‘Wuthering Heights’ Is No Longer 2026's Most Provocative Movie

For a little while, it seemed like Wuthering Heights had claimed the title of 2026's most provocative movie. If you've read Emily Brontë's novel, you'll know it's an intensely passionate story. Catherine Earnshaw and Heathcliff (played by Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi in the film) spend much of it longing for each other while making destructive decisions that leave everyone around them miserable.

It's emotionally messy rather than sexually explicit. But director Emerald Fennell had other ideas. Her version keeps the obsessive romance intact but makes it considerably more physical. The stolen glances become sex scenes. The emotional intimacy becomes bodily intimacy. Even some of the imagery leans much further into physical desire than anything Brontë ever wrote.

Some people praised the reinterpretation, while others felt the deliberate eroticism overshadowed the quieter emotional tragedy of the novel. Whether or not you enjoyed Fennell's version of the 1847 classic, Wuthering Heights quickly became one of the year's most talked-about films. That lasted until Rosebush Pruning debuted at the 2026 Berlin International Film Festival.

Directed by Karim Aïnouz, the story follows an obscenely wealthy American family living in Spain whose relationships with each other become increasingly disturbing as long-buried secrets begin surfacing. The premise makes it sound like it belongs in the same category as 2023's Saltburn, since rich people doing terrible things has pretty much become its own subgenre over the years.

The difference is that Rosebush Pruning seems to get a kick out of taking things too far. The Hollywood Reporter generously described the film as "an acquired taste," while The Guardian criticized its shocking attempts at satire and questioned whether the film actually earns its more provocative moments. Those reactions are completely valid once you take a closer look at the movie.

‘Rosebush Pruning’ Seems More Interested in Provocation Than Satire

Rosebush Pruning builds its story around an affluent family that's become completely detached from reality. Fashion labels matter more than people. Designer handbags are discussed with greater enthusiasm than actual human feelings. And almost every interaction feels uncomfortable from the moment it begins.

The problems start when Jack (Jamie Bell) introduces his girlfriend Martha (Elle Fanning) to the rest of the family. His siblings immediately begin treating her as an outsider who is a threat to the strange ecosystem they've created together. Jealousy quickly turns into manipulation, obsession, and increasingly disturbing behavior as the family's already fragile dynamic begins collapsing.

That could've been a perfectly interesting setup for a satire about long-standing privilege that also explores the way dysfunctional families often protect themselves from change. And there are flashes of those ideas in the film. The family's obsession with luxury brands becomes almost cartoonish, while their inability to appreciate anything beyond appearances is an obvious criticism of performative wealth.

Unfortunately, those ideas rarely remain the focus for very long. Instead, Rosebush Pruning repeatedly opts to focus on scenes that are designed to make audiences recoil. Incestuous relationships, graphic sexual behavior, and shocking violence are presented with such frequency that they start to overshadow whatever social commentary the film originally seemed interested in exploring.

Is ‘Rosebush Pruning’ Actually Saying Anything Beyond Shock Value?

There's nothing wrong with a movie wanting to make its audience uncomfortable. Lots of great filmmakers have done exactly that over the years. Stanley Kubrick did it with A Clockwork Orange in 1971. David Cronenberg built an entire career around it with movies like Crash (1996). And Yorgos Lanthimos made audiences squirm with Dogtooth (2009) and Poor Things (2023).

But Rosebush Pruning doesn't make any sort of larger point (if it did, a lot of people seem to have missed it). Instead, reviewers have pointed to its graphic scenes as evidence that the movie mistakes shock value for insight. The Hollywood Reporter praised the performances and visual style but ultimately argued that the satire leaves "a sour taste," suggesting the film never finds enough humanity beneath its deliberately abrasive surface.

The Guardian reached a similar conclusion, describing the satire as heavy-handed and questioning whether the increasingly shocking scenes ever amount to much beyond making viewers uncomfortable. That doesn't necessarily mean everyone will have the same reaction. There will almost certainly be audiences who admire just how fearless the film is.

But there's a difference between exploring sexuality and repeatedly crossing into incest and sexual abuse for the sake of audience provocation. By the time Rosebush Pruning reaches its most controversial scenes, it's difficult to tell whether the film is interrogating those ideas or simply using them to generate a reaction. If that is what the film is doing, it's just wrong for obvious reasons.