Netflix’s My Oxford Year Movie: Why Book Fans Are Disappointed

I’ve been waiting for My Oxford Year to drop on Netflix for what feels like forever. Six weeks of hype, anticipation, and countdowns... only to be hit with — let’s just say it — major disappointment.

Now, I don’t usually write negative reviews. I like to focus on the positive, but I genuinely felt so let down by this adaptation that I had to say something. Maybe I’m also a little extra annoyed because I was so hyped, and the let down hit harder because of that.

First Rant: Why Did They Change Ella's Name?

One of my biggest frustrations right off the bat — why did they change the main character's name? In the book, Jamie always affectionately called her Ella from Ohio. It was endearing and sweet, and it became part of their bond. But in the movie, her name is Anna De La Vega, and she’s from New York? Why? What was the reason for changing such a core part of her identity?

Anna’s Character Felt Off — And Not in a Good Way

Another huge miss was the way Anna (Ella) was written in the movie. In the book, Ella's father died in a tragic car accident when she was young, and that loss shaped so much of who she was — her drive, her ambition, even her tense relationship with her mother. The movie just... erased that. In fact, her father is alive and well in the film, which made no sense at all.

Also, Anna's character gave off total "pick me" vibes in the movie, which was so far from the independent, passionate Ella we got in the book. It felt like the screenwriters just didn't understand her character at all.

The Emotional Core Was Missing — Jamie’s Illness Was Rushed

One of the most emotional parts of the book was how Jamie and Ella connected during the time he was taking an experimental drug for his cancer. That entire plotline — the raw vulnerability, the emotional build-up, their shared moments — was completely glossed over in the movie. In fact, I don’t even think the experimental drug was mentioned at all.

This wasn’t a small detail; it was a huge part of their story. By ignoring it, the movie lost a big chunk of emotional depth. Their relationship felt rushed, surface-level, and lacked the heart that made the book so special.

The Movie Was Choppy and All Over the Place

Another thing that really bothered me: the movie’s pacing and editingwere just off. Scenes felt like they were stitched together with no real flow, jumping from one moment to another without giving the audience time to breathe or connect. It didn’t feel natural, and I wasn’t alone in thinking this. Even friends who hadn’t read the book mentioned how disjointed it felt.

On a Side Note: The Acting vs. The Material

Now, I want to make it clear — I actually like Sofia Carson and Corey Mylchreest. Sofia, though, played the same character she tends to play in almost all her movies, so her performance felt predictable. As for Corey, while I think he's a great actor (loved him in Queen Charlotte), I don’t believe he was given the right material here. His performance felt constrained, like he wasn’t given enough direction or depth to work with. This isn’t a critique of him as an actor, but more of the script and how the movie was produced. He deserved better.

Major Book-to-Movie Differences (a.k.a. Why the Adaptation Fell Flat)

Here are some of the biggest (and most baffling) changes the movie made from Julia Whelan’s novel:

Ella from Ohio vs. Anna from New YorkIn the book, Eleanor "Ella" Duran is a Rhodes Scholar from Ohio. The movie changes her name to Anna De La Vega and makes her a New Yorker. This seemingly small change actually altered the charm and grounding of her character. 

Career Ambitions: Politics vs. Goldman Sachs Ella’s Career Ambitions were completely watered down. One of the core aspects of Ella’s character in the book was her passion for education policy and her dream of making a real difference through politics. She wasn’t just at Oxford for the experience — she was career-driven, with a clear sense of purpose. In fact, a major plot point revolves around her being recruited to consult on a U.S. political campaign, which plays a big role in her inner conflict between career and personal life. The movie, however, ditches this entirely and instead has Anna heading into a post-grad job at Goldman Sachs. This change not only stripped away Ella’s deeper motivations but also made Anna’s character feel more generic, like she was just another ambitious girl chasing a high-paying job, rather than someone fighting for meaningful change.

They Butchered Ella and Jamie’s First Meeting at the Fish & Chip Shop

Another scene that was criminally altered was Ella and Jamie’s first encounter at the fish and chip shop. In the book, this wasn’t just a cute meet-cute — it was hilarious, messy, and totally set the tone for their dynamic. Jamie’s potato famine question? Gone. The iconic moment where Ella accidentally gets food all over her shirt? Also gone.

That scene was supposed to be chaotic, witty, and instantly charming. It showed Ella’s feistiness and Jamie’s playful charm, all while wrapped in this very “Oxford meets Ohio” clash of personalities. But in the movie, their meeting felt rushed and lacked the memorable, slightly ridiculous charm that made it such a standout moment in the book.

How do you skip over a potato famine question? And seriously — no fish and chip shirt disaster? That was the icebreaker of their relationship!

Anna’s Father Is Alive (??? Why.)

This one was a major dealbreaker for me: The movie erased Ella's backstory of losing her father, which was a major part of her identityand her emotional journey. In the book, this loss defined her relationship with her mother and her ambitious nature. 

Jamie’s Brother: Eddie vs. Oliver

In the movie, Jamie’s late brother is named Eddie and was dating Cecelia. In the book, his brother is Oliver, and Cecelia was his fiancée. Small detail, but why change it? 

Jamie’s Experimental DrugThis was a glaring omission. In the book, Jamie takes an experimental drug, and while it’s touch-and-go with his health, his condition improves. This entire emotional arc is erased in the film. In fact, the movie makes it seem like Jamie outright refuses the trial — if it was even mentioned at all. 

The Ending: Open-Ended vs. Neat and TidyThe book ends on a bittersweet, open-ended note. Ella realises that she and Jamie, while significant to each other, aren't meant to be together long-term. She decides not to return to the U.S. for a political campaign, choosing to stay in Oxford for herself. The movie, however, opts for a more cinematic ending where Anna takes over Jamie’s role as a poetry professor, complete with a "first day of class" cake tribute. There’s also a montage of Anna traveling to all the places Jamie wanted to visit, but — plot twist — she’s actually alone, not with him. It felt like a forced emotional wrap-up that didn’t hit the same. 

The Movie Had an Identity Crisis — Emotional Drama or Rom-Com?

One of the biggest issues with the movie was that it couldn’t seem to decide what it wanted to be. Was it aiming for an emotional, character-driven drama? Or was it trying to be a light-hearted rom-com? It kept flip-flopping between the two, and as a result, it landed in this weird middle ground where neither side hit hard enough.

The book balanced humour and heartbreak perfectly. You laughed with Ella and Jamie, but you also felt their pain. The movie, on the other hand, felt tonally confused — it would lean into heavy, emotional moments and then immediately undercut them with awkward humour or rom-com clichés. It’s like the movie was scared to fully commit to the emotional depth of the story, so it kept pulling back and adding fluff.

That tonal inconsistency made it hard to connect with the characters on a deeper level because you never knew if a scene was meant to be taken seriously or just passed off as another quirky rom-com moment.

Final Thoughts

I completely understand that book-to-movie adaptations require changes. But My Oxford Year lost the very heart of what made the story beautiful: the slow build of deep, emotional connections, the personal struggles, and the realistic, imperfect journey of two people who changed each other's lives.

The movie felt like a watered-down, cliché rom-com rather than the heartfelt, poignant story we read in Julia Whelan’s novel.

Netflix, you owe us an apology.