Big Little Book Talk

[Mabinogia]

Does Joseph exist at all in the book or was he written into the show just for the affair?

I'm still fascinated by the fact that Reese wanted her character to have an affair. I can only assume it is because she didn't think playing a happy character was "challenging" enough? Or does she not know how to play a character who doesn't have some outside drama going on? Regardless, the decision just seems selfish. It didn't add anything to the story. It is a huge disservice to fans of the book and the character of Maddie. She made her character the least likable out of the women, IMO. Weird choice.

[chocolatine]

8 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

Does Joseph exist at all in the book or was he written into the show just for the affair?

He doesn't exist at all. Maddie's job does't play much of a role in the book (she has the same job, it's just not central to the plot). The Avenue Q stuff doesn't happen either.

12 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

I'm still fascinated by the fact that Reese wanted her character to have an affair. I can only assume it is because she didn't think playing a happy character was "challenging" enough?

That's my assumption too. For all the "women supporting each other" lip service she has been paying on the publicity circuit, I'm sure she didn't want Nicole Kidman to steal all of the spotlight. Also, it's HBO, and when was the last time they've allowed a character to just be happy?

[Mabinogia]

1 hour ago, chocolatine said:

Also, it's HBO, and when was the last time they've allowed a character to just be happy?

Hahaha, good point. It just would have been an interesting contrast, Maddie, the happy friend who tries to fix everyone else's problems because she hates seeing the people she loves in pain. There was just no reason at all to give her an affair. It didn't make her a meatier character at all. I liked the conflict with the older daughter. They should have scrapped the stupid affair and shown more of her presumably mixed feelings about Abigail's father being back in her life. That's some good conflict to work with. Being happy for your daughter because she's getting to know her dad but also resenting him for just showing up and winning her daughter back, but trying to keep a happy face for the daughters sake. Why wouldn't Reese have wanted to build on that story? It's a lot meatier than a stupid, pointless affair.

[Llywela]

3 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:

I know I said he "looked" skeevy and gross but my opinion has little to do with the actor himself and rather the character. It is Joseph the character that annoyed me. His presence, as the character is what I found gross and annoying. I actually have no opinion of the actor himself. He did well enough with the material he was given. I just really did not like Joseph. If anything colored my view, I'd say it's the fact that I read the book and loved Ed and Maddie's relationship and was totally bitter that the writers went down that route.

That was pretty much my exact point.

[Umbelina]

Well, for once, I haven't read the book first, so I can answer with one woman's opinion about the SHOW Maddie.  I'll probably read the book later, and may change my mind after that.

I LOVED that Maddy had a secret and a fault.  I loved the realistic portrayal of a "second husbands" secret fears as well.  I thought it showed a true marriage, since I rarely see any "perfect marriages" in real life.  I love that she was torn apart by her tawdry affair, because she does truly love her husband.  That actually happened to a friend of mine, and the grief and guilt felt honest, mostly because I'd seen it play out in real life, even though Ed was a prize and my friend's husband was a pain in the ass (and pedestrian in bed, no matter what my friend tried.)

I've also dealt with a man's insecurity about sexual prowess/former partners, and Ed portrayed that perfectly.

I think that having this perfect little wife and friend sticking up for everyone would have taken me completely out of the show.  Everyone DOES have problems, and most of us have secrets we keep.

I also didn't mind Maddie's confession to her daughter, it felt real, and her daughter was longing for REAL, for honesty, for something other than a "perfect" woman to talk to, and this made Maddie more valuable in making her decision to take the website down.

To have a show about secrets and not have a single wife be a someone who had an affair would have been stupid to me, having that character be Maddie?  Was the most compelling choice.  So basically?  I loved it.  That said, I hope Ed and Maddy find happiness, or at least that Ed finally has some spectacular sex, from Maddy hopefully, but if not?  From someone.

[truthaboutluv]

3 hours ago, Umbelina said:

I think that having this perfect little wife and friend sticking up for everyone would have taken me completely out of the show.  Everyone DOES have problems, and most of us have secrets we keep.

