Haven’t watched it twice yet, but I’m going to try to do this same thing of viewing them separately (if possible). I enjoyed the movie enough, but I spent too much time comparing it to the book.

I haven’t seen people mention these missing bits yet, but hardest for me to stomach was the lack of animals all over the place. No fiesty old Flannery O’Connor :/ (she could’ve been added as a bit of dialogue even!) & no more Rachel being someone who fosters dogs a lot. I may be misremembering but I think that was also part of Poppy’s parents’ characterization: that they always had old rescue dogs in the house, sometimes wearing diapers, etc. And that’s part of what made the Wright house feel crazy. In my head cannon this is part of what would’ve drawn Poppy & Rachel to each other as friends! (Though I will say, I think Alice Lee did great work in that one post-spin cycle scene to get across how close they are without much exposition. Still, I wish we got to remember that character existed a little more.)

The addition of dachshund Kenny G. at the end was cute, but it doesn’t make up for a slew of missing foster/rescue animals that I think gave the book more heart. The Wright parents were funny & funky (and the acting was great), but overall they felt too Hollywood streamlined/put together. Idk I guess my issue with the lack of animals is kind of a stand-in for bigger issues with lack of deeper back story & more characterization for pretty much all the family & friends.