Emerald Fennell’s adaptation of “Wuthering Heights” could only have been created by a true fan. The British filmmaker wanted to evoke her youthful experience reading Emily Brontë’s 1847 novel when she was 14, which she describes as “the most physical emotional connection I’ve ever had to anything.” Her bodice-ripping, visually sumptuous version, in theaters Friday, incorporates some essential literary elements, but also imagines what’s in between the lines of Brontë’s writing, including sultry moments between the protagonists.
“I’m fanatical about the book,” Fennell says. She’s speaking over Zoom alongside Margot Robbie, who stars as Catherine Earnshaw (and who also produced the film), and Jacob Elordi, who plays Heathcliff. “I’m as obsessive about Emily Brontë as everyone else. She gets inside you.”
The director, 40, recalls going to the Brontë Festival of Women’s Writing in West Yorkshire, England, in 2025 and feeling completely at home. “I was like, ‘These are my chicks,’” Fennell says. “We all want to sleep in a coffin.” Robbie laughs, despite likely having heard the story before.
“We are, all of us, breathless, up against a rock,” Fennell continues, referencing a particularly evocative scene she imagined for her film. “I care so deeply about this that I couldn’t hope to ever make a perfect adaptation because I know my own limits.”
Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi in the movie “Wuthering Heights.”
Advertisement
(Warner Bros. Pictures)
What she could do is make a film that recalled the visceral feeling of reading the novel as a teen. “That would mean it had a certain amount of wish fulfillment,” she admits. The novel is famously austere, with mere glimmers of physical intimacy. “The Gothic, to me, is emotional and it’s about the world reflecting everyone’s interior landscape. This is my personal fan tribute to this work.”
“Wuthering Heights” marks the third collaboration between Robbie’s production company, LuckyChap Entertainment, and Fennell. Robbie, 35, produced Fennell’s 2020 feature debut “Promising Young Woman,” which earned Fennell the Oscar for original screenplay, and 2023’s class-envy thriller “Saltburn.” Her style is confrontational and seemingly fearless, often provoking hugely divergent reactions from critics and fans. She’s a filmmaker who goes full-on.
Despite their history, however, Robbie had never acted in one of Fennell’s films.
Advertisement
“When I read this script, I did find I was putting myself in Cathy’s shoes and reading the lines and thinking, ‘How would I play it?’” Robbie says. “I do that often when reading scripts, but my heart sank when thinking about the casting. So I threw my hat in the ring.”
Margot Robbie in the movie “Wuthering Heights.”
(Warner Bros. Pictures)
“It’s a bit like asking your friend to date you,” Fennell chimes in. “It’s taking something a step in a different direction. You don’t want to be the person who blows up the thing that you have that works so well. But I was desperate for Margot to play Cathy. I was so relieved that it was her who made the first move.”
Fennell did make the first move with Elordi, 28, recently Oscar-nominated for his monster in Guillermo del Toro’s “Frankenstein.”
Advertisement
“Emerald texted me and said, ‘Do you want to be Heathcliff?’” Elordi recalls. “That was it. I said, ‘Yeah.’ And then when she gave the screenplay, I read it and wept. That’s how you dream of making movies.”
Not only did Elordi look like the version of Heathcliff on the cover of Fennell’s edition of the novel, but she had witnessed his potential for the role while making “Saltburn.”
Jacob Elordi in the movie “Wuthering Heights.”
(Warner Bros. Pictures)
“Felix is a character who does something awful in every scene,” Fennell explains of Elordi’s charismatic rich boy in “Saltburn.” “But it needed somebody who could make everyone in the audience forget that. And Jacob was the only person who came in and did that. Heathcliff is an extreme antihero. He’s cruel and he’s violent and he’s relentless and he’s vengeful and he’s spiteful. Jacob has a sensitivity and tenderness and groundedness that makes us forgive all that.”
Advertisement
Fennell knew the film hinged on the casting of Cathy and Heathcliff, two iconic literary characters who have been portrayed by a multitude of actors over the years, including Laurence Olivier, Juliette Binoche and Ralph Fiennes. It’s been broadly debated whether the novel actually is a love story between the snobbish Cathy and the glowering Heathcliff. For some, it’s a tale of toxic fixation, for others a revenge plot or a tragedy. But Fennell’s version is undeniably a big-screen romance.
“We were looking for outsized charisma and outsized talent, people like Burton and Taylor,” director Emerald Fennell says. “A combination of actors who are explosively brilliant. And it’s these two.”
