Speaker 1: From the Australian. This is the weekend edition of the
Speaker 1: Front Unclaire Harvey. Wuthering Heights is the most polarizing cinema
Speaker 1: event of twenty twenty six. Reviewers have thrown at five
Speaker 1: stars or one, audiences have loved it or walked out
Speaker 1: of the cinema. One thing people agree on is that
Speaker 1: Emerald Fanelle's adaptation of Emily Bronte's story of love and
Speaker 1: Revenge is for women, specifically young women. So joining me
Speaker 1: today is Bianca far Marcus, content director of Culture at
Speaker 1: The Australian and a young woman and spoiler alert, she
Speaker 1: hated it. What should you do here?
Speaker 2: Well, if you were rich supposor and do all Richmond
Speaker 2: live in a big ouse?
Speaker 3: It be cruel to my servants.
Speaker 1: Take a wife, a wife? What wife?
Speaker 4: Hi?
Speaker 1: The Australian's got a new chief film critic, Nikki Gammel,
Speaker 1: and she announced herself in the role with a pretty
Speaker 1: startling review Wuthering Heights.
Speaker 4: Oh my goodness, five stars, my first ever five star review.
Speaker 1: Bianca far Marcus is The Australian's Content director of Culture
Speaker 1: and Bianca, it's safe to say Nicki loved this movie.
Speaker 5: Yes, she absolutely loved the film. I think it's one
Speaker 5: of the most exciting reviews I've read of Wuthering Heights,
Speaker 5: and our audience loved either agreeing with her or getting
Speaker 5: into a debate, which this film seems to be sparking
Speaker 5: a lot of.
Speaker 4: Emerald Fanelle has electrified the franchise. I watched the nineteen
Speaker 4: thirty nine Wathering Heights you know, Lawrence Olivier mil Oberon
Speaker 4: with my heart. I watched the very Door Overly Yearness
Speaker 4: twenty eleven Andrea Arnold version with my head. I watched
Speaker 4: this one.
Speaker 1: With my groin. Bianka, you got Nikki and a few
Speaker 1: of our other experts, Jordi Gray and Melanda rout into
Speaker 1: the State Theater to have a deep dive into who
Speaker 1: loved Wathering Heights and who hated it.
Speaker 4: We are at the glorious State Theater in Sydney. We're
Speaker 4: just a couple of weeks ago. Wathering Heights made its
Speaker 4: Australian premiere quite divisive ever since. I think we should
Speaker 4: turn to bi Anchor.
Speaker 5: Let me just start by saying I don't think Wathering
Speaker 5: Heights is necessarily a bad movie. I would say it's
Speaker 5: the worst film I've ever seen.
Speaker 2: Banker.
Speaker 5: Now, I know I'm surrounded by fans here, and I
Speaker 5: would just like to kick off this conversation by saying,
Speaker 5: what was it that you actually enjoyed?
Speaker 1: I loved It's audacity.
Speaker 6: For me, It's about women being audacious and breaking through
Speaker 6: with boldness and daring, just as Emily Bronte did in
Speaker 6: eighteen forty six eighteen forty seven. Emerald Fanelle has seized
Speaker 6: the ip, the original product and made something electric and
Speaker 6: alive and Dann sexy.
Speaker 4: I just take off my hat to her.
Speaker 1: The ankle. We're gonna look at what some other people
Speaker 1: thought of this movie, but I need to know more
Speaker 1: about why you hated it. Why did you hate this
Speaker 1: movie so much?
Speaker 5: It's three things. Firstly, all style, no substance. Secondly, and
Speaker 5: I really hope I'm not deported for this one, but
Speaker 5: Margot Robbie and Jacob e Loordi cannot act together. They
Speaker 5: were hopeless.
Speaker 2: I have not broken your heart, have broken it, and
Speaker 2: in breaking it, you've broken minds kussas broth Betun.
