Netflix’s recent release of “A Good Girl’s Guide to Murder” on August 1st, bringing Holly Jackson’s popular teen thriller to screens worldwide, was met with anticipation. Based on the first novel of Jackson’s trilogy, the series follows Pippa “Pip” Fitz-Amobi, an 18-year-old delving into the closed case of Andie Bell’s disappearance and presumed murder from five years prior. In Pip’s town, the consensus is that Andie’s boyfriend, Sal Singh, was the culprit, committing suicide after killing Andie, despite her body never being recovered.
The novel captivates readers with its intricate investigation, filled with unexpected turns that culminate in a satisfying resolution, highlighting the nuanced boundary between good and evil while exonerating Sal. However, the Netflix adaptation falls short of these strengths. By oversimplifying the novel’s complex narrative, “A Good Girl’s Guide to Murder” on Netflix becomes a disappointing experience. Core elements of the mystery are altered to the point of incoherence, leaving fans of the book questioning the plot’s resolution, which, unlike the novel, never truly materializes.
Here are key changes in the adaptation, ranked from minor to major, that detract from the series’ overall impact:
6. The Undermined Sal Innocence Reveal
In the book, Pip’s discovery of Sal’s innocence is a powerful moment, sparked by a Facebook post that reveals his friends fabricated his alibi. This leads to a confrontation with Sal’s friend, Naomi – a scene filled with emotional weight and a sense of triumph. In contrast, the Netflix series handles this revelation with surprising nonchalance. After Naomi confesses to lying about Sal’s alibi, Pip seemingly drops the thread, and the audience is left without closure regarding Naomi’s role or the consequences of her lie.
This pivotal scene, the book’s climax where Pip achieves her primary goal of proving Sal innocent, is glossed over in the adaptation, diminishing its emotional and narrative significance. The impact of clearing Sal’s name, a driving force of Pip’s investigation, is significantly weakened.
5. The Marginalization of Nat Da Silva
Nat Da Silva, a standout character throughout the book series, is known for her fiery personality, sarcasm, and intense animosity towards Andie Bell, stemming from her crucial role as one of Max Hastings’ victims. Her character is integral to the broader narrative, especially concerning the exposure of Max Hastings’ predatory actions.
However, the Netflix adaptation reduces Nat to a fleeting presence. She appears in a single scene, praising Andie and advising Pip to abandon her investigation. This interaction inexplicably places Nat on Pip’s suspect list, a baffling move for viewers unfamiliar with the books. The series excises Nat’s crucial backstory and complexities, rendering her a shadow of her book counterpart and obscuring her significance to the overarching plot. Her connection to the larger themes of the book, particularly regarding Max Hastings’ crimes, is completely lost.
4. Exaggerated Antagonism of Becca Bell and Elliot Ward
Becca Bell, Andie’s sister, and Elliot Ward, a teacher involved with Andie, are presented as the antagonists of the first book, responsible for Andie’s death. However, in the novel, their actions are portrayed as accidental, compounded by a subsequent cover-up to frame Sal.
The book depicts Becca and Elliot in shades of gray. Becca’s actions, leaving Andie to die, stem from a place of anger and hurt after Andie dismissed her rape, an act she immediately regrets. Elliot’s framing of Sal is motivated by a desire to protect his family. The novel explores their flawed humanity, fitting into its central theme of moral ambiguity.
Conversely, the Netflix series portrays Becca and Elliot as overtly villainous, lacking the sympathetic undertones of the book. The adaptation misses the opportunity to explore the “gray area” in their motivations. The show simplifies their characters into straightforward antagonists, losing the nuanced moral questions posed by their actions in the book. The complexity of their motivations, particularly Elliot’s desperation to shield his children and Becca’s regret-fueled panic, is flattened.
3. The Mishandling of Max Hastings’ Portrayal
The series significantly downplays Max Hastings’ history of sexual assault, barely acknowledging the trauma inflicted on his victims. Instead, the adaptation inexplicably uses Max’s screen time to insert flirtatious interactions with Pip. This decision is jarring, especially considering the series seems to demonize Becca Bell, a rape victim, more than Max Hastings, the perpetrator. While perhaps unintentional, this narrative choice, coupled with the lack of depth in Max’s storyline, inadvertently softens his reprehensible character in comparison to Elliot and Becca.
In the books, Max serves as a crucial figure, embodying pure evil and standing as a stark contrast to the morally gray characters. He is the catalyst for many of the tragic events, representing a clear-cut example of villainy. The Netflix adaptation’s failure to address the gravity of Max’s actions and his role in the larger narrative undermines a critical thematic element of the source material. The series misses a powerful opportunity to confront issues of sexual violence and accountability, central to the books’ deeper message.
2. Pip’s Diminished Obsession and Drive
Pip’s character in the books is defined by her intelligence, feminist ideals, and an almost obsessive determination to prove Sal’s innocence. This relentless focus, bordering on obsession, consumes her, driving her investigation day and night and creating a palpable sense of tension and urgency that fuels the thriller aspect of the novel. This intense dedication, coupled with her sharp intellect, makes for a compelling and immersive reading experience.
However, the Netflix adaptation portrays a less driven Pip. Her commitment to the case seems less consuming, and the series includes scenes that feel like filler, diluting the investigative tension. The show loses much of the thriller’s edge, resulting in a less engaging viewing experience. The internal struggle and growing obsession that define Pip’s character in the book are noticeably absent, replaced by a more superficial portrayal of her investigation. The series struggles to capture the same level of suspense and psychological depth.
1. The Subversion of Jason Bell’s True Nature
Jason Bell, Andie’s father, is a lurking presence of menace throughout the books, eventually revealed to be a serial rapist and killer, making him the ultimate villain for many fans. While his overt villainy is not immediately apparent in the first book, Pip uncovers his pattern of verbal abuse and objectification towards his daughters, establishing him as a prime suspect in Andie’s disappearance.
Conversely, the Netflix adaptation places Jason Bell on the suspect list with seemingly little justification. His underlying evil and abusive nature remain largely unexplored, leaving viewers confused about his significance and undermining his crucial role in the narrative. He is treated with a similar lack of depth as Max Hastings, resulting in a disservice to both characters and the overall thematic complexity of the story. The series misses the opportunity to build suspense around Jason Bell’s character and to reveal his true depravity gradually, as is done so effectively in the book. The impact of his eventual unveiling as a truly monstrous figure is greatly diminished.
Ultimately, Netflix’s “A Good Girl’s Guide to Murder” adaptation is a significant disappointment. It clumsily translates Pip’s intricate investigation, generating more confusion than intrigue. The changes made not only simplify the plot but also dilute the complex character motivations and thematic depth that made Holly Jackson’s novel so compelling. Book fans are left hoping that potential future seasons will more faithfully capture the essence of the source material. For now, readers seeking the true “A Good Girl’s Guide to Murder” experience are better off sticking to the books.