(Shayan Asgharnia / For The Times)
“We were looking for outsized charisma and outsized talent, people like Burton and Taylor,” Fennell says of the classic onscreen pairing of Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor, famously tumultuous. “A combination of actors who are explosively brilliant. And it’s these two.”
“That’s the coolest thing to say,” Elordi says, covering his face with his hands. “This after years of hearing nothing,” he quips. (Fennell says she is sparing with praise.)
Advertisement
“Wuthering Heights” reunites several of Fennell’s repeat collaborators. Actor Alison Oliver, who appeared in “Saltburn,” plays Isabella Linton, Edgar’s ward who becomes a problematic fixation for Heathcliff, and the filmmaker reteamed with cinematographer Linus Sandgren, production designer Suzie Davies and editor Victoria Boydell. Fennell also brought in new faces, including Hong Chau as Nelly Dean, Cathy’s companion, and Shazad Latif as wealthy businessman Edgar Linton. She and Robbie aimed to create a creatively safe set.
“It’s very exposing, especially for the actors,” Fennell says of making an audacious film like this. “You need to be able to forget that and feel that you have the ability to make mistakes and try something different.”
Fennell’s direction was often unexpected.
“I remember she prepped us for the long table scene and said, ‘It needs to come to life,’” Elordi says. “Heathcliff was brooding but she said, ‘What if he wasn’t brooding?’ All of a sudden there was this electricity at the table. As an actor, that pushes me out of my comfort zone. And every time it works.”
“What I like about working with Emerald is: I like going too far,” Robbie agrees. “My instinct is to go really hard and then have someone tell me to pull it back. She rarely tells me to pull it back. She wants the maximalist version and I relish that. She would say, ‘Now you’re in a sensible period film.’ And then she’d say ‘Now do it like you’re Ursula the sea witch.’”
Advertisement
That was the take that made the final cut. “Part of it is there,” Fennell confirms. “Usually I use only a little moment of something but that’s the crucial one. Because we’re all so crazy in life, aren’t we?”
“And Cathy so is Ursula the sea witch,” Robbie says.
“She’s such a little sea witch,” Fennell agrees.
Fennell’s reimagining of “Wuthering Heights” amps up the existing emotions in the novel. She abridges its plot, removing the second-generation narrative that bookends Brontë’s writing. The torment of Cathy’s abusive brother shifts to the hands of her father, played by Martin Clunes.
Meanwhile, the longing between Cathy and Heathcliff, who can’t be together due to his lowly station and her spiteful decision to marry the wealthy Linton, accelerates dramatically into fervid sex scenes. The doomed couple erotically embrace on the Yorkshire Moors, in the back of a carriage and even inside her bedroom at Thrushcross Grange — all moments that are not part of the book.
Advertisement
Margot Robbie in the movie “Wuthering Heights.”
(Warner Bros. Pictures)
“They’re part of the book of my head,” Fennell says, adamantly. “I think they’re part of the book of all of our heads. With all the love and respect and adoration I have for the book, I also wanted to make my own version that I needed to see.”
“It is totally that wish fulfillment,” Robbie says. “And if you can’t have the wish fulfillment in movies, where are you going to get it?”
Fennell imbued the film with tactile visuals that evoke the sexual tension between Cathy and Heathcliff. There are close-ups of hands kneading dough, a snail sliming its way up a window and Cathy prodding a jellied fish with her finger. The director tested numerous fish before selecting the one that is seen onscreen.
Advertisement
“Why I love working with these guys so much is we’re all detail perverts,” Fennell says. “I am obsessed with every single thing. That fish that Margot fingered — I fingered about 50 different fish before then. Tiny fish, big fish, fake fish, jelly that was wet, jelly that was soft, jelly that was firm.”
“You think she’s joking but she’s not,” Robbie says.
“My finger smelled so bad the whole time that we were making this movie,” Fennell adds.
Ultimately, though, it was the best possible fish. “We did the takes with a couple of fish, but we all knew the right one when it happened,” Robbie says of the scene, which mirrors the sexual disappointment in Cathy’s marriage. “We all felt it in the same moment. Everyone went, ‘That’s it.’”
Jacob Elordi and Margot Robbie in the movie “Wuthering Heights.”
(Warner Bros. Pictures)
Advertisement
The film’s aesthetic is bold and brash, featuring brilliantly hued red floors and walls designed to look like Cathy’s freckled skin. It lands somewhere between Disney fairy tale, ’80s romance paperback art and old Hollywood glamour. Atmospheric mist pours across every scene. The estate of Wuthering Heights is foreboding and dark, with rocks splintering through the walls, while Linton’s Thrushcross Grange bears a Victorian aesthetic, containing the outside world. “It’s nature coming in and nature being kept out,” Fennell says. “And it’s about what that means emotionally and metaphorically for the story and for these characters.”