Speaker 5: Thirdly would be the positioning of this film as a
Speaker 5: great love story, which has caused a lot of drama
Speaker 5: for a lot of different reasons. People are upset that
Speaker 5: it deviated so much from the original text. People are
Speaker 5: upset that it kind of ignores the whole domestic violence
Speaker 5: element to it. My main gripe was that if you're
Speaker 5: going to position something as a love story, you need
Speaker 5: to get actors with the slightest bit of chemistry, and
Speaker 5: the symbolism used was just the most lazy and boring
Speaker 5: kind of hints at subtle sexuality. I think I've ever
Speaker 5: had the misfortune of watching for two and a half
Speaker 5: hours of my life. I cannot tell you how much
Speaker 5: I hated this movie.
Speaker 1: I really don't want to see it because I, as
Speaker 1: a devoted Jane Austen fan fine the Bronte sisters and
Speaker 1: their gothic running around on the moor's kind of ripping
Speaker 1: your clothes often crying novels really tedious. I also found
Speaker 1: really tedious Saltburn, which is the movie that everyone loves
Speaker 1: by Emerald Fanell. Hello Oliver Darning, Oh beautiful eyes, Oh.
Speaker 4: Wonderful No, I told you it wasn't a Minger Oh,
Speaker 4: but Darning your kind about everyone you can't be trusted?
Speaker 1: Did you like Saltburn?
Speaker 5: I found Saltburn fine personally. I thought it was a
Speaker 5: poor man's Tom Ripley and just focused more on the
Speaker 5: depravity than anything else. It had interesting bits, and I
Speaker 5: think visually she is an impeccable filmmaker, and I think
Speaker 5: culturally she is one of the most interesting filmmakers of
Speaker 5: our time and really shows like kind of this new
Speaker 5: generational shift of how we're watching films. My personal favorite
Speaker 5: was her debut promising Young Woman.
Speaker 1: Oh you Hi, I'm back because I think you gave
Speaker 1: me a fake number.
Speaker 2: The other day.
Speaker 7: I'm not really looking to date anyone at the moment, Yeah.
Speaker 2: Me, neither.
Speaker 4: Would you.
Speaker 1: Be interested in a friendship And I'm secretly pining for you.
Speaker 2: The whole time.
Speaker 5: The substance, the nuance of it, every single element of
Speaker 5: that film was just a work of art. I don't
Speaker 5: know what's happened since. I think for anyone wanting to
Speaker 5: know whether they should see whether in Heights or not,
Speaker 5: I'd say read a Vogue, drop a cardon of eggs
Speaker 5: on the floor, and look at someone you find attractive
Speaker 5: from a distance, and think about what it would be
Speaker 5: like to be with them for five minutes. You pretty
Speaker 5: much just saved yourself two and a half hours and
Speaker 5: ten minutes that's what you get.
Speaker 1: Throw a bucket of cold water on yourself and pretend
Speaker 1: you're on the Yorkshire Wars. Let's read a review by
Speaker 1: The Independence Clarice Lowry. She gave it one star. She said,
Speaker 1: adaptation or not, it's an astonishingly hollow work. Some of this,
Speaker 1: it can be argued, was already signaled by the film's
Speaker 1: casting and the choice to obliterate any mention of race,
Speaker 1: colonialism or ostracization in the telling of Pseudo Siblings Kafyine
Speaker 1: Heathcliff's destructive codependence. Heathcliff, who's ethnically ambiguous appearance is of
Speaker 1: great concern to every other character in the book, is
Speaker 1: played by white Australian actor Jacob Alaudie. Now this has
Speaker 1: been a thread of the commentary about Jacob Elordie's performance.
Speaker 1: Whether you like it or not, there's a critique that
Speaker 1: he's too basically. I think that might be a little
Speaker 1: bit unfair. I mean, yes, he is not a gypsy
Speaker 1: as Heathcliff is described in the original text, but he's
Speaker 1: also not blonde with blue eyes.
Speaker 5: I think people getting hung up on the fact that
Speaker 5: it's not directly a representation of the book are missing
Speaker 5: the point that Emerald Fanell intentionally put it in inverted commons.
Speaker 5: We know it's wuthering heights in her interpretation, and I
Speaker 5: also just think it riscins the ability to move on
Speaker 5: from the text, Like there are versions of the book
Speaker 5: that's turned into a film that is very loyal to that,
Speaker 5: and I think it's important, But I also don't know
Speaker 5: why that's become such a sticking point when there's plenty
Speaker 5: of other things to hate about this movie.
