Brontëmania!

Wuthering Heightsmania may be slowly fading only to make way for Brontëmania. As reported by The Straits Times:

Perched on the edge of the rugged Yorkshire moors that inspired Emily Bronte to write her masterpiece “Wuthering Heights”, the quaint village of Haworth has long been a place of literary pilgrimage.

Now the latest big-screen adaptation of her classic 1847 novel – starring Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi and with a Charli XCX soundtrack – is drawing a fresh influx of visitors.

It was here that Emily and her sisters, Charlotte and Anne, lived and wrote.

More than 150 years after the sisters’ deaths, “the world is still fascinated with their stories,” said Canadian retiree Nancy Marto, adding that being able to visit Haworth was “a dream come true”.

“I think the fact that there is a new version of ‘Wuthering Heights’... speaks to the power of these authors, to Emily, but also to her sisters,” she said.

Two weeks after the release of the film, picturesque Haworth in north-west England with its narrow, cobbled streets and small stone houses, is packed. [...]

Mr Johnnie Brigg, a local tour guide, has been inundated with requests in recent weeks.

“They want to come here and experience the Brontes, the moor, and find their own interpretation of Emily,” he said.

The film would attract a “whole new generation of people” who had not yet read the book but were “completely besotted” after seeing the film, he added.

The parsonage between the village and the moors where the Brontes lived with their clergyman father and brother, Branwell, is now a museum dedicated to their memory.

Emily’s sister Charlotte also wrote “Jane Eyre” here, another classic of English literature.

The museum’s Mia Ferullo, who has been giving talks on “Bronte-mania” for the past fortnight, said “so many people” were “picking up the book for the first time” as a result of the film.

Museum director Rebecca Yorke said 500 people of all ages and backgrounds visited on one Saturday.

Numbers like that were usually only seen in peak season such as during the August summer holidays, Ms Yorke said.

“Everyone is talking about Emily Bronte and ‘Wuthering Heights’.... It’s just extraordinary,” she added. 

Also in Yorkshire Live.

Wales Online recommends a cottage in Haworth as a staycation option to enjoy World Book Day.

Become a Brontë for the weekend in Haworth, West Yorkshire

Heathcliff Cottage – Haworth, West Yorkshire

Sleeps: Six

Price: Seven nights from £565

The aptly named Heathcliff Cottage is a traditional stone-built retreat set in the heart of Haworth, the village where the Brontë sisters resided.

Complete with subtle nods to Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights, including inspired artwork, it’s the perfect base for fans of the story. Beautiful interiors add depth and character, including exposed wood and stone, as well as luxurious colour schemes.

The Yorkshire Moors, where Wuthering Heights is set, are within walking distance of Heathcliff Cottage, and guests can also explore the independent shops of Haworth before popping into a local pub or café. There’s also the Brontë Parsonage Museum, which holds regular talks, exhibitions, and displays. (Daniel Smith)

The Herald reports on someone who had got the name of Wuthering Heights wrong for years.

We recently mentioned a blockbuster movie based on a classic Emily Bronte novel. Which inspires Jenny Wilson to admit that for years she believed the book was called ‘Withering’ Heights.

“I always wondered,” says Jenny, “how much the Heights withered. Was it enough for them to become Lows instead of Heights?” (Lorne Jackson)

BBC News feels the ned to feature a bookshop owner saying that, 'Wuthering Heights is not bonkbuster like the film'.

A bookshop owner says customers wanting to buy a copy of Wuthering Heights because they think it is a "bonkbuster" are "going to be seriously disappointed".

Demand for Emily Brontë's magnum opus soared after the release of Emerald Fennell's film adaption starring Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi.

According to Penguin Classics, sales of the 19th Century gothic tragedy went up by 469% year on year in January 2026, with 8,795 more copies sold.

But Suzie Grogan, from Framlingham Books, warned that any shoppers hoping for the novel to be as raunchy as the film version might end up feeling shortchanged.

"I'm going to tell you, if you're looking for a bonkbuster, you're going to be seriously disappointed," she said.

"There's so much naughty stuff in it (the film) and, to be quite honest, Emily Brontë must be turning in her grave in Howarth [sic] at the idea of it, frankly." (Sarah Lilley and George King)

Similarly, The Shield claims that 'Emily Brontë died of tuberculosis, but ‘Wuthering Heights’ (2026) was still the worst thing that happened to her'. We know it's said in good fun, but she was an actual woman who lived and breathed and who lost her mother when she was 3 years old and then saw three of her siblings die and saying that an innocuous movie adaptation was worse than that is rather awkward.

