So it’s finally time to talk about To All The Boys: P.S. I Still Love You, and why it was not only a weaker film than the first, but an incredibly big let down considering the book series.
Before I dig in, I want to make a few things clear. One, I know that films can’t fit in everything from a novel when they’re doing an adaptation. This isn’t my first rodeo. Second, for all you “the book is ALWAYS going to be better than the movie” cronies, please keep in mind that I loved the first movie. Loved it.
I’m going to name a few major plot points that PS I Still Love You chose (for some reason?) to leave out, and then i’m going to follow up with why this hurt the overall narrative of the story.
And, yes, this mostly is all going to focus on John Ambrose McClaren because, well…he got done really dirty, and it needs to be addressed. Snubbing the Josh/LJ plot line in film one made sense (setting up the story, there’s a love triangle in the second movie anyway, you need to get invested in Peter and LJ, etc). But to snub John Ambrose? Now we have issues.
1. There’s no game of Assassin. In the book, after the kids meet up at the treehouse, they all decide to play a long game of assassin like when they were younger. If you’re not familiar with the game, you each get a name, and our goal is to keep tagging people out until you’re the one left standing. Lara Jean is obsessed with playing-and winning–this game, because she can’t get over Peter seemingly always picking Gen over her, and she wants to be the one who wins, even if it’s just one time.
Her first name? John Ambrose. She and Chris get together and make an elaborate plan to knock him out. When he falls for it, she gets the name he had–Peter. John Ambrose then promises to help her win, and this leads to the two of them bonding, but also eventually pulling up at the school and seeing Peter/Gen together, holding each other.
Why does this matter?
-This comes way earlier in the book version, and Lara Jean and Peter stay broken up for a long period of time. This allows all the Lara Jean/JAM stuff (besides writing the letters to each other) outside of her relationship with Peter. Therefore she doesn’t look like she’s emotionally cheating on him.
-Structurally, this plot line ties everything together. It’s how John and LJ bond, it’s now Gen and Peter get caught, it’s how LJ eventually finds out about Gen’s parents splitting up. The pacing of the film is wildly off, lagging for the majority of time, bringing real conflict only in the last fifth, and has so much filler that could easily have been cut. I CAN NOT EMPHASIZE THIS ENOUGH, THE ASSASSINS GAME DRIVES THE ENTIRE PLOT.
-There’s also this really great moment in the book where LJ and John are at the USO party (aka Star Ball) and they jump in a red mustang convertible (because John picked her up in one…yeah, he’s THAT great in the book) and speed away from Gen and Peter, who show up to tag LJ out of Assassin. They then ride down the road with John’s arm around LJ and LJ laughing, feeling free and ready to take no the world. It’s pretty much epic.
2. Lara Jean and John Ambrose don’t write multiple letters to each other. In the book, LJ gets John’s letter and does write him back–multiple times. It should also be noted that Peter is not jealous of these letters from the get go.
Why does it matter?
It gives them a solid foundation (it starts out as merely friendship, really) and gives their relationship more time to flourish.
3. John Ambrose Isn’t Stormy’s Grandson. In the book, John Ambrose is coincidently Stormy’s grandson, and she keeps talking bout how LJ has to meet him because they’d love each other. When they do meet, it’s a big surprise.
Why does it matter?
It doesn’t, really, but there isn’t much sense to why they took it out? Stormy is great, and it’s a lovely flourish (that carries over into book 3), and John “randomly volunteering” at Belleview felt odd, especially after they hadn’t even written multiple letters to one another.
Also, it means that the two weren’t “forced” to spend time together. In the film, they have to bond. In the book, they choose to be around each other all the time.
4. There’s no night stuck at Belleview during the snowstorm. In the book, John and LJ get stuck at Belleview during a storm, and they have to spend the night. During this time, they stay up and play in the snow (way more than you see in the 15 seconds of the film) and John ends up kissing LJ.
Why does it matter?
You’ll have to read the book, but it showcases how John and Lara Jean are connected, now. I mean, it’s a HUGE moment/chapter in this story. The film does this pivot in narrative that makes it seem like she really liked John as a kid, and that confuses her, but Peter is the only person she’s connected to in the present. That’s not true in the books. John and LJ click, and she enjoys the kiss. Also, it’s romantic as HELL.
5. John Ambrose doesn’t give Lara Jean the snow globe. In the novel, it’s LJ’s birthday and John Ambrose shows up at her school to give her a snow globe (you know, to remember that night in the snow together?). Peter comes stalking up and gives LJ back her necklace, and claims that as his gift for her (more on the necklace fiasco later). This is where John and Peter square off, and it’s a huge climactic moment, bringing the two boys head to head, and LJ has to make her final choice. She leaves with John, but she picks Peter.
Why does it matter?
Well, again, because the snow night was a huge moment between the two. It showed how good they are for each other. It’s also structurally, the climax of the book and it’s weird the film never bothers to go there. Instead, the save the breakup for the climax, which ultimately comes too far into the film, and everything feels rushed and tied up way too quickly.
