Netflix’s Jan. 9 release of “People We Meet on Vacation,” directed by Brett Haley, offers a welcome dose of warmth as winter settles in. The film, adapted from Emily Henry’s 2021 novel of the same name, marks the beginning of a series of cinematic adaptations of Henry’s popular romance stories, with “Beach Read” and “Book Lovers” currently in development.
A Friends-to-Lovers Tale Tested by Time and Distance
Table of Contents
The new Netflix film explores the complexities of a long-held friendship and the potential for something more.
- The film centers on Poppy and Alex, whose connection begins during their college years at Boston College.
- Emily Bader and Tom Blyth star as Poppy and Alex, respectively, bringing the beloved characters to life.
- While visually appealing, the film condenses the novel’s timeline and omits key relationship-building moments.
The story follows the spirited Poppy, played by Emily Bader, and the more reserved Alex, portrayed by Tom Blyth. Their paths first cross at Boston College, but a shared hometown of Ohio leads to a fateful carpool that sparks years of adventures, inside jokes, and simmering romantic tension. The narrative unfolds across years of intimate and challenging moments, as the pair’s annual summer vacations become a testing ground for their enduring friendship.
What makes a long-distance friendship blossom into romance? Viewers will be captivated by the playful banter between Poppy and Alex and the palpable tension that builds as their relationship evolves. Poppy, a spontaneous travel writer, lives a life in constant motion, a stark contrast to Alex’s desire for stability as a teacher back home. Despite their differences, a deep-rooted friendship consistently draws them back together.
Bader and Blyth faced the challenge of embodying characters already cherished by readers. Bader’s portrayal of Poppy captures her boundless enthusiasm and confident spirit, while Blyth skillfully navigates both the introverted everyday Alex and the more carefree “Vacation Alex” that emerges when he’s with Poppy. Their on-screen chemistry effectively conveys the vibrant and intricate journey from friendship to love.
A Condensed Narrative: What Was Lost in Translation?
Fans of the novel may notice the absence of certain pivotal scenes and the years of longing that define the book’s narrative. The film’s runtime, just under two hours, necessitates streamlining the story, but this results in a noticeable impact on the pacing and development of the relationship.
While minor changes, such as alterations to trip locations, don’t detract from the romance, the compressed timeline and reordered events diminish the depth of Poppy and Alex’s connection. Both the book and film utilize flashbacks to past vacations to provide context for their bond. However, the film omits several character-building trips and glosses over years of accumulated familiarity.
The most significant divergence lies in the climactic reunion. In the book, a rekindling follows a period of emotional turmoil after a previous summer trip. Poppy initiates contact, and Alex invites her to his brother David’s wedding in Palm Springs, Calif., leading to a low-key trip reminiscent of their college days, filled with awkwardness and vulnerability.
The film’s depiction, however, portrays their reunion as more coincidental than a deliberate reconnection. Poppy receives an invitation to the wedding from David—not Alex—which diminishes the sense of a hard-won, slow-burn romance. The omission of these genuine moments softens the intimacy and enduring yearning that resonated with readers.
Visually Stunning, Emotionally Streamlined
Despite these creative liberties, the film successfully captures the essence of Poppy and Alex’s travels and their encounters with quirky characters along the way. Breathtaking shots of the Canadian mountains, lively New Orleans bars, and the Tuscan landscape enhance the story’s emotional beats and compensate for narrative gaps.
Netflix’s “People We Meet on Vacation” is an enjoyable and charming film, bolstered by the chemistry between its leads. However, viewers familiar with the source material may find themselves missing the nuanced emotions and intricate details of the original story. The film’s condensed format inevitably sacrifices some of the subtleties that define the literary version.
