My 2026 has been pretty awful, but there’s one thing that’s given me a lot of joy in recent days: everyone slamming Emerald Fennell and her bullsh-t adaptation of Wuthering Heights. The actual reviews of WH have been hilarious and the tweets and skeets from people who watched it opening weekend have been a joy to behold. People are really mad that Fennell screwed up a classic story and turned this tortured gothic novel into a cheesy vibes-only “romance.” Now, all that being said, all of the box-office prognosticators said that because of the studio’s marketing to the female audience, the film would end up being a pretty big hit overall. They were right. Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” got to #1 in North America and had a tidy opening weekend here and in Europe.
Emerald Fennell’s bold reimagining of “Wuthering Heights” brought crowds of women to movie theaters this weekend. The Warner Bros. release topped the box office charts and nabbed the title for the year’s biggest opening with $34.8 million in ticket sales in its first three days in North American theaters, according to studio estimates Sunday.
According to PostTrak polling, an estimated 76% of those ticket buyers were women. By the end of Monday’s Presidents Day holiday, the total could rise to $40 million from its 3,682 locations.
“Wuthering Heights” was also No. 1 at the global box office with $82 million, ranking as the top worldwide debut of the year.
Those ticket sales include a better-than-expected $42 million internationally from 76 territories as well as $40 million over the four-day domestic debut. (Rival studios believe the North American tally will be closer to $35 million through the President’s Day holiday on Monday.) Warner Bros. is backing the $80 million production. Directed by Emerald Fennell and starring Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi, the bold and steamy remake of Emily Brontë’s classic novel follows a toxic relationship between star-crossed lovers Catherine Earnshaw and Heathcliff in 18th century England.
Since reviews and word-of-mouth have been mixed and domestic ticket sales were slightly softer than expected, “Wuthering Heights” may rely on international audiences to offset its budget. (That’s because movie theater owners keep roughly half of theatrical revenues.) Top overseas markets were the United Kingdom with $10.3 million, Italy with $4.4 million and Australia with $4.3 million. Warner Bros. didn’t report any grosses from Asian territories, though the film has yet to open in two key markets, China and Japan.
It apparently cost around $80 million to make Wuthering Heights, so the worst thing that will happen is that the film completely breaks even. It’s far more likely that the film continues to have a successful theatrical run and that everyone makes money on this. So, this is a success for women directors, a success for Margot Robbie (she not only starred, but produced it through her LuckyChap shingle), and a success for anyone willing to make and market films for a primarily female audience. It can be all of those things and still be a terrible movie though! This honestly reminds me of the Fifty Shades of Grey phenomenon, where the films were unquestionably major successes, the audiences were primarily horny women, and afterwards, the actual film industry simply ignored that market and FSOG’s success and acted like it was all a one-off which would never be duplicated. I think the real lesson here should be: women are willing to go to the actual movie theater if they’re given a fun, dumb, sexy option which is marketed directly to them. They said that about The Housemaid’s recent box office success too – that women just want a fun, dumb option, something they can see with their girlfriends.
Photos courtesy of “Wuthering Heights” and Backgrid, Cover Images.
-
- Hollywood, CA Warner Bros. Pictures and MRC Presents World Premiere of “Wuthering Heights” at TCL Chinese Theatre in Hollywood, California. Pictured: Emerald Fennell BACKGRID USA 28 JANUARY 2026 BYLINE MUST READ: Juan Rico / BACKGRID USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
-
- Paris, FRANCE Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi stole the spotlight at the Wuthering Heights premiere at Le Grand Rex in Paris on February 2, 2026. The co-stars posed together on the red carpet, with Robbie stunning in a velvet red dress and Elordi looking dashing in a sleek black suit. Pictured: Margot Robbie BACKGRID USA 2 FEBRUARY 2026 BYLINE MUST READ: Best Image / BACKGRID USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
-
- Sydney, AUSTRALIA Actress Margot Robbie, actor Jacob Elordi and model Hailey Bieber attend the opening night celebration of “Wuthering Heights” at the State Theatre in Sydney, Australia. Pictured: Margot Robbie & Jacob Elordi BACKGRID USA 12 FEBRUARY 2026 BYLINE MUST READ: Marc Skinner / BACKGRID USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
I’m not surprised it did well. There seems to be little competition when films open these days as only seems to be one major release each week. Also it’s a period film from world loved book so easy to attract a decent audience if marketed right even if the film is not good.