Speaker 1: There are certainly ways to adapt iconic novels without being
Speaker 1: faithful to the text. Clueless is a great example of that,
Speaker 1: the nineteen nineties movie that's an adaptation of Jane Austen's Emma.
Speaker 7: You're like, I go out like that are share?
Speaker 2: I get in here?
Speaker 4: What's that? Daddy?
Speaker 1: What the hell is that?
Speaker 3: Address?
Speaker 1: Says who Calvin Klein.
Speaker 2: It looks like underwear.
Speaker 1: Go upstairs and put something over it.
Speaker 4: So I was just going to.
Speaker 1: It managed to be funny and incisive and different, but
Speaker 1: it didn't get itself into the same jam that Emerald
Speaker 1: Fanell's now in, And maybe inverted commason on enough to
Speaker 1: distance you from the original text.
Speaker 5: Yeah, absolutely, I mean, my personal favorites ten things I
Speaker 5: Hate about you The Taming of the Shrew.
Speaker 4: All right, anyone braving up to read theirs aloud?
Speaker 7: I will lord, here we go. I hate the way
Speaker 7: you talk to me and the way you cut your hair.
Speaker 7: I hate the way you drive my car. I hate
Speaker 7: it when you stare. I hate your big, dumb combat
Speaker 7: boots and the way you read my mind. I hate
Speaker 7: you so much it makes me sick. It even makes
Speaker 7: me rhyme.
Speaker 5: I guess what those achieved was taking it completely out
Speaker 5: of the world that it was said in, whereas Emerald
Speaker 5: Fanel kind of does this sort of lazy flirtation with
Speaker 5: it and then just ignores everything else. So it's a
Speaker 5: balance of which parts that she ignored that you really
Speaker 5: take an issue with.
Speaker 1: Now, Emerald Fanil is a millennial, but only just she's
Speaker 1: forty years old. Yes, she's getting much closer to my
Speaker 1: end of the spectrum then to yours. But there's a
Speaker 1: lot of talk about how she's reinventing cinema for a
Speaker 1: new generation, and she's making this relevant for young women.
Speaker 1: You're a young woman. Why did that not connect with you?
Speaker 5: Other than the fact that it was beautiful to look at.
Speaker 5: I think it had absolutely nothing to really hook into,
Speaker 5: And I think this one was kind of a failure
Speaker 5: in ways to make a film for young people because
Speaker 5: it did have those sexy celebrities editing that makes the
Speaker 5: whole thing kind of look like a TikTok. At the
Speaker 5: end of the day, it just felt really shallow and
Speaker 5: hollow and overtly reliant on things that appeal to young people,
Speaker 5: rather than in the past, where she's genuinely made films
Speaker 5: that really connect to younger audiences.
Speaker 1: The New Yorkers Justin Chang wrote this in his review.
Speaker 1: The actors generate sparks of passion, but no deeper air
Speaker 1: of tragic or romantic inevitability, no sense of a bond
Speaker 1: forged between souls, and only a smidgen of the corrosive
Speaker 1: rage that makes Wuthering Heights as much of a hate
Speaker 1: story as it is a love story. You hated it,
Speaker 1: obviously that you're bringing the hate. What about the sex?
Speaker 1: Was it sexy? Ah?
Speaker 4: Not? Really?
Speaker 2: Do you want me to stop?
Speaker 5: It was just lazy. It was like, let's rely on
Speaker 5: two attractive people to sell a sex scene. It's like, well,
Speaker 5: they have to actually do something and it can't just
Speaker 5: be random staring across the yard sticking your fingers into
Speaker 5: a fish. Also, the thing that I find quite interesting
Speaker 5: about this is she didn't change the historical context of it. Right.
Speaker 5: This is in the eighteenth century, a pre refrigeration period,
Speaker 5: might I add, So the kind of the idea that
Speaker 5: everyone's getting off by smash dairy and rotting fish is
Speaker 5: just ridiculous to me.