Book Maddie had flaws, plenty of them. She was by no means perfect and she did have problems - her daughter she raised mostly by herself after her ex-husband walked out on them, was choosing him and his new wife over her. That was actually a very real and relateable struggle that Maddie was going through in the book, for any parent who was divorced and shared a child with the ex. Cheating is not the only way to make a character imperfect or flawed. 

[Umbelina]

But the show included all of that side of Maddie as well.

Anyway, as I said, the question was asked, and that's my answer.  I loved it, as someone who had not read the book.

[Mabinogia]

12 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:

Cheating is not the only way to make a character imperfect or flawed. 

If anything it is the laziest way to make a character flawed. That or booze. I feel like, when a writer wants a "flawed" character they either make them a cheater or an alcoholic.

[Umbelina]

I do understand how disheartening it is to have  beloved book changed, and as I said, if I'd read it first, I might see things exactly as you do.  All I know about book Maddie is what I've read here after all.

I do think both Alcohol or other substance abuse, as well as infidelity are two of the biggest secrets kept inside families/marriages, the only thing I can think of that may be more common is  money issues.

Anyway, for me the story really did work.  My friend that I mentioned above tried to tell me how she felt about her affair, which was almost exactly like Maddie feels, but I don't think I really got it back then.  (I detested her husband, who was also threatening her about taking her kids if she were to divorce him etc. which may have played into my feelings.) 

When I watched "Maddie" struggle, I finally got it, in a real gut punch way, and felt sad that I hadn't been more empathetic with her at the time.  So for me, it was powerful, meaningful, and an important story.

I'm also interested in her choices, since this has been renewed.  Some say that if you tell, all you do it transfer your pain to the injured spouse.  Some say marriage can't work without the honesty and intimacy that confessing allows.  I think there are no easy answers. 

Meanwhile both "Maddie" and "Ed" just killed this, I felt for both of them, and I do think this story will be something many can relate to, simply because it's more common that a super wealthy rapist/wife beater.

[truthaboutluv]

On 4/23/2018 at 3:04 PM, Llywela said:

That was pretty much my exact point.

Not really because you're conflating my opinion of the character to the actor and I'm saying that it is not one and the same. I'm positive that I will be able to see the actor in something else and judge the character he plays there, irrespective of Big Little Lies. I didn't like Joseph - period. It had little to do with the actor himself, who as I noted, was fine in the role and I'm sure simply delivered the part he was asked to play. It was the character and the entire storyline of Maddie and Joseph's affair that I found to be a turnoff. 

[Nessie]

2 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:

Not really because you're conflating my opinion of the character to the actor and I'm saying that it is not one and the same. I'm positive that I will be able to see the actor in something else and judge the character he plays there, irrespective of Big Little Lies. I didn't like Joseph - period. It had little to do with the actor himself, who as I noted, was fine in the role and I'm sure simply delivered the part he was asked to play. It was the character and the entire storyline of Maddie and Joseph's affair that I found to be a turnoff. 

I can see both your points (I think).  I had only seen Santiago Cabrera in "heartthrob" roles before*, so like @Llywela says, he probably relished playing against type.  But in this, I found him so gross I not only didn't find him attractive, I didn't even recognize him and wondered why Maddie would cheat on Ed with him.

* I mean, he's been both Lancelot and Aramis, for goodness sake!

[meredithalmighty]

I read the book after watching Season One and wanted to point out some of my observations:

• What made Madeline's affair on the show interesting is that she was almost replicating the self-destructive patterns that Nathan brought into her first marriage- it kind of illustrated that she couldn't move past the pain of her first marriage bc she saw how hard the divorce was on Abigail. I think the show could have gone into more detail about the break-up- some show scenes seem to imply that Nathan left Madeline either when Abigail was older or directly for Bonnie and that was not the case in the book
• I personally would have loved to see Jane's family featured on the show, Not the whole series, but it would have been nice to see the scene between Jane's Mom and Maddie on the beach. 
• I also would  have loved the scene where Madeline gets a hint of Abigail's fundraiser by seeing her post on FB late at night and calling Nathan about the change in the math tutor. 
• I actually liked the addition of the Avenue Q storyline because it helped cement the Celeste / Madeline relationship
• I hope that Laura Dern doesn't move to London with Ammabella for her divorce
• I would have preferred the Celeste South Dakota storyline to get Abigail to pull from the website vs Maddie's confession. Sometimes parents just can't get through to a teenager. Also would have preferred the picking up school scene, getting Celeste's children, the nits, and rear ending Renatta as you're screaming at your daughter for the website and seeing the Nathan/Maddie conversation trying to figure out passwords.
• Would have preferred that they eliminated the storyline with Bonnie overstepping by getting Abigail on birth control. Book Bonnie would not have done that.