So here’s the thing. It’s not a flop by any means. But is it doing as well as the studio hoped? Absolutely not. That $34.2 million estimate number has already been updated on other sites down by $2 million. It’s not hitting $40 million for the 4 day. International is pretty good but once again, studios are spending too much. The $80 million budget does not include the insane amount of advertising. They have a looooong way to go to break even. With mixed word of mouth and bad reviews, it’s unlikely to happen.
It’s an overspending problem once again. Why did this cost $80 million?
Do we know that the 80 m production didn’t include the promo? Look, it’s gonna make money. How much is TBD. What’s funny to me is that everything being promoted recently talks about the “yearning” and the actor’s chemistry. Gee what press press run are people capitalizing off of, lol.
That’s direct from the trades, so yes we do know that the $80 million did not include promotions and advertising. Add tens of millions for that at least. And that’s kind of my point: Without knowing the exact amount, the studio would still need to make at least $200 million to come close to break even at the box office. These numbers don’t get them there, not easily. But I just don’t see how the studio saw a chance to be profitable at the box office at that budget. It’s bizarre. Streaming revenue and rentals I suppose?
And yes implying that a married new mother was having (at least) an emotional affair to promote your movie is super gross. And then from most feedback I’m hearing their actual on screen chemistry is “meh” to “OK I guess”! 🤣 Thankfully this movie is not a breakout hit (it’s doing fine) which hopefully will make someone think twice next time about pulling that. Not worth it, it wouldn’t have made a penny more or less.
With promo costs and theater percentages a film usually needs to do 2.5x its budget to break even. So for WH that’d be $200 million. Nowadays there are additional monies like tax breaks etc that can be factored in, plus streaming studios are usually fine if a film makes back just its budget because they want it for their library, but that’s the general formula.
WH was front loaded so we’ll see if it has legs or not.
Not surprised…one thing the Director & her team knows how to do is promote TF outta their movies & use the HELL outta social media…HOWEVA…after “Saltburn”…I’ve had my fill of Fennell…and can wait for it to come to streaming…
Agreed, but I will probably be hate watching. A novel about unhealthy obsessions and stalking isn’t the greatest love story ever told.
LOL, I mean yeah. I was one that thought it would earn money. No surprise there. The casting of heathcliff has always been my issue. I wana see some POC as the main characters and not the side characters. This was an adaptation that could’ve done that bc it fit the source material. But nope. Will Emerald Fennel ever do that in one of her films, cast a POC as a main character and not a supporting one? Idk. And surely she wouldn’t be the only director not to do so. Sigh. I’m tired.
Racism is so fundamental to the story I’m not sure how it works without it.
You are correct. But there does need to be acknowledgement that at the time the book was written racism against the Irish by the British was very much a thing. In fact, the book was written and published during a fucking British genocide of the Irish people with over a million dead and more than that fleeing the country. Ireland’s population still hasn’t recovered.
Emily Brontë wrote an incredibly compelling character in Heathcliff. A major part of that is each of the characters in the novel sees him quite differently. He is described throughout in contradictory ways. There’s a strong critical history of him being seen as otherworldly. Liverpool was the port of the slave trade, but it’s also the closest port to Ireland and how most refugees arrived.
I think the scholarship showing that there is evidence in the novel that Emily Brontë also included details that Heathcliff could have been an orphan from the British overseas colonies, instead of the one next door, is compelling. But claiming that the most obvious possible origin for Heathcliff, and the one accepted at the time is a racist lie and no other possibilities exist is presentism at it’s worst.
@Mac I think what annoys me the most is that the director said she basically read this book as a teen (like 14 or something) and this is her version of what she wanted when she read the book. So removing the MMCs race and whitewashing it to fit her idea crush is disgusting. Completely reworking this complex book about obsession, race, and complexities of upper class views of classism and the horrifying outcomes of it all meshed together is just a fervor dream of whitewashed eroticism and that is my issue. Emily Bronte put in the work in that text to make sure we all knew Heathcliff was no-white. He was most likely Southeast Asian (perhaps biracial Indian) and at the very least Romani. For the director to strip that away into what she feels is attractive a statement. The DV victim in the book being flipped into a sub who enjoys humiliation dog kink is mouth dropping. So of course this movie was successful it’s vibes, it’s Taylor Swift feminism, it’s white woman fan fic version of Wuthering Heights and they wear ahistorical pretty gowns.