The Sun reports gleefully that a Reddit user has spotted a blunder in Wuthering Heights 2026:

The original novel Wuthering Heights was published by Emily Brontë in 1847, but the story itself is set much earlier – beginning in 1801.

Heathcliff’s arrival at Wuthering Heights takes place in 1771, with the new film adaptation wrapping up events in 1784.

But sharp-eyed fans have pointed out that Belgium – referenced in the movie – wasn’t founded until 1830, decades after the timeline in which the story unfolds.

Taking on Reddit, one fan wrote: “In Wuthering Heights, Isabella, when talking to Cathy, boasts about dresses from France, Italy and… Belgium.

“This makes no sense as Belgium did not exist as a state until 1830, almost half a century after the events of the film take place.”

Despite the major blunder, the UK ranks Wuthering Heights among the top-grossing films of the year, with strong ticket sales behind it. (Henna Sharma)

The 'despite the major blunder' bit truly had us in stitches. In all likelihood it's a nod to Emily Brontë's own stay in Belgium.

Some more reviews:

Berkeley High Jacket:

The ambiance emphasizes the unsettling, somewhat dreamlike feel that encapsulates “Wuthering Heights.” 

All things considered, the film is not an exact adaptation of Brontë’s gothic romance novel “Wuthering Heights.” If one goes into the film expecting a true adaptation of the original novel, they would leave the theaters disappointed. As its own, individual work of art, the film proves to be a beautiful picture, throwing the audience into the setting. “Wuthering Heights” is a movie really made to be seen in a theater to experience the true atmospheric nature of it. (Zoe Whitman)

The Triangle:

Robbie and Elordi’s overindulgent (but fitting) performances would have become unbearable if it was not for the refreshing ice-cold chill given by Chau’s performance.  She dominates every scene she is in with an enigmatic vindictiveness that makes her next moves unpredictable but empathetic. She is the daunting voice of reason that is the antithesis to the indulgences the rest of the story takes. 

Directors need to be less afraid of humiliating themselves in a world where online dialogue is attached to success. A director who is unafraid of making bad movies will always be appreciated by certain movie-goers. Film is Fennell’s freedom to make her shameless art, a quality that produces the most dynamic artists.  It is what has the power to turn the passive experience of watching a movie into experiencing a confessional. 

Those who want a movie like Fennell’s debut film, “Promising Young Woman”, will have mixed feelings. “Promising Young Woman” was clinical and heavy. “Wuthering Heights” is the levity in her career, one that allows herself to lean into the fantasies that “Promising Young Woman” and “Saltburn” rejected. 

For all its political incorrectness, it is well-meaning and devoted to making the audience love Cathy and Heathcliff as much as Fennell does. It is a tender and frustrating ode to the stories that inspired teenage fanfiction careers. (Maddie Dort)

Folio Weekly:

But the greatest sin “Wuthering Heights” commits is that, despite the promised eroticism that the film was made and sold on, it’s just not remotely hot and, instead, surprisingly tame. I can accept and enjoy a film where the romance takes a backseat to more simplistic, lustful needs, but if that’s the case then you need to take a bigger swing than Fennell does here, where the most charged imagery she can muster is a repeated motif of Heathcliff’s sweaty, scarred back and of a slimy white snail slowly trickling down a window Cathy gazes longingly out of. I’m not saying that the film needed to have scenes of full penetration to fulfill its promise of being a sexually charged epic romance, but at the very least, Elordi could have hung some dong or something. (Harry Moore)

The Argonaut:

As a movie rather than an adaptation, the movie was entertaining though it exaggerated the dark romance elements to an uncomfortable degree, using lust as a selling point rather than a narrative to tell a deeper story. The cinematics were beautiful, showcasing the green misty moors and elaborate gothic manors, whose gloom adds to the narratives depressing tone. At the same time, this overshadowed the plot to the extent that the only take was that the directors preferred vibes to substance. 

The costume design was strikingly beautiful but unfitting for the 19th century  

setting. Elordi alone wore clothes fitting of the setting compared to Robbie whose elaborate outfit looked like it belongs at the MET Gala. The worst offender of Robbie’s outfits was a dress that looked like colorful plastic wrap. 