There is purposefully no adherence to historical accuracy, particularly in the costumes. Designed by Jacqueline Durran, the wardrobe was elaborately wild to underscore emotional truths rather than period relevancy.
“You couldn’t not scream,” Robbie says about trying on each piece. “And then Emerald would come up with a platter of jewels and start decorating me like a Christmas tree.”
“There was so much screaming every day,” Fennell says. “I always want people to have permission to go too far, to do something that’s in bad taste, that’s not subtle. I’m really interested in pushing until that squeaking point where you’re like, ‘OK, that’s too far.’ It takes a lot of bravery to do that.”
Advertisement
Even Elordi joined in the excitement. “I was screaming at all the dresses,” he says. “Margot and Alison’s dressing rooms flanked me so I’d often get caught in the hallway.”
Although the world of the movie is heightened and beautifully garish, the romance is more grounded. You can feel how desperate Cathy and Heathcliff are for each other in their own twisted way, and despite their horrible machinations you want them to be together. The film ends differently from the novel, but it shares with it a sad inevitability.
Fennell inherently understood what makes these characters so desirable.
“I was led by my own feelings,” she says. “On set, we were all trying to find that thing that made us get goosebumps. One of the earliest scenes we shot was where Heathcliff breaks the chair to build Cathy a fire.”
To help a shivering Cathy, Heathcliff rises from his wooden seat, smashes it on the floor and tosses the pieces into the fireplace. It’s a moment of devotion from Heathcliff, but triggers a lustful response in Cathy.
Advertisement
“I looked around and all of these professionals, women and men, were agape. Everyone felt the same way as Cathy. That’s what I was looking for every day.”
“He actually broke the chair,” Robbie says. “Cathy’s reaction is my genuine reaction.”
Elordi understood the challenge of embodying such an iconic character, who has existed both on the page and on the screen for generations. He also didn’t want to let Fennell down.
“I knew how personal the story was to Emerald and I knew the screenplay that she had written was extremely good, but I was like ‘What makes you think I can do this?’” Elordi remembers. “I had a lot of nerves but I jumped into it. This is a director you’re really able to give everything to. The images that come from her head are so unique and singular. The first time I watched ‘Saltburn’ with her, I sat back and I realized I was in the presence of something truly great and original. To be able to investigate with her two times is a gift.”
Says Robbie, “My hope is always: There’s got to be one person that watches this movie and thinks ‘That’s my favorite of all time.’ I want to make a movie that is someone’s favorite movie of all time and I’ll know how much that means to them. That it might save them in whatever ways movies can save you.”
Advertisement
Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” shudders with feeling. And however audiences perceive it, its maker has done exactly what she intended.
“Pond rules” dictate that if an animal is hungry, the creature that’s about to become a meal should accept its fate. That’s the first lesson that Mabel (voiced by Piper Curda), an idealistic university student whose mind is transferred into the body of a robotic beaver, learns while interacting with wildlife as one of their own in Pixar’s inventive “Hoppers.” In typical human fashion (we love to meddle with nature), Mabel ends up breaking that directive by saving a “fellow” beaver, the slumberous Loaf (Eduardo Franco), attracting unwanted attention that leads her to a wacky group of characters who will transform her rigid young worldview.
For his second feature, Daniel Chong, best known for creating the popular “We Bare Bears” series for Cartoon Network, has unleashed a hilariously unexpected and outrageous crowd-pleaser with “Hoppers.” Recently, I bemoaned that a movie like Sony’s “Goat” stood as further proof that talking-animal animated films had mostly run their course. Chong and screenwriter Jesse Andrews swiftly push back on that read with this environmentalist tale in defense of people who stand up for something, even when it seems no one is willing to stand beside them.
“Hoppers” is Pixar by way of a creator, Chong, whose career isn’t exclusively tied to the studio. That’s likely why his movie is more daring in its humor and tone, bringing a refreshing infusion of mischief to Pixar while maintaining the genuine emotional gravitas that has endeared the company to audiences for over 30 years.
Why is Mabel’s psyche roaming around inside a fake beaver à la “Avatar”? After discovering that this technology has been developed by one of her professors, Mabel thinks it could be the answer to saving the local forest glade where self-aggrandizing mayor Jerry (Jon Hamm) wants to build a highway. Mabel’s grandmother instilled in her an appreciation for nature as a reminder that she’s part of something greater than herself. Collecting signatures isn’t yielding results to stop construction, so, to the dismay of the scientists in charge, Mabel hops into the human-made mammal to learn from the creatures themselves why they’ve left the glade, giving Jerry carte blanche to destroy their home.