@tis true Yes he could definitely be Black Irish or even Black Welsh. People tend to think that only means you have dark hair and/or eyes but that’s not true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Irish_(folklore)
I think that actual marketing for the film upped that 80 mil budget significantly. Marketing was relentless and everywhere, I actively avoided this movie and it was still in my face
So much marketing. I was waiting to board a delayed Eurostar in Paris a couple of weeks back and all the ad screens were playing a short clip/ad on a loop endlessly.
YES! Marketing these days, especially for a movie like this that had LOTS of marketing materials, is usually half the filming budget! So the movie made $82 million globally in week 1. Typically, week 2 brings in half the money in week 2. So it actually needs to make $120 million to break even, which is very possible in the next couple of weeks – but probably not much profit to make. I’m sure the studio was hoping for a big blockbuster with those actors.
The formula is generally 2.5x the budget for profitability. So it’d need $200 million to break even.
Turner classic movies featured the 1939 wuthering heights with Laurence Olivier and Merle oberon. It is now available on demand. And copies of the book are included with best sellers in bookstores
The 1939 version is STILL my fave due to how GLORIOUS Olivier & Oberon are💚…along with Fitzgerald…the 1992 version with Binoche & Fiennes is the one that I think is most faithful to the novel…
And ANYONE who reads the novel would KNOW that…THIS…is NOT a love story!🫨
But that’s the thing. I don’t think many people have actually read the novel! Sure they may buy it and keep it on their bookshelf but did they actually read it? I doubt it. To most people it’s a love story, a sad love story that does not end well. C’est tout. That’s it.
Not surprised at all that it’s a hit and that most people aren’t going to care if it’s faithful to its source.
Full disclosure: I hated that book and as far as I’m concerned any changes would only benefit it!
@sueinorleans I think all of this has proven that it is 100% obvious that vast majority of people have never actually read the novel so they don’t perceive why people are upset or why there is controversy over this no-Wuthering Heights Wuthering Heights beyond remix.
I think the 1939 version is what influenced a ton of people’s perception of the story as opposed to actually knowing what’s in the book. And, yes, Olivier (yum) and Oberon were perfect for that particular version even if not book accurate. They were 32 and 28 respectively too which is funny considering Robbie and Elordi are 35 and 28 respectively. But inaccurate ages and costumes were such a big deal then.
I wouldn’t be surprised something Emerald Fennell worked on was successful.
Racist white women prevail, yay.
The film industry is always surprised that women go to the movies. They were blindsided back in 1996 that First Wives Club was a hit. There was about 30 minutes of navel gazing about women being a possible demographic – and then they decided this was a one-off that would never be repeated.
Yeah they also seemed surprised that Bridesmaids did well (LOVE that movie) – same with the all female Ghostbusters (Leslie Jones was my fave).
Same with Barbie. If ‘the menz’ don’t go it can’t succeed. Maybe now they’ll finally figure out that women go to movies and want to see movies about other women once in awhile!
I just wish they made more films about women that didn’t insult our intelligence, and didn’t just cater to romance novel fans. I appreciate a good romance as much as the next woman, but we are so much more than that.
@jennifer romans Even though I don’t personally like Wuthering Heights the novel (and have exponentially less respect of like for this movie version), the book is a Gothic Fiction story that is not a romance and speaks to other larger themes. The director decided to remove all of the enriching Gothic Fic themes into a weird Dark Romance for personal reasons but Romance doesn’t deserve to catch strays. Romance is the highest selling genre of books. Romance is heavily created, curated, populated and supported by women. It’s a very women-focused space. Romance in general is very expressive and creative, by extension so are love stories in other fiction genres.
I’m not surprised. There was a lot of hype put out there about this film. There was a ton of discourse on socials.
I saw it on Valentine’s Day and enjoyed it. It’s not perfect. (The ending is chaotic.) but there are so many parts that were amazing. Every moment of Isabella on screen was an absolute unhinged joy. I also thought Margot Robbie was great as a petty, feral Cathy. I enjoyed Emerald Fennell movies in general, though. I think you wouldn’t like this if she isn’t your cup of tea.
