the relationship between Heathcliff and Cathy, ” said Ruth, a visitor experience coordinator. Staff members also expressed hope the new version will send viewers back to the novel. “I think it will make a lot of viewers intrigued to read the book, ” said Sam from the museum’s programming department.

At the same preview, outreach officer Diane conceded the film is not for literary purists but defended it as “an entertaining riff on the novel. ” She also praised the casting of Jacob Elordi as Heathcliff, saying the actor “was fantastic” and “nailed the accent. ” Rebecca Yorke, director of the museum and the Brontë Society, noted the institution was not involved in making the film but acknowledged that any new interpretation will attract different audiences and spark lively debate.

Provocative additions and major omissions inflame debate

The adaptation introduces a string of explicit and provocative elements absent from the 1847 novel: a scene opening with an aroused nun observing a hanged man with an erection, sequences depicting BDSM, on-the-moors masturbation, beds filled with eggs used for erotic effect, and repeated sex in the rain. At the same time, characters have been omitted or conflated, key plot details altered and nearly the entire second half of the book excised.

Those choices have unsettled many fans and some academics, who argue the reworking misrepresents key aspects of the original text and may confuse viewers tempted to substitute the film for the novel in classroom or casual reading contexts. Critics warn that the narrative pruning and sexual foregrounding reshape the work’s moral and emotional architecture, turning a multilayered 19th-century novel into a concentrated, contemporary fever dream.

Still, members of the museum staff believe the director’s personal response to the novel — formed in adolescence and deployed here with theatrical intensity — has produced a film that is both entertaining and provocative. “Is it faithful? No. Is it for purists? No. Is it an entertaining riff on the novel? Yes!” said Diane.

Biographer and viewers find fun amid the intensity

At the first public screening in Leeds on Friday morning (all times ET), the novel’s most recent biographer was in the audience and described the film as enjoyable, praising its performances and noting that there is “a lot of fun built into it, as well as the intensity and tragedy. ” The filmmaker herself has framed the work as her own spin on the story, leaving fidelity to the original out of scope.

For museum staff, that frank declaration of intent matters. Many expressed that while the adaptation will not satisfy purists, it succeeds on its own terms: a bold, stylised imagining that may provoke curiosity about the source text as much as it angers traditionalists. Whether viewers see an innovative reclamation or an irreverent distortion, the film has already reignited fervent conversation about the novel’s themes and the limits of adaptation.

As screenings continue, the debate looks set to deepen: some will praise the film’s theatricality and emotional immediacy, others will critique its departures and omissions. Either way, the adaptation has ensured that Emily Brontë’s work remains a lightning rod for contemporary discussion about sexuality, violence and artistic license.