6. LJ offers up her necklace to Peter after they break up. In the book, Peter comes up to LJ after they break up and says he wants his necklace back. In the film, she gives it back to him, and he’s sad about it.
Why does this matter?
The book wasn’t about glossing over Peter’s insecurities and flaws, while the film is. Honestly, it’s probably because the third movie is all about Peter/LJ and they didn’t want audience to turn on Peter. But that in turn makes LJ look like the bad guy. Like she was emotionally cheating, like she left him and he didn’t deserve it, like he makes no mistakes. And Peters arc is about growing within his relationship with LJ–it’s what makes the third book feel like such a good payoff when he finally becomes a great boyfriend and he’s all in. Making your female protagonist look bad so the male love interest can look better isn’t a strong choice, and there’s no reason why Peter can’t be imperfect. If anything, these mistakes make their relationship more realistic (they are SIXTEEN), and make Peter a more complex and believable person.
7. LJ and John don’t have any closure. In the book, LJ tells Peter that she could “fall in love with him so easily” and she’s “halfway there already,” but she can’t stop loving Peter. John answers that “it wasn’t our time then, and I guess it isn’t now, but maybe one day” before letting her go.
Why does this matter?
Because in the film, she just leaves him out in the cold! LITERALLY! I mean really, what the actual fuck was that? She kisses him and just dips. It’s rushed, it’s lame, it gives their dynamic no levity or credit. It’s actually absurd. Even without ANYTHING else from the books, this was an easy bit of dialogue to fit in, and no narrative had to change. Again, this paints LJ in a really negative light and makes her, dare I say it, pretty damn unlikable in the moment. It just undermines the whole point of the second book.
8. Peter doesn’t even have to pay for what he does to LJ. This is a huge one. In the book, as previously stated, LJ and Peter break up way earlier. She finds out he lied about the hot tub, knew about Gen making the video, lied about writing the poem, refuses to stop putting Gen first and calling her/seeing her constantly, and LJ breaks up with him. They then stay apart for a long time before getting back together in the last scene of the novel.
Why does this matter?
Because the film paints LJ as the problem! She has to apologize to Gen, she has to admit that she was overly obsessed with Peters past, etc. And while that’s true, she is, she also has a right to be? Peter lies and manipulates and is selfish and wants to have his cake and eat in too in the second book. It’s actually outrageous that in the film, LJ breaks up with him just to immediately get back with him and he never has to even apologize or admit his wrongdoings. This is ruining LJ’s characterization, and again, Peters growth arc.
The thing about the book? You hated Peter when you needed to, loved John when you needed to, but also forgave Peter when you needed to. It had a way of creating scenarios that felt balanced and understandable, and wasn’t glossing over a guys bad behavior just because of the actor’s celebrity.
9. John Ambrose generally wasn’t a contender. In the book, JAM is a real contender for Lara’s heart. He picks up the pieces with her after Peter breaks her down, and their time together heals her in a really special way.
Why does this matter?
Because the film wasted time on emphasizing their past, while it was also about them connecting in the present. There was a lot of filler throughout the movie where John and Lara Jean just kind of sat around and did nothing. That doesn’t get you rooting for those two to get together, and does nothing to build a bond between characters. John has almost no standout moments in the film, and it feels obvious from the beginning that he is just a way to pass the time before everything with Peter gets worked out.
John Ambrose helps Lara Jean understand what she wants and most notably, DESERVES from a relationship. And while it’s a bummer she learns that from JAM and then goes on to find it with Peter, that’s still way more of an interesting story than watching LJ and Peter play bingo at Belleview and talk about 5th grade for 40 minutes. The film relied on Jordan Fisher to be charming, but it did nothing to making John Ambrose that way.
Again, this reason for this feels like they didn’t want people to be disappointed in movie three, when she ends up with Peter (*spoiler, I guess*).
20. Creative Choices. I just felt like some of the creative choices were weird. I didn’t like how they went up in the air while they were kissing at the end, and I wish they had their big “break my heart, do anything you want with it” moment in the treehouse, like the book. I thought Lara Jean singing and gliding through the hallways didn’t work. I thought there was too much inner monologue and it made no sense she was thirsting after John the second she got his letter.
There were things I liked, aspects they executed nicely, and interesting additions (i’m here for Trevor and Chris!), and the aesthetic was great. Lara Jean and Peter had some really lovely moments, and Stormy was absolutely iconic (as she should be). They cut a few things they didn’t need (Margot/Josh) and made sure to nail a few others (Lara Jean/Lucas talk at the party was beautifully done). Jordan Fisher was excellent at exuding true JAM energy. Lana Condor slayed, obviously.
But overall, This could have been such a better film.
Last Thoughts? Don’t worry about the third film. I know people who are let down by PS I Still Love You are now worried they won’t do Always And Forever justice, but they probably will. It’s all about Peter and LJ, and how great Peter has become, and how much they love each other, etc etc. I have no doubt in my mind they will dig into all of that, full force.
And just for the record? I love Peter and LJ! I do. Especially in book three. He fully wins me over there. And that’s kind of the point? Should have made film three so good, it doesn’t matter if in film two, they showcased all the grimy stuff he did in book two.
