The film adaptation of “People We Meet on Vacation” opens with the same line that begins Emily Henry’s bestselling novel:
“On vacation, you can be anyone you want.”
While both versions start in the same place, they quickly diverge in how they explore identity, longing and missed timing, revealing the strengths — and limitations — of translating a slow-burn romance into a feature-length film.
“People We Meet on Vacation” follows Poppy Wright, a travel journalist, and Alex Nilsen, a buttoned up English teacher, who meet in college and form an unlikely friendship. For a decade, they take one summer trip together each year, blurring the line between platonic and romantic as timing, distance and miscommunication keep them apart. When their tradition fractures after one trip goes wrong, the story moves between past vacations and the present as Poppy confronts what — and who — she has been avoiding.
The novel opens with a prologue set five summers earlier, immersing readers in a vacation that establishes the dynamic between Poppy Wright and Alex Nilsen. The film reframes the opening by centering on present-day Poppy, a travel writer who has begun to lose her passion for the career she once dreamed about. By blending elements of the book’s prologue and first chapter, the film creates a fresh entry point that remains faithful to the story’s emotional foundation while adding new context.
This structural change works. It allows the film to ground its narrative in Poppy’s dissatisfaction and sets up the story as one of personal reckoning as much as a romance. However, other adaptation choices prove more divisive.
One of the film’s most significant departures from the book involves Sarah, Alex’s longtime partner. In the novel, Alex begins dating Sarah during college after he has already developed feelings for Poppy. His attraction to Poppy fuels years of restrained tension, driven by his belief that their relationship would never work in real life. That restraint — and the emotional pining it creates — forms the backbone of the book.
The film reimagines Sarah as Alex’s high school sweetheart. This change reshapes Alex’s character development. Instead of quietly suppressing his feelings, the film portrays Alex as emotionally conflicted and distant, at times blurring the line between emotional self-control and emotional infidelity. The shift weakens the slow-building tension that defines the novel and diminishes the emotional impact of Alex and Poppy’s eventual confrontation.
Several smaller omissions further alter the story’s emotional texture. The film removes Poppy’s college travel blog, which plays a central role in the book by documenting the annual summer trips she takes with Alex and tracking the evolution of her ambitions. Without it, Poppy’s professional identity feels less defined, and her relationship to travel carries less narrative weight.
The film also omits Alex’s cat, Flannery O’Connor. While the detail may seem minor, the cat plays a meaningful role in the novel. Alex’s affection for Flannery reveals a nurturing side that deepens his character, and early conversations about the cat help establish his dynamic with Poppy. For longtime readers, the omission stands out as unnecessary and symbolic of the film’s tendency to streamline emotional nuance.
The adaptation retains Poppy’s demanding editor, Swapna Bakshi-Highsmith, but removes Rachel Krohn, Poppy’s closest friend aside from Alex. While there is a character who fills Rachel’s role, she is never fully developed. In the book, Rachel provides grounding and perspective, offering emotional contrast and reinforcing Poppy’s life beyond her relationship with Alex. Without her, the film narrows its focus almost entirely to Poppy, Alex and their families, limiting the story’s emotional range.
Another major structural change involves David, Alex’s brother. In the novel, David does not get married and there is no destination wedding anchoring the present-day storyline. The film introduces David’s wedding in Spain as a narrative device to reunite Poppy and Alex, replacing the book’s quieter, memory-driven reconnection with an external plot catalyst. The change streamlines the story for film, shifting the focus away from the novel’s emphasis on unresolved silence and emotional distance.
The film also alters how Poppy confronts her dissatisfaction with her life. In the novel, present-day Poppy acknowledges that her once-dream job in travel journalism no longer fulfills her. In the film, she remains largely in denial for much of the story, delaying emotional clarity and weakening her character arc. References to Poppy’s family dynamics remain brief, missing an opportunity to add further depth.
Not all changes fall short. The film alters how Poppy and Alex meet, moving their college setting from the University of Chicago to Boston College. Despite the shift in location, the scene preserves the awkward chemistry and personality contrast that define their relationship through familiar dialogue and character beats presenting it in a new way. The moment remains true to the book’s spirit without relying on exact replication.
The film also retains key details familiar to readers, including Alex’s nickname — “Alexander the Greatest” — and their shared hometown of Linfield Ohio, grounding the adaptation in the source material even as it reworks major character and narrative elements.
Despite these strengths, the film struggles to condense a story built on time, silence and emotional accumulation into a single feature-length narrative. Many of the novel’s most powerful moments rely on interiority and years of unresolved feelings — elements that resist compression.
The casting succeeds. While adaptations do not require exact physical accuracy, they demand truthful portrayals, and Emily Bader and Tom Blyth capture the essence of their characters even when the writing simplifies their arcs.
The film delivers charm, chemistry, and a sense of summer romance. The book delivers longing. For viewers seeking an accessible romantic film, the adaptation succeeds. For readers drawn to the quiet, emotional ache that defines Emily Henry’s novel, the book remains the more powerful experience.
