From The Great Gatsby to Wuthering Heights: Why Do Literary Adaptations Divide Audiences?

For as long as filmmakers have adapted classic literature, audiences have argued about whether to preserve or reimagine those stories. The debate has only grown louder in recent years, as modern adaptations increasingly lean into stylization, reinterpretation, and contemporary sensibilities.

Now, with the arrival of Emerald Fennell’s new version of Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights, the question comes up again: how much change is too much when adapting classic books?

Wuthering Heights

In his review of Wuthering Heights, our own Chris Bumbray noted that the film would likely divide critics, and we’re certainly seeing that as other reviews roll in.

“One thing is for sure—it’s strikingly different as far as adaptations go, with the classic tale reimagined into a corset-loosening erotic drama that at times feels like it owes more to E.L. James than Brontë,” Bumbray wrote. “It’s a defiantly maximalist take on the costume flick, with director Fennell throwing everything but the kitchen sink into her adaptation, which boldly ditches the entire second half of the novel and takes huge liberties with the rest.“

Before the film’s release, Fennell emphasized she never aimed for a definitive version. Her goal was to capture how the novel felt to her as a teen. “That would mean it had a certain amount of wish fulfillment,” she told the Los Angeles Times. “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.“

For many classic novel fans, any deviation feels like a betrayal. But Wuthering Heights isn’t the only recent literary adaptation to court controversy.

Not Every Adaptation Works…

Baz Luhrmann’s adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby was similarly divisive. The film is undeniably stunning, with an opulent production design that screams excess and an all-star cast fully committed to the spectacle. However, its fast-paced editing and modern soundtrack, with artists like Jay-Z and Lana Del Rey, led some critics to dismiss it as style over substance. Personally, I found it a lot of fun, but I can appreciate that some didn’t enjoy the vibe.

Netflix’s adaptation of Jane Austen’s Persuasion proved equally polarizing, becoming something of a cautionary tale about modernization. There’s nothing inherently wrong with updating Austin—Amy Heckerling’s Clueless remains one of the most beloved reinterpretations of her work—but this version struggled to find its tone. Dakota Johnson’s Anne Elliot frequently breaks the fourth wall, uses contemporary slang, and embraces a more ironic comedic sensibility. For some, those modern flourishes clashed with the Regency setting and altered Anne’s character.

Director Carrie Cracknell defended the choice to IndieWire. “I think it allows this access to the complexity of her inner thoughts,” she explained. “It’s a way for us to understand Anne’s interiority. So much of the book is about Anne observing her family and their bizarre behaviors and her frustration at that, and so to be able to just look at the audience and sort of connect over that frustration felt really compelling as a device.“

…But Others Do

Still, for every adaptation accused of going too far, there is another that gets praised for bold reinvention.

Greta Gerwig’s take on Louisa May Alcott’s Little Women reshaped the novel, using a nonlinear structure for deeper emotional resonance. The ending also changes. In Alcott’s book, Jo March says she never wants to marry or have children, only to ultimately marry Professor Bhaer and have kids. The film gives Jo another path. After presenting her novel to Mr. Dashwood, her publisher, he refuses to accept an ending in which the protagonist remains unmarried. In exchange for a greater percentage of the profits and maintaining her own copyright, Jo agrees to make the change, but remains fiercely independent and unmarried in the end.

Similarly, Baz Luhrmann’s Romeo + Juliet was once seen as sacrilegious for its modern setting and kinetic editing. Today, it is widely regarded as one of the most accessible Shakespeare adaptations. Chances are, many of us watched it in school and actually understood the language because of it. Time has a funny way of softening adaptation outrage.

Reinvention is Necessary

Literary classics are resilient. These stories have survived centuries precisely because they can be reinterpreted. Think of how many adaptations of Dracula have been made over the last hundred years, some faithful, others not. Each generation reshapes them in its own image, emphasizing new themes and meanings.

Of course, reinvention carries risk. When an adaptation abandons the spark that made the story endure, audiences feel it immediately. But strict fidelity isn’t always the answer either. A perfectly “faithful” adaptation can easily feel like a museum exhibit rather than a living story. Perhaps the real measure of a successful adaptation isn’t how closely it mirrors the page, but whether it captures the spirit, and even challenges it in a way that feels purposeful.

Sound off in the comments: What are some of your favourite literary adaptations, and how closely do they follow the original story?

The post From The Great Gatsby to Wuthering Heights: Why Do Literary Adaptations Divide Audiences? appeared first on JoBlo.