I hate all the Brontë books…find them unreadable and I am a big reader of 19th century fiction…but I think any of the Brontes would cringe at “love story” being a descriptor of their work…
@Constance Big facts. The fact Bronte wrote this as a huge discussion on how racism in the upper class society in particular breeds obsession and violence to be flipped into a sexy stylish breezy story is appalling.
@imaratotha219 I don’t know that I would call it “breezy.” Class is depicted in pretty brutal ways, and the ways in which class inequality do harm are on really clear display. But yeah, its focus on class comes at the expense of attention to race. It would be great for an adaptation to tackle that. (There’s a young adult novel by Tasha Suri that retells the story of Heathcliff as the son of a South Asian lascar that I wish would get adapted. It fleshed out Healthcliff’s missing years in the original, and it’s a really delightful read.)
@Meg I say breezy because of how the ads/promo/marketing materials presented the movie not the movie itself. Tasha Suri’s book sounds nice. I’m not a fan of Wuthering Heights in general but I am happy to see some people promote Tasha’s book as counter-programming.
All the controversy makes me want to do two things. Re-read the novel since it’s been sixty years. And see this movie. The 1939 William Wyler version is worth a rewatch too. I’m not sure I have seen it in its entirety.
I’m one of those tedious people who likes movies named after a source material to actually reflect the source. Eg i HATED with a passion the last I think movie version of P and P with that boring Mathew Mcfadyen playing Darcy. And Keira K as Lizzie. So I’ll likely avoid a 14 yr old girl’s wet dream version of the book.
Gd, i’m just like you–there are at least five of us lol
Add me to the list and don’t get me started on that last version of P&P. WH is a gothic, generational soap opera and maybe should be a mini series to cover the full scope of the story – and even then, it’s not romance people think it is.
I have a friend who teaches English Lit, so she naturally had to go see it opening night. She said that the review that called it a “smoothbrained” version was pretty accurate, but that it was enjoyable for what it was. And she’s really looking forward to the hilarious analysis by the inevitable lazy students who will try to cheat by watching this particular adaptation rather than actually reading the book.
I heard a review that pointed out that emerald Fennel seems to always make films where a low born person tries to move beyond their class and end up killing the rich people.
Also the film should have been called Cathy and Heathcliff because the film only covers the first half of the book.
But yes, as with fifty shades, twilight etc, many women will go see a dumb film that looks horny but has a hot abusive guy in it.
A friend of mine dragged me to see it last night. It wasn’t as bad as I was expecting – it certainly is a very pretty movie visually – but its also not great and glosses over…..well, a lot.
I think if you watch it for the vibes and just to see a messy relationship on screen, you’ll enjoy it. I think if you expect it to be a good adaptation of Wuthering Heights, you’ll hate it.
I am a fan of Emerald Fennell’s directorial work so I will give this a chance. I have never been a reader who demands absolute loyalty to the book in movie adaptations. I always view them as covers like in music. For example Billie Jean is my favorite Michael Jackson song and I Iove Chris Cornell’s deconstructed cover of it.
2009 tv series version of Wuthering Heights with Tom Hardy as Heathcliff is my favorite version.
Not surprised it did well. Women go to movies more than men. And movie goers are tired of super hero and dystopian films. I don’t think most people know or care that much about the source material they just know it’s supposed to be kinky and visually stunning so sure why not.
Margot’s winning streak continues and Jacob is definitely going to profit from this going into the final Oscar stretch
Elordi/Euphoria fans apparently made up about 25% of those who attended. And Gen Z showed up. 53 percent of the audience was between ages 18 and 34.
Hollywood never believes that movies that appeal to women and directed by women will make money no matter how many times a blockbuster like this comes along. I highly recommend the documentary called “This Changes Everything” about sexism in Hollywood. It focuses primarily on women directors. Interviews with Meryl Streep, Natalie Portman and many others . Go see “Wuthering Heights” in the theater and prove the studios wrong! (And stream the documentary about women directors too!)
When it was time for our Christmas movie this year the only thing available was “Marty Whatever” …. YUCK!!
Great production values, good acting … STUPID story. I would have seen WH happily … warts and all.
I enjoyed it. The visuals were very dramatic, the music too. I haven’t read the book.