Ok DCUM, what do you think of the Wuthering Heights movie?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
"Media literacy"? You need some *actual* literacy - as in, read the book. And from your own link: "In her novel, Brontë leaves Heathcliff's precise ethnicity open to debate, variously describing him as "a Lascar" and a "dark-skinned gipsy in aspect", which only adds to the confusion. Should he be black? White? Roma? Indian? Couldn't they have just cast Colin Firth?" And from the comments section: "In the book, Heathcliffe was described as a ragged street Arab found running wild on the streets of Liverpool. 'Street Arab' is simply a figure of speech, and means any kid pursuing a nomadic existence. It doesn't literally mean Arab, or Gypsy. Heathcliff could have been any ethnicity - but he was never described as black...!!!" And as for the "afro Heathcliff" (your words), that's just another interpretation. That director chose to make his Heathcliff black. Emerald Fennell chose to make hers white. You'll just have to get over it. |
Anonymous
+100 This entire discussion is absurd. The book's description of Heathcliff is open to interpretation, the end. |
Anonymous
| This movie should probably have just been something else. Like just a generic, spicy period piece. She basically ripped the heart and soul out of the novel. Even putting aside eliminating the racial aspect of Heathcliff why eliminate Hindley???? Why also get rid of the warm relationship between heath cliff and the dad? She basically removes all nuance and complexity so that aged Karens can fantasize about Jacob Elordi (probably why Margot Robie who is too old for this role was selected). |
Anonymous
That PP should just stick to Bridgerton. |
Anonymous
|
This book was written as contemporary fiction in the 1840s. When you know about that period, Heathcliff definitely isn’t white. Liverpool and the word “Lascar” would have be universally understood by readers in the time period. Few Americas know what those words mean, of course.
The terms describing Heathcliff are from characters, not the narrator. We have to decide who we believe - Lockwood? Mrs. Earnshaw? That being said. The movie chooses not to discuss this, but it also removes major characters and the whole second part of the story. It isn’t really an adaption, IMO. It’s inspired by and mostly vibes. |
Anonymous
Did you even see the movie? It was hardly a hot fantasy... |
Anonymous
Yes, and I'm not sure why people are so offended by it? Some newer works with a big fan based like Hunger Games and Harry Potter demand faithfulness to the material, but WH has been adapted SO many times. Same as Romeo and Juliet with West Side Story for instance. Why would anyone have an issue with a newer take changing some/most details and putting their own creative spin on it? It's odd to see so many pages about the movie with it being clear people either did not see it or were offended by the creative license, but without much discussion of the content of the movie at all. |
Anonymous
WH is a macroagression. |
Anonymous
The movie is much better than the book. |
Anonymous
I think it's because of recent faithful adaptions that fans were so disappointed. There's such a huge fanbase for the Bronte sisters that unfaithful adaptions will absolutely get ripped to shreds. I imagine that if there were more social media channels with Pride & Prejudice 2005 came out, we'd see the same thing happening (there's an Austen reddit sub that routinely has threads bashing 2005 even today). |
Anonymous
| I bet those complaining about the casting of Elordi were thrilled with the recent Snow White live action movie that had a Latina woman in the title role? I didn't care either way - as it was yet another *interpretation* - but I think it's obvious that those of you outraged about a white man playing Heathcliff are absolutely delighted whenever a POC plays what is known to be a white character. See: Hamilton. |
Anonymous
It was indirectly suggested that Heathcliff is of mixed heritage because he was adopted (or benefactee) by a white man who very likely fathered him out of wedlock. I thought gypsy or Spanish. Back in the day the "Black Irish" were the descendents of the Spanish invaders from the Armada - they tended to have darker skin, eyes and hair. We have to remember that the people of the British Isles are typically very fair. The Roman colonization introduced pigmentation normally associated with the mediterranean. |
Anonymous
How many times is this PP going to bring up Hamilton which came out 10 years ago! It's not the "gotcha" you think it is. You can accuse ppl of being oversensitive but I'm happy to own that just fine. This moment is making me more sensitive to a lot of things. The movie is just another data point. |
Anonymous
I agree that it's because there are many people who hold WH near and dear to their hearts, so aren't excited to see lots of liberties taken with it. Little Women and Anne of Green Gables are also books like that, where people want something pretty faithful to how they carry the book in their heart. I think the movie folks probably could have been just fine if they called it something else and said it was inspired by WH -- like Clueless inspired by Emma, or The Lion King inspired by Hamlet. No one's complaining the Simba is not giving a tortured monologue debating suicide, because no one called the movie Hamlet. Instead, people think the subtle homage to the play is clever. |
Anonymous
My family is "Black Irish" and this Armada thing is just total myth. Dark haired Irish actually dated to antiquity. The red-head gene was brought in by Viking invaders (probably most of the blondes too). The Vikings ran all up and down the east coast of Ireland for centuries and left a lot of DNA while they were there. I also think the term "Black" that a poster used would have been historically unlikely for 1840s England. A mixed race child with some African or Asian or Roma heritage would have been described as dark, but a Welshman or Irishman might also be described that way. (Look at Catherine Zeta-Jones, who is Welsh.) I'd actually love to hear more from the English M.A. who wrote her thesis on WH....but my memory/understanding is that it's pretty important to Heathcliff's character and the love story that he was "othered" due to his financial circumstances/uncertain parentage, but also due to his coloring. You could maybe overcome 1 or 2 of those in 1840s England, but not all three. There were definitely people of all different races in Victoria society....Darwin's taxidermy teacher was Black. There was a famous British Colonel who was the son of an Indian woman and British father. The sun never set on the British empire....guys had children all around the world and not all of them just left those kids there. Race/ethnicity issues were actually a big thing in early 19th century England, so it wouldn't surprise me if Bronte actually wanted to play on those contemporary social debates by creating a sort of ethnic ambiguity around Healthcliff. It makes him more dangerous, more liminal, more exotic -- it all adds to the thrill and mystery of the character. |