[sppa125]

I read originally Reese didn't know who she wanted to play, and that she originally thought she thought Jane or Renata. It was Nicole and DEK who looked at her and said of course you're Madeline.

I remember an interview with Reese where she said she came up with the affair idea because she wanted a secret too and didn't think there was much to Madeline in the book or than being a busybody. Seems to me Reese basically really wanted to play Jane and tried to incorporate those ideas -- having a secret, having the love interest (Tom got sidelined in favor of the extra affair with Joseph and Madeline) to Madeline instead. Originally it was Renatas husband who had an affair when caused the break out fight at Trivia Night but in the show it was Madelines affair.

The problem for me was I felt that Madeline's main trajectory in the book was to counterpoint Celeste and Jane. They were abuse victims. Madeline, on the other hand, between pushing her daughter away and the way she treated Renata etc there was more of an emphasis on Madeline herself turning into a bully, but then trying to overcome that in the end. To me expanding on this angle would've made more sense in context of the overall story and show. The affair didn't add anything.

Edited June 3, 2019 by sppa125

[jeansheridan]

On 6/2/2019 at 4:53 PM, sppa125 said:

she came up with the affair idea because she wanted a secret too and didn't think there was much to Madeline in the book or than being a busybody.

This is interesting because it shows her limits as a story idea/producer. And that's okay. She isn't a creative visionary. Witherspoon gets things done, pulls people together, builds the team. Maybe leave the story ideas to others. 

Her idea didn't ruin the show. It just didn't add anything. Hiring Laura Dern to play Renata added A LOT. That was probably one of their best choices. That and Monterey which really is a sleepy, wealthy seaside community.

[truthaboutluv]

4 minutes ago, jeansheridan said:

Her idea didn't ruin the show. It just didn't add anything.

It ruined Maddie for me, who was my favorite character and you're right, added nothing to the show. So it ruined a character and one of the best relationships in the book for a storyline that really added nothing to the show and story. 

[Crs97]

Yes, I was very disappointed at what could have been when I read the book and realized how wonderful Madeline’s marriage was supposed to be.  I wish someone had talked Reese out of that storyline.

[jeansheridan]

7 hours ago, Crs97 said:

Yes, I was very disappointed at what could have been when I read the book and realized how wonderful Madeline’s marriage was supposed to be

I think unfortunately Adam Scott and she lacked chemistry. They're fairly close in age but he reads younger. I remember wishing they had gotten an older actor, less fit but cuddly. Adam Scott is not cuddly.

[chocolatine]

1 hour ago, jeansheridan said:

I think unfortunately Adam Scott and she lacked chemistry. They're fairly close in age but he reads younger. I remember wishing they had gotten an older actor, less fit but cuddly. Adam Scott is not cuddly.

Yes, I think someone like Jack Black would have been spot on. Not conventionally attractive, but still sexy due to his personality. I think he and Reese could have had great chemistry together.

[jeansheridan]

Or Patton Oswalt. But Jack Black is an interesting idea. I am not sure how Reese does with funny men. Apparently she didn't get on with Vince Vaughn. 

I like her a lot but when I think about it, she rarely has good romantic chemistry. She didn't spark with Mark Ruffalo. Sweet Home Alabama? I can't remember the male leads. Same with Legally Blonde. Joaquin Phoenix maybe. I kind of wonder how she would do with Paul Rudd. Or Jason Bateman.

[truthaboutluv]

No offense to Jack and Patton but I don't think the issue was lack of humorous chemistry and I certainly don't remember Ed being described as this goofy not conventionally unattractive type in the book.