The poignancy-to-comedy ratio is precisely calibrated. Sharp gags, whether visual or in superbly timed lines of dialogue often laced with irony, work on multiple levels. A few moments like an accidental death or the wild introduction of an aquatic character are so wonderfully out of left field they make one’s head spin. That also goes for instances late in Mabel’s adventure in which “Hoppers” steps into amusingly creepy terrain, paying homage to the horror genre. These impish touches involve a wicked caterpillar (Dave Franco) whose mother, the Insect Queen, is voiced by acting royalty Meryl Streep. Each group of animals has its own ruler.
Advertisement
Since most scenes occur in the forest glade, the artists at Pixar have created strikingly rendered settings which, while aiming for photorealism, also have a fantastical glow to them, highlighting the inherent magic of nature. That such a seemingly commonplace location is elevated to feel mesmerizing speaks to how animation can make the mundane anew. That’s on top of how the rotund beavers in “Hoppers” have been conceived for maximum cuteness. One of them, Mabel’s guide through this ecosystem, is the disarmingly adorable King George (Bobby Moynihan), who wears a tiny crown (Where did he get it? No one knows) and rules over all mammals with a gentle hand.
Mabel’s friendship with King George, who doesn’t know she is human, becomes the movie’s heartstring-pulling core. The jovial royal believes he can persuade Jerry to change course. Mabel, conversely, doesn’t think Jerry will listen. Her cynicism and King George’s sincere faith in others clash. Among Mabel’s non-furry pals, Tom Lizard (Tom Law) becomes a scene-stealer. (The crazy-eyed, eloquent reptile first became an online sensation as part of a post-credits scene in “Elio.”)
Chong and his team include a minuscule but brilliant detail that illustrates how character design can have major narrative impact: When the animals are speaking among themselves, their eyes are large and expressive, full of life. But when the film takes the perspective of a human looking at the forest dwellers, their eyes appear small and dark, almost nondescript. It’s a subtly visual symbol for how we often fail to gaze at others with understanding.
There are many heavy hitters still to come, but “Hoppers” feels like the first great animated movie of the year. At a time when our right to protest is under siege, this sci-fi yarn exalts the way an individual’s conviction can plant seeds of change, leading to a stronger sense of community. Neither simplistically optimistic nor preachy, “Hoppers” smuggles timely ideas inside a rodent body. Pond rules would probably call that a beaver victory.
‘Hoppers’
Advertisement
Rated: PG, for action/peril, some scary images and mild language
Pankaj Kapur in ‘Jab Khuli Kitaab’
| Photo Credit: ZEE5
Cracks in conjugality constitute a common conflict device in Hindi cinema. Usually, the male commits the bhool and expects forgiveness. Most fissures appear early, but what if a grandmother reveals a long-buried truth? Can the man accept it as easily as he expects forgiveness? Seasoned actor and theatre practitioner Saurabh Shukla gives new meaning to a prescribed book, making us both chuckle and reflect.
Being a cinematic adaptation of his play, the constraints of the medium are not completely erased, but it shines as a heartfelt exploration of love’s endurance.
The film’s core premise revolves around a decades-old secret — Anusuya’s (Dimple Kapadia) confession of an indiscretion early in their marriage — that surfaces after she awakens from a coma. This revelation forces Gopal (Pankaj Kapur) to re-examine 50 years of trust through the lens of this buried truth as a forgotten ad hoc presence in his life threatens to become a permanent peeve. Enter Negi (Aparshakti Khurana), a young client-chasing lawyer who becomes an unlikely facilitator of tough conversations, legal proceedings, and emotional confrontations.
Synopsis: Gopal and Anusuya’s decades-long marriage is shaken by a revelation.
Though the transgression is a distant memory, its emergence shatters Gopal’s sense of shared space with Anusuya. He questions whether the life he built was an illusion. The woman he cared for seems suddenly unfamiliar. The film asks questions that may seem flimsy but persist in memory. For instance, Anusuya’s love for poetry that Gopal never really discovers, or the concept of marzi (inclination) in relationships.
Meanwhile, the revelation shakes the family unit. The parents initially try to shield the children from the truth, but the tension inevitably seeps in. Initially, it seems the son and son-in-law are bitten by the Baghban bug, but as the film progresses, the writing provides space for a dialogue on how companionship extends beyond the couple.
