As a long-term Bronte fan, I'm probably not the most dispassionate of critics, but felt I had to add my piece to the debate. Andrea Arnold has, I think, made a bold and useful effort at interpreting what is, after all, a very complex and multi-stranded plot. The cinematography is beautiful, reflecting the wildness both of the setting and the characters' emotions. Having said that, I have to wonder whether she's actually the best person to try and portray an early nineteenth century novel, given her previous oeuvre. She understands the emotional grittiness of the book, but doesn't seem willing to make allowances for a different time with different values. Some of her ideas seem downright anachronistic, to say nothing of perverse. The casting of a black person as Heathcliff is just about plausible (although it does raise interesting questions of how somebody of a different racial origin would have been treated in that period and in that place that aren't answered) but such relatively minor things as Cathy wearing trousers and the casual use of swearing both seem pointless and anachronistic, and in my opinion actually interfere with the narrative thrust of the film. I also think that the stringent attempt to capture the darkness of the plot means the film is achingly slow in places. An interesting attempt, but not a classic.
Review of Wuthering Heights
