Review by marymgrover

This would be 9/10 if it were based solely on Emily Mackey's acting. Genius. Aren't we all in love with her, and in Sex Education, too. But I think in a biopic, you shouldn't rampantly ignore all information about your characters. Charlotte Brontë is portrayed as lively and gay, even a flirt. In actuality, she was reserved, intense, somewhat awkward, albeit yes, the most worldly of the sisters. In the first scene of the movie, she rails at Emily, saying Wuthering Heighte is ugly, with selfish characters, and where did that come from! This is what Victorian critics said about the book. Charlotte was a fierce defender of her sisters' literary ventures. The father is portrayed as affable, as is the brother, when in actuality they were both prone to outbursts of abusive, behavior, domestic violence, and the brother, total alcoholism, which lead him to an early death. This is where the "ugliness" came from, same with the alcoholism in Anne's novel. The sisters shared what they wrote, reading it aloud before the fire. Yes, Emily was the weird recluse, but Charlotte never thought that held her back or made them all look bad.

You'd think the writer or director would bother to read, oh, one or two Bronte biographies, but it seems like they only watched a couple of YouTube videos and then forgot about them, though remembered movies about Jane Austen's novels and did some of that, but with Moors. I walked out after 20 minutes and restrained myself from turning around to the audience and declaring, "This is an abomination!" I had to listen to Kate Bush sing Wuthering Heights 3 times after (more true to the Gothic spirit of the Brontes), to purify myself. What's really sad to me is that even the NYT critic raves about it. She has a masters in film studies and I suspect hasn't read the novels or biographies either. Anyway, rant and rail, how could they?