The Housemaid Movie Made 4 Big Changes From The Book (And There Were A Few Other Things I Noticed)

Oh, do I love book adaptations for this very reason. I think it’s so much fun to see how Hollywood decides to translate the material to a visual medium, and what’s added or lost along the way. When it comes to The Housemaid film, there’s a lot of eyes on this one because so many people have been reading and discussing Freida McFadden’s bestseller since it was published back in 2022. Now that I’ve seen the movie after being excited for it after reading it, I want to talk about all the big (and small) changes.

As far as adaptations go, I thought the film remained pretty close to the source material overall, and is a ton of fun to watch with an audience. But, there’s definitely some interesting ways in which the two differ. Whether you started with the movie, or you contributed to the huge popularity of the The Housemaid novel (which reportedly has sold 3.5 million copies to date and has stayed on the New York Times Best Seller list for 130 weeks, per Deadline), there’s a lot to unpack here – SPOILERS are ahead.

The Movie Version Of Nina Is Quite Different

I thought Amanda Seyfried’s performance as Nina Winchester was really well done, and perhaps better for not being exactly like the literary character. That being said, I found her Nina is a lot more likable than the original version. For example, I can recall reading the novel and gasping throughout for the audacity of Nina when she talks to Millie, and makes her do all these things. By the time Andrew leaves her, I was completely on Millie’s side over being OK with betraying her until the book sidesteps with its big twist. Seyfried’s version isn’t quite as Mean Girl-level (despite her obvious experience in that department), but I think it’s also possible that knowing her backstory going in gave me more sympathy for the character from the start.

Another alteration to note, is in the book Nina is always overeating, and is visibly heavier than the other moms, which they talk behind her back about. In the movie, they attempt to suggest the PTA moms think her skin isn’t up to par, but I thought Seyfried looked like a vision in every scene. The actress more-so playing up acting psychotic rather than having this minor physical detail included worked just fine for me.

Millie And Andrew’s Romance Moves Quicker In The Movie

Another change is in regards to the affair between Millie and Andrew. In the novel, it's more of a slow burn regarding these two becoming attracted to each other, as Millie’s narrations suggest being interested in him, but neither of them do anything about it until much later. But in the movie, it’s not long at all before it’s set up that an affair between Millie and Andrew could be brewing.

This is done, for example, with this dream sequence where Andrew brings her a cupcake and she imagines him making a move on her in the attic. I totally get why they set this up earlier, my only complaint here is Millie seems a bit more reckless than the book because of the quicker buildup.

Enzo Has A Much Smaller Role In The Movie

Sadly, I think the storyline that’s cut the most is regarding Enzo, the gardener. 365 Days’ Michele Morrone wonderfully plays the role is just cut so much. In the book, Millie has a lot more interactions with him before we learn the twist such as his first word to her being the word for “danger” in Italian, and she often tries to get him alone in order to get information from him.

And, in one funny scene, she also comes on to him to try to rein in her sexual fantasies about Andrew, but he flat out rejects her. Enzo and Nina actually totally have sex after she’s left by Andrew. Additionally, he stays with Cecelia at the hotel and teaches her Italian while Nina attempts to rescue Millie at the end. I wish more of his role had been adapted, but oh, well!

How Andrew Dies

You can read my full explanation of the book vs. movie ending differences and why I liked the film version better, but basically how Andrew dies is not the same. In the book, Andrew dies from days of Millie’s torture, and Nina finds him in the attic when she thinks she’s rescuing Millie. But in the movie, when Nina unlocks the door thinking it’s Millie, Andrew is unleashed and it leads to a confrontation between them before Millie pushes Andrew from the top of the staircase. In the book, Nina tells the police he accidentally got locked in the attic while she was gone, and in the movie she says he fell while trying to swap out a lightbulb.

Other Smaller Changes I Also Noticed

Now that I’ve done a rundown of the BIG shifts, I want to quickly point out some smaller things that were different from the book:

• In the movie, Nina Winchester initially tells Millie that she’s already pregnant when she’s interviewing her for the job, so Millie thinks her mood swings have to do with her hormones being all over the place. But, of course she later learns that she was lying to her about being pregnant.
• In the book, there’s no creepy doll house that Cecelia plays with. I personally loved this addition to the story, and thought it added to the tension and creepiness of it all.
• The movie doesn’t touch on Cecelia’s peanut allergy, and how Nina and Cecelia led Millie to believe she had one, even though she didn’t.
• Millie’s room (aka the attic) looks much nicer than it’s described in the book, even though they try to suggest that it’s uncomfortable. I’m sorry but this took me out of the story, because it looks too gorgeous.
• There’s no talk of the Winchester’s family china in the book. It replaces the original reason why Andrew locks Millie into the attic, and what method of torture he uses to “punish” her.

There's certainly even more to talk about I didn't cover that I could definitely run on about, but I'll let you find them yourself. Like I said, it’s always so interesting to me how books and movies compare and contrast. For all the things I did notice, I thought Paul Feig's film did a great job of adapting the material.