Speaker 1: What was the thing about the eggs? Behind the eggs? Please,
Speaker 1: you gotta tell me these eggs. Everyone's talking about eggs.
Speaker 5: These eggs in this economy is what bothers me the
Speaker 5: most about this film. It's just like it's a symbol
Speaker 5: that Heathcliff keeps leaving her smashed eggs in her bed
Speaker 5: on the floor, or there's eggs smashing everywhere, and apparently
Speaker 5: no one in this village is starving because they just
Speaker 5: get to smash eggs all the time.
Speaker 1: The eggs could be about fertility, about sort of smashing
Speaker 1: her fertility. There could be about you know, bodily.
Speaker 5: Fluids, honestly, and I'm like, I'm meant to believe that
Speaker 5: that's sexy. Really, I mean, don't get me wrong, I
Speaker 5: love and implied sort of sexual reference in everything. I
Speaker 5: think It is very appealing and it does kind of,
Speaker 5: particularly for women, tap into that whole thing of like
Speaker 5: we want to think about it rather than just see,
Speaker 5: like you know, full on sex scenes. But also, I
Speaker 5: just did nothing for me. I just cannot fathom that
Speaker 5: these two people had any chemistry whatsoever. It's like confirms
Speaker 5: my firm belief that there should always be one ugly
Speaker 5: person in a relationship, because then you know they've got
Speaker 5: something else driving you there to stay with them. These
Speaker 5: are two gorgeous and might I add, very talented actors
Speaker 5: that should never again be in a film together.
Speaker 1: They've taken the chemistry or unfortunately not the eggs to
Speaker 1: the red carpet as well. Every time I see them
Speaker 1: on a red carpet, they're kind of all over each other.
Speaker 1: They're posting social media videos with matching rings. That is
Speaker 1: sort of breaking the fourth wall in a quite old way.
Speaker 1: I mean, we meant to believe that Margot and Jacob
Speaker 1: are actually obsessed with each other in real life.
Speaker 5: Yeah, look, I think this is a masterclass in marketing.
Speaker 3: Alison told me about Alex Cameron, who I know know
Speaker 3: Alex Cameron loves modern day meet Look, why have we
Speaker 3: never spoken about.
Speaker 2: The way.
Speaker 5: They clearly did all these things just to build the
Speaker 5: hype around it, and now we have things like Jacob
Speaker 5: Elordie wearing his silver tooth with the initials of the
Speaker 5: characters engraved on it. It's just a marketing ploy, and
Speaker 5: it's a very good one, but it doesn't do anything
Speaker 5: for the film other than build hype around it and
Speaker 5: then spurn a thousand think pieces talking about how bad
Speaker 5: it was.
Speaker 1: Is it going to win any awards? Is this an
Speaker 1: all school worthy film?
Speaker 5: Do you think I think it's a Razzie worthy film
Speaker 5: if you're not on the judging fannel, no, I know
Speaker 5: not yet, but look, I think there are definitely accolades
Speaker 5: to be paid for the costuming and the set design
Speaker 5: is incredible. But yeah, I'm going to give it a
Speaker 5: solid note for the Oscars. Also makes sense for why
Speaker 5: they released in February, because they completely missed the season
Speaker 5: and they will most certainly not be making it the
Speaker 5: next year.
Speaker 1: Bianko far Marcus, I think you've made up my mind.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to see it, and I'm really happy
Speaker 1: about that.
Speaker 5: Wait till streaming.
Speaker 1: Thanks for coming.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Biancher far Marcus is Content director of Culture at The Australian.
Speaker 1: Every day you can read the best of arts, entertainment, music,
Speaker 1: dance and more with our culture experts at the Australian
Speaker 1: dot com dot a U slash culture. This episode of
Speaker 1: the Front was hosted by me Claire Harvey and co
Speaker 1: produced with Jasper League, who edited the episode and also
Speaker 1: wrote our theme. Thanks for joining us on the Front
Speaker 1: this week. Our team includes Kristin Amiot Leat Sammaglue, Tiffany
Speaker 1: Dimac and Joshua Burton.