In fact I remember the scene in the book when Jane first meets him at his and Maddie's home and her being a little uncomfortable seeing him bare chested, as he'd just gotten back from surfing. I actually worried when I first read the book that the author might have gone "there" with Ed and Jane. 

The vibe I got from Ed in the book was a chill, normal, likely average looking guy in that he wasn't smoking hot but still kind of cute. He just seemed very level headed, which was a nice balance to Maddie's crazy. The problem wasn't that Adam couldn't do cuddly because I've seen Adam in many other things where I found him plenty appealing. Like I loved him and Amy Pohler's pairing on Parks & Recreation. The problem was, to facilitate the rewrite of Maddie's being a cheater, they changed Ed's character and the dynamic between him and Maddie significantly.

Book Maddie and Ed had a comfortable, loving relationship where they came across not just as lovers but friends. The show's Maddie and Ed didn't have that because the writers were too busy telling us Maddie was not attracted to him anymore and that's one of the reasons she cheated and then there was this ridiculous pissing contest between him and Maddie's ex-husband because they'd also turned Ed into this ball of insecurities. 

Edited June 8, 2019 by truthaboutluv

[ProudMary]

I am a huge fan of the book. It means a great deal to me. The written version of BLL was the impetus for me to leave my abusive husband after 30 years. He was never physically abusive; he was an emotional abuser, which leaves you scarred only inside, not out, but Liane Moriarty's descriptions of what Celeste was thinking and feeling were so attuned to my own, that it opened my eyes and made me realize I was an abuse victim and that our marriage was most definitely not normal.  Even so, it took me close to two more years before I escaped.

After watching S2, Ep. 1, I'm finding myself somewhat angry. The closing chapters of the book provided all the essential answers.  This season is not necessary.  The whole premise of this season is in contradiction to what LM has already written. 

To be specific, I'm quoting this directly from the book Pages 455-456.
 

Quote

Bonnie did not have to do jail time. She was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter by an unlawful and dangerous act and sentenced to two hundred hours of community service. In handing down his sentence the judge noted that the defendants's moral culpability was at the lower end of the scale for this type of offense. He took into account the fact that Bonnie did not have a criminal record, was clearly remorseful and that, although it was possibly forseeable that the victim would fall, this was not her intent.

He also took into account the testimony of expert witnesses who proved that the balcony railing was beneath the minimum height requirements of the current building code, that the bar stools were not appropriate for use on the balcony, and that other contributing factors included the weather, the consequent slipperiness of the railing and the intoxication of both the defendant and the victim.

According to Madeline, Bonnie had performed her community service with great pleasure, Abigail by her side the whole time.

There was no cover-up! There is not a detective following these women around. It's been decided legally.

Additionally, what is this nonsense about Jane not cashing checks? Celeste is a lawyer. She set the whole thing up legally.  

Again quoting from BLL, pages 456-457:

Quote

Her [Celeste's] boys were trust-fund kids, but their trust funds weren't going to define them, and she was determined that Max and Josh would one day be asking, "Do you want fries with that?"

She'd also set up a trust fund of equal value for Ziggy.

"You don't need to do that," Jane had said, when she'd told her, over lunch at a cafe near Celeste's apartment. She'd looked appalled, almost nauseous. "We don't want his money. Your money, I mean."

"It's Ziggy's money. If Perry knew Ziggy was his son he would have wanted him to be treated exactly the same as Max and Josh," Celeste had told her. "Perry was ----"

But then she'd found herself unable to speak, because how could she say to Jane that Perry was generous to a fault, and scrupulously fair. Her husband had always been so fair, except for those times when he was scrupulously unfair.

But Jane had reached across the cafe table and taken her hand and said, "I know he was," almost as if she did understand everything that Perry was and wasn't.

No checks for Jane to cash. Celeste has set up Ziggy's future. 

I guess I'll continue to watch, but this new season just seems completely untrue to me.

[truthaboutluv]

Didn't watch the season premiere but none of this surprises me. The fact is, if they were going to stick to the book, there really wouldn't be any reason for a second season (and there wasn't). So I thought it was obvious, the minute a Season 2 was announced, that they would turn it into this big murder investigation and the women all trying to cover up what happened. Considering the show literally changed Maddie and Ed's entire relationship to fit a different narrative on the show, these changes noted above are hardly surprising to me. 