For such a bad plot, the actors were able to spin so much tension into every moment they appeared on-screen together. This movie wants to be the next dark romance obsession of the young women, and may be for some, but like “Saltburn,” another story about unhealthy obsession gone wrong from the same director, this movie will fade from cultural memory in a couple of years. (Andrea Roberts)

The Collegian:

Now, if Fennell had chosen to create an original film inspired by “Wuthering Heights,” à la “50 Shades of Grey” to “Twilight,” there wouldn’t have been so much to complain about. “Wuthering Heights” is, understandably, one of the hardest novels to adapt to film. All adaptations so far have lacked at least some important aspects of the novel because there is so much content and symbolism to sift through that it’s hard to pin down what is most important to focus on. 

But choosing a story known for its criticism of institutionalized classism and racism and turning it into a horny romantic drama will never be appealing. 

If media literacy is dead and buried, Emerald Fennell is among those holding a shovel. (Gimena Baez Baez)

And yet sales of the novel went up by 469% as reported above, so perhaps she's shining a light instead.

A contributor to Her Campus reviews the film. The Tab discusses Cathy's mother.

The Montclarion reviews Charli XCX'S Wuthering Heights album.

Though a few of the tracks can feel similar to each other at times, Charli’s lyricism and modernized theme bring forth the need for feeling in an epic drama such as this film. Each song focuses on the tensions seen between the two characters, Catherine and Heathcliff, played by Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi.

While some of the repeated tempos and lyrics bring some tracks down, the album is still able to shine and makes the most sense when seeing the film, as it creates the world Fennell is attempting to give audiences.

The “Wuthering Heights” soundtrack is a triumphant pivot for Charli xcx, who is only just getting started in her work on films. Its gothic, modern-pop sound marks a new beginning in the singer’s undebated discography, and will push her to new heights no matter what she does next. (Diego Baez)

The Telegraph and Argus reports that Northern Ballet is returning to the stage.

Claude-Michel Schönberg’s Wuthering Heights will open in March 2027 at Leeds Grand Theatre before performances at venues including Sadler’s Wells in London. [...]

Artistic Director Federico Bonelli said: “Northern Ballet has a history of transforming classic novels into blockbuster ballets and Wuthering Heights is no exception. The combined might of David Nixon’s choreography and Claude-Michel Schönberg’s music is an unstoppable force of emotion which carries the audience through this tumultuous and tragic love story. We began our trio of Northern stories with a Jane Eyre revival in 2025 and Gentleman Jack in 2026, so it feels only fitting to bring back Wuthering Heights, a ballet I know is a fan favourite with many of our loyal audiences.” (Emma Clayton)

Far Out Magazine looks into 'Cliff Richard’s utterly bonkers ‘Wuthering Heights’ musical'.

Was it a dare? A mistake? A figment of this writer’s imagination? None of the above. I have seen all two hours of this cultural artefact, and trust me when I say that it is the most memorable feature-length adaptation of the novel that has ever been made. It may also be the worst, but that is beside the point.

Vanishingly minimal choreography, plastic rocks, two very bad wigs, and an incongruously jaunty soundtrack make this production what it is. The acting excels at loudness. The makeup excels at the colour brown. Richard does a lot of arm tossing, like a mime who’s been tasked with depicting the slow, excruciating death of a rapidly deflating blow-up doll, but unlike a mime, however, he makes a lot of sounds, some of them musical, some of them not. He is fully committed, and it is one of the bravest performances I’ve ever seen.

Richard has been obsessed with Wuthering Heights ever since he read the novel as a kid, but it wasn’t until he hit his fifties that he had time to do something about it. Emily Brontë’s 1847 story follows the destructive love story between Cathy Earnshaw and her adopted foundling brother Heathcliff. After she marries a wealthy neighbour, he dedicates his life to seeking revenge on everyone in her family. It’s dark, violent, and nasty, three words that do not come to mind when thinking of the crooner behind ‘Miss You Nights.’

Still, by the early 1990s, Richard was itching to get back into acting. Those who only know him as the Christian-adjacent chart-topper might not be aware that in the 1960s, he was consistently beating James Bond at the box office with his series of promotional musicals. In the ‘80s, he took his acting qualifications to the theatre to appear in the intergalactic space musical Time, which was roundly panned by critics but was a hit with his voracious fanbase.

Ready to tread the boards once more, Richard finally acknowledged what had been lurking in his heart since boyhood. “There was one dream role that I longed to play above all others,” he wrote in his memoir. “I wanted to be Heathcliff.” He wasn’t completely delusional. He knew that no one in their right mind would cast a 55-year-old white Englishman as a teenage “gipsy”. But he had a solution. It wasn’t to cast someone younger or dial up Tom Cruise and ask for some of the fetal stem cells he’s been stockpiling. His solution was to produce the thing on his own so that he had the last word on casting.