The film quietly reflects on the role of memory in a marriage, treating it as a central force that both sustains and disrupts long-term bonds. Gopal’s growing dementia suddenly seems like a cure for his marital problem. Without underlining, Shukla also explores the impact of the revelation on Gopal’s social psyche. Suddenly, a seemingly progressive man starts behaving like a parochial uncle, as we find dozens of them around us these days. Is it always the personal that shapes the political socialisation? Another uncle reminds us that laughing too much leads to days of sorrow, as if the Almighty has assigned us a quota of happiness.
Advertisement
A still from the film
| Photo Credit:
ZEE5
Kapur’s masterful control shines through in Gopal’s progression from bewilderment and stubborn pride to vulnerability and, eventually, the rediscovery of love. Over the years, Kapur has shone in the estuary of comedy that holds a tragedy in its fold. He lives the script’s shifting tones. From the tender caregiving scenes in the beginning to the profound internal shift in demeanour and body language toward the film’s resolution— the transformation feels earned and believable.
It is hard to believe Dimple as a wilting wife, but soon we realise it’s the gravitas in her voice and personality that makes Anusuya a believable picture of regret and resilience.
We know the coma is more like a metaphor, but the medical aspect is treated with a heavy hand. The plot unfolds in a somewhat linear and foreseeable way, with the revelation and its consequences following expected beats. The contrivances, the dot-to-dot mechanics of storytelling, surface in the second half as if the director is keen on arriving at the crux without peeling the layers properly. But it is the chemistry between Shukla and Kapur that prevents this bittersweet dramedy from becoming schmaltzy.
The movie is called “Heel” and its frenetic opening — a flash-cut glimpse of young, handsome, swaggeringly cruel Tommy (Anson Boon) in drug-fueled party mode — seems enough to explain the title. The next time we see him, though, he’s neck-shackled in the basement of a remote English estate. What follows in Polish filmmaker Jan Komasa’s blackly comic, unnerving thriller is clearly meant to evoke “Heel’s” more obedience-minded reading.
And who would be harshing this hooligan’s buzz with a case of reform-minded abduction? An eerily isolated, rules-driven nuclear family: mild-mannered, soft-spoken Chris (Stephen Graham), haunted Catherine (Andrea Riseborough) and polite son Jonathan (Kit Rakusen). They all may as well have sprung from the combined neo-gothic conjurings of Edward Gorey and Harold Pinter. Under Komasa’s direction, the mix of fractured fable and terroristic morality play in Bartek Bartosik’s screenplay is absurd but potent, giving “Heel” enough psychologically twisted juju to nearly always feel like more than the sum of its parts.
Our first glimpse of Tommy chained up, pleading to be let go, is through the eyes of a young Macedonian refugee, Katrina (Monika Frajczyk), being given a tour of the large countryside manor where she’s just been hired by Chris for twice-a-week housework. Katrina, like us, is rightly horrified but she’s in her own bind: undocumented, saved by Chris from the streets, with her signature on a confidentiality agreement and a deportation threat hanging over her. She’s hardly in a position to do much more than accept what’s going on as a grimmer version of her own dead-end predicament.
And yet what’s readily apparent is that this weird, fragile, insular family is genuinely keen on folding Tommy into their lives. They’re also convinced of their unorthodox methods, which hinge on reinforcement and reward. Tommy seems receptive, too, with each invitation to participate in his abductors’ togetherness (meals, movie nights, a picnic). This is when “Heel” is at its most alluringly queasy, a dark commentary on all families as institutions inherently built on confinement and emotional blackmail. (It’s no coincidence one of the movie’s executive producers is Jerzy Skolimowski, who made his own pointed kidnapping allegory with “Moonlighting.”)
Everyone’s broken, so the collective strength of the cast in keeping us on our toes about where this is all headed is a huge plus. The wiry Boon doles out his brash character’s reserves of vulnerability to stunning effect — Tommy is a difficult part and Boon knows how to make it revealing and suspenseful. Graham’s tweaked, sensitive patriarch is tantalizingly far from the heartbreaking dad of “Adolescence” and the gloriously oddball Riseborough makes the most of her faint-voiced mom’s severity. Frajczyk and Rakusen are also pitch-perfect.
Advertisement
Last year Komasa had another family-centered thriller with “Anniversary,” a movie about politics corrupting a happy home. But we know that equation already. “Heel” is Tolstoy’s happy-family maxim cooked in a mad scientist’s lab. While it sometimes shows its seams as an idea movie, its elegant disturbia has a boldness, recalling that great mind-game ’60s era that gave us “TheServant,” “The Collector,” and the early psychological freak-outs of Komasa’s countryman, Roman Polanski.