[jeansheridan]

Maybe a second season wasn't necessary but getting to see this group of actors work together again intrigues me. Kidman is still very tuned in to what made Celeste so interesting. And giving her Streep to play with is delightful.

I really didn't care for the book much so changes don't bother me much. It was nice to have Maddie just be very warm and ordinary but I can see how that might be hard to play over six or seven eps. And now that Adam Scott doesn't need to be vaguely creepy for the mystery, he can be funny (I felt their chemistry was already better, especially at the assembly when they look at each other appalled/amused).

I can't remember. Who was Bonnie's abuser in the book? Boyfriend? Father?

[ZootSuitWyatt]

34 minutes ago, jeansheridan said:

Maybe a second season wasn't necessary but getting to see this group of actors work together again intrigues me. Kidman is still very tuned in to what made Celeste so interesting. And giving her Streep to play with is delightful.

I really didn't care for the book much so changes don't bother me much. It was nice to have Maddie just be very warm and ordinary but I can see how that might be hard to play over six or seven eps. And now that Adam Scott doesn't need to be vaguely creepy for the mystery, he can be funny (I felt their chemistry was already better, especially at the assembly when they look at each other appalled/amused).

I can't remember. Who was Bonnie's abuser in the book? Boyfriend? Father?

I don't believe we know for sure but based on the fact that she said "we fucking see!" in response to Perry saying the kids hadn't seen what he did to Celeste, I assumed a parent.

[kassandra8286]

38 minutes ago, jeansheridan said:

I can't remember. Who was Bonnie's abuser in the book? Boyfriend? Father?

I believe in the book Bonnie used to witness her father or step-father abusing her mother. I don't remember the details, just some kind of flashback where little Bonnie was hiding under a bed or behind a couch.

But Show!Bonnie is almost a completely different character than Book!Bonnie so I don't expect her backstory to be the same.

[Eri]

On 6/17/2019 at 10:02 AM, jeansheridan said:

Maybe a second season wasn't necessary but getting to see this group of actors work together again intrigues me. Kidman is still very tuned in to what made Celeste so interesting. And giving her Streep to play with is delightful.

I really didn't care for the book much so changes don't bother me much. It was nice to have Maddie just be very warm and ordinary but I can see how that might be hard to play over six or seven eps. And now that Adam Scott doesn't need to be vaguely creepy for the mystery, he can be funny (I felt their chemistry was already better, especially at the assembly when they look at each other appalled/amused).

I can't remember. Who was Bonnie's abuser in the book? Boyfriend? Father?

It was her father - Bonnie explains growing up in an abusive household: her mother would do something that would trigger him (i.e. laughing too loudly, not putting enough tomato sauce on his plate, etc.) and how she used to react by hiding under the bed with her little sister and did so well into her 20s until she finally called the police. Nathan never got to meet him because he had died of a heart attack but says Bonnie still suffers from PTSD as a result from all those years of trauma.

[jeansheridan]

Since we are getting all the mom's this season I do hope we get Jane's dad. I remember liking him in the book. I know it was a brief scene but he seemed like one of the reasons Jane was slowly recovering. A good dad can really help with self esteem. I have seen it with my female friends. Women who have supportive fathers (supportive of their mothers and their children) seem to have good balance. There is just this confidence they radiate. I know people can create their own confidence, but a supportive parent helps. Plus it would be nice to see a cool dad beyond Ed. And Nathan somewhat.

[peggy06]

Just finished the book, and you will never convince me that they didn't plan two seasons from the get-go. If they didn't, why would they have left it a cliffhanger? Come on, we weren't born yesterday. Also, Madeline's affair subplot that caused a strain on her marriage and needed extra time for resolution. I'm just glad I didn't read the book first. If I had, I would have rolled my eyes so hard at a S2. Now I understand why the episodes were so short. No decent material to pad them out. Everything was overblown. In retrospect, it makes the show look like a vanity project for Reese, with her giving herself this extraneous affair and its aftermath. (Ugh, that vow renewal.)