He assembled a stellar crew. His former bandmate and Olivia Newton-John collaborator, John Farrar, composed the music, Tim Rice, who co-wrote several of Andrew Lloyd Webber’s most successful musicals, penned the lyrics, and Frank Dunlop, who founded the Young Vic, took directorial duties. The casting choices were less important because this was no regular Wuthering Heights adaptation. This version was to be called simply Heathcliff, and despite a lot of scripted wailing from Helen Hobson, who plays Cathy, none of the other characters register.

Despite the supergroup of artists at the helm, things went terribly wrong with Heathcliff from its inception. Where Kate Bush managed to create a sound and lyrics that evoke the tone of the novel (“How could you leave me / When I needed to possess you? / I hated you, I loved you too”), the same cannot be said of Richard’s version. While the lyrics delve into the darkness of the subject matter, the sound of it is, well, the Cliff Richard sound. Nearly all the numbers are shimmery, synth-heavy ballads so benign that they practically wipe your brain clean of all thought or sensation, the sonic equivalent of a very effective lobotomy.

The choreography is more milling than dancing, and even the way the actors move through each scene without the musical numbers is strangely circumspect. At one point, when Heathcliff ventures to India (this is not in the book) and confronts the local monarch with a pistol, the man does a tiny wave of his hands to indicate that he doesn’t want to be shot dead at point-blank range. This is pretty much the extent of the physical work.

The biggest problem of all, of course, is that Richard, who has spent his entire career denouncing the drugs and alcohol-soaked antics of his peers, simply does not possess the darkness required to play a grade A bastard. Even when he beats his wife, he may as well be lightly swiping her with a velvet glove for all the violent rage it imparts. He does take strides to slip, chameleon-like, into his character. The scene in India includes a lot of hookah smoking, which one can assume is the famously drug-averse Richard’s shorthand for utter moral degradation. For his audience, this must have been the equivalent of slapping a sign on his bronzed forehead reading “NOT CLIFF”.

The acting comes into its full glory during scenes of plot-driven drama, such as when Mr Earnshaw falls down dead after lightly cuffing his daughter or when Cathy appears to perish randomly, without ailment. Rocketing up the plastic stone steps of a Yorkshire promontory, Heathcliff delivers what Richard called his most affecting lines of dialogue.

If it wasn’t for this moment, this musical might not be worth remembering, but skip to the end of the trailer (or watch the whole thing if you’re trying to prove something) and wait for Richard’s delivery. “I cannot live without my life,” he hisses, “I cannot live without my sooooooooouuuuuuuuuul.” That last word is bellowed several octaves above comfort, and it’s a choice that turns what could simply be a bad performance into a virtuosic one. Richard is not an actor, but my god, is he a performer.

Heathcliff was predictably panned by critics, who dutifully called out the ropey acting, stilted choreography, and overall tedium. But the pop star knew his audience. Posters for the show featured the heading “When Reviews Aren’t Good Audiences Know Better,” followed by a list of dire quotes from critics and claims that half a million tickets had been sold anyway.

Why this shining example of flamboyant theatrical tosh has been forgotten is a mystery, but it deserves to be celebrated. We don’t have to pretend it’s good, but we should all admire the guts and originality behind it. What other pop star at the peak of their powers would do something so daring and misguided? JLo’s This is Me… Now was a self-serving vanity project in which she burnished her usual persona at great monetary expense.

There was no jeopardy in it, and with Heathcliff, we got to see a pop star try something completely insane that they had never done before… we can only hope that, by excavating this deliriously strange relic from the dregs of the ‘90s, we might inspire James Blunt to embark on a musical version of Oliver Twist in which he plays the titular child, or Susan Boyle to star as the lead character in a genre-bending adaptation of Annie. The possibilities are endless. (Lily Hardman)

Far Out Magazine is impressed by the fact that Kate Bush recorded Wuthering Heights in one take.

Bush explained, “When I first read Wuthering Heights I thought the story was so strong. This young girl in an era when the female role was so inferior and she was coming out with this passionate, heavy stuff. Great subject matter for a song. I loved writing it.”

It really is a remarkable performance, and not just because of the palpable emotion that Bush is able to imbue into the song. It’s also because Bush was able to channel those emotions in just a single go: Bush did one take of the song, and that was it. The recording for the song was mostly done in a single night, including taping the guitar solo and mixing the final track. It’s a remarkable feat of efficiency, even 35 years later. “There was no compiling,” engineer Kelly said. “We started the mix at around midnight and Kate was there the whole time, encouraging us… We got on with the job and finished at about five or six that morning.” (Tyler Golsen)