I did like getting a more vivid and memorable Renata, but even she went OTT by the end.

Edited August 15, 2019 by peggy06
Grammar

[Eri]

This was a book club read earlier in the year but the waiting list was so long I got the audiobook instead and it turned out to be a lot better than I thought (Caroline Lee does an excellent job and brought the humour out of story, the greek chorus is sooo much better) so I highly recommend to anyone who has already read it in book format 🙂 

With that said, I didn't realise they made a US version of it until a few months ago, just before Season 2 came out, which disappoints because of the Australian theme. Season 1 grew on me but I was hoping that the characters would've been more true to form (i.e. Madeline being a brunette instead of a blonde, Ed being an older middle aged, balding guy, Renata and Jeff, Harper and Graeme, Nathan being less of a douche). I was fine with the kids being a few years older and I thought Nicole Kidman was a good choice for Celeste - I always think of her past role in Practical Magic dealing with an abusive relationship. The psychiatrist scene was the most accurate part of the book that I saw portrayed onscreen with Ziggy so A+ there.

I think Bonnie was the biggest adjustment from the book since I pictured a "Plain Jane' character with a single plait over one shoulder and they made her an attractive hippie with a completely different identity. I especially hated her storyline after Season 2.

Another parallel was how the domestic abuse was portrayed - the book felt a lot more subtle in the way Perry behaved and controlled Celeste as opposed to his obvious onscreen 'killer stares' and constant track of her movements that book Perry never cared as much about because he was away so much. The elevated Fifty Shades of Grey dominant-submissive sex scenes took me out of the show also. In addition, I thought the producers did a major injustice giving Madeline an affair storyline when the book provided more than enough drama for her to deal with (i.e. her rivalry with Renata, Abigail, struggles co-parenting with Nathan, and looking after Jane after learning about her background). Book Madeline was one of the few light-hearted characters that brought energy to the story and made the book an interesting read.

I have listened to the audiobook several times now and it never gets old for me - I really wish there was a sequel for the books to make up for the trainwreck that was Season 2. I would read it in a heartbeat!

[Eri]

Ah one more mention from the book that came to mind; Ziggy was named after Ziggy Marley, not Ziggy Stardust. Jane specifically mentions that her brother Dane was a big fan of Bob Marley and heard one of his sons was called Ziggy so she liked that it was "kind of out there."

As someone with Jamaican heritage, it bothered me that this wasn't emphasized in the show *ahem*

[Ms Blue Jay]

On 4/9/2017 at 5:02 PM, Ms Blue Jay said:

What Alice Forgot.  I liked that a lot more than The Husband's Secret, which I didn't like.  So far, I REALLY didn't like Truly, Madly, Guilty and I haven't been able to get through any of the others.  I've been stuck halfway through The Hypnotist's Love Story forever and I find it really boring.

So, I've been singing "What Alice Forgot"'s praises in here and now I'm embarrassed.

I recently read "Remember Me?" by Sophie Kinsella and I looooooooooooved it.  To make matters worse, "What Alice Forgot" now seems like a total copy of that book.

What Alice Forgot: May 2009

Remember Me:  February 2008.

Okay, the internet says they're only 1 year apart.  Maybe it was an innocent mistake…. 

 

On 6/7/2019 at 8:43 AM, jeansheridan said:

I like her a lot but when I think about it, she rarely has good romantic chemistry. She didn't spark with Mark Ruffalo. Sweet Home Alabama? I can't remember the male leads. Same with Legally Blonde. Joaquin Phoenix maybe. I kind of wonder how she would do with Paul Rudd. Or Jason Bateman.

I actually love that movie "Just Like Heaven".  I've watched it a dozen times.  Also, Reese plays a 

Spoiler

dead woman/ghost.

 🙂  It's definitely not a traditional romcom and I'm fine with them not exactly being overly "sparky".  

Reese actually IS with Paul Rudd (and Owen Wilson) in the movie "How Do You Know?"  It wasn't well received, but I liked it.

I also like the movie "This Means War" which is very similar, in that two men are fighting over her (Chris Pine and Tom Hardy).

Edited February 21, 2020 by Ms Blue Jay