Paul Waring won his first European Tour title at his 200th attempt with victory at the Nordea Masters in Gothenburg.

The Englishman, 33, held a two-shot lead with four holes to play before playing partner Thomas Aiken birdied the last to force extra holes.

However, South Africa’s Aiken drove into the water on the first hole of the sudden-death play-off, with Waring’s par good enough to secure victory.

“I wasn’t sure this day would come in total honesty,” he told Sky Sports.

“I’m obviously ecstatic. I’ve tried so hard for many years to get to this point and it’s nice to finally get across the line and be holding the trophy.”

Waring and Aiken both shot two-under 68s to finish on 14 under par, a shot ahead of Germany’s Max Kieffer, who carded a five-under 65 in the final round.

Denmark’s Thorbjorn Olesen finished fourth in Sweden to move ahead of England’s Ian Poulter in the race to qualify automatically for Europe’s Ryder Cup team.

“It wasn’t easy. I felt really in control though,” said Waring.

“I’ve had a couple of operations along the way. It feels like it’s all worth it.

“I’m sure everyone back home will be absolutely thrilled for me.

“I’ve got a great team around me so this is all for them as well.”

BOSTON — Slogans and buzzwords aren’t enough to fix the mess USA Gymnastics is in.

USA Gymnastics CEO Kerry Perry finally emerged from behind the curtain Sunday, holding her first extended question-and-answer session with the media since taking over Dec. 1. But she offered nothing of substance, and if she responds to athletes’ concerns as vaguely and indirectly as she responded in the 22-minute session, the organization is in the wrong hands.

Perry talked repeatedly about forging a path forward and making sure athletes, past and present, know that USA Gymnastics is their biggest advocate. Yet when asked about the anxiety athletes and coaches have expressed over the lack of national team training camps and their dismay over the abrupt firing of the head of the women’s program, the best Perry could manage is that change is hard.

Not even a question about the criticism raised by Simone Biles, the greatest gymnast of all time and the best thing USA Gymnastics has going these days, could get Perry to divert from her talking points and offer some substance. Or show some emotion.  

“I respect her opinion, and know that as an organization, the kinds of changes that we’re making can be a little scary, can be a little daunting,” Perry said. “I want her and all of our athletes to know we have their best interests at heart.”

That’s the problem: They don’t believe that. Nobody does.

More: Biles dominates in her return to the U.S. gymnastics championships

More: No longer a teen, Biles is finding her voice at a time of crisis in sport

Look, changing the culture that allowed a predator like Larry Nassar to thrive and restoring the organization’s reputation is a Herculean task, one that will take years, if not decades, to achieve. But Perry has made it far harder than it needs to be and, worse, there’s no indication she even realizes that.

Yes, the lawsuits filed against USA Gymnastics by Nassar’s survivors limit what Perry can say and, in some respects, even do. But by ducking questions and essentially being a ghost for the last eight-plus months — she’s held three teleconferences since she was hired, and had one off-the-record session with media members at last month’s U.S. Classic — she is perpetuating the very lack of transparency that got USA Gymnastics into this crisis.

“I’ve heard talk about transparency,” said Oklahoma coach Mark Williams, who coached the men’s team at the Rio Olympics. “I’ve not seen a lot of that.”

Perry said she’s talked to athletes, parents, club owners, even survivors who have told her they’re encouraged by the changes USA Gymnastics is making. So where are they? Go to a gymnastics meet, talk to just about anyone in the sport, and all you’ll hear is how disappointed they are in Perry and the job she’s doing.

“I want more,” said Chellsie Memmel, the 2005 world champion and a member of the committee that selected Perry. “Going into it, our expectation was (she was) going to be the face of USA Gymnastics and the positive change and the positive force. So to me, that’s been a little bit disappointing, and I’d like to see more.”

There are small things Perry could say and do that would go a long way in showing she and the organization are sincere, that there is action behind all this talk of change.  

Take this week’s national championships. This would have been the perfect time to honor the Nassar survivors and promote abuse prevention. Paint teal ribbons on the podium and give T-shirts promoting an awareness group to every kid who walks through the door. Invite survivors and recognize them on the floor before Sunday night’s women’s final, or at the end, before medals are awarded.

Is USA Gymnastics doing that?  

“In terms of recognition, I hope it’s clear, and we’re going to continue to communicate that it’s clear, that we are all of our athletes’ advocates. That we are here, USA Gymnastics exists, because of our athletes,” Perry said. “Celebrating like competitions today, celebrating their success and celebrating what the sport of gymnastics does, for our athletes not just as they’re competing but beyond is really important to all of us.

“As I think of our survivors, and I’ve been asked this question a lot, what do I envision in the future, and I’ve said, I envision our survivors standing side by side with our organization and making changes as we continue down this path. That’s really important to me.”

So that’s a no on any recognition of the survivors.

“I would say that overall, we’re going to constantly recognize and make sure that our athletes know that we have their best interests in mind,” Perry said, “including our survivors.”

That’s not only non-sensical, it’s condescending.

And it’s not leadership. Certainly not the kind USA Gymnastics so desperately needs. 

***

Follow USA TODAY Sports columnist Nancy Armour on Twitter @nrarmour. 

 

 

 

Little girls grow up.

But a daddy’s daughter remains, it’s been said, his little girl.

So maybe that was the sentiment when Alec Baldwin, President Trump’s frequent “Saturday Night Live” impersonator, objected to a sexy shot of daughter Ireland on Instagram. This weekend, the 22-year-old model shared a sizzling shot of herself clad in cowboy boots and a black bikini, leaning forward on a motorcycle.

Dad weighs in

Ireland Baldwin captioned the photo, “Stay extra.”

The comments that followed were a lot of wows and approvals. 

It didn’t take long for her 60-year-old father to notice the photo and chime in with a succinct statement of disapproval: “No. Just … No.“

An old controversy 

Ireland is the daughter of Alec Baldwin and actress Kim Basinger. The father and daughter addressed an earlier uproar during his 2017 roast. The controversy involved a 2007 leaked tape in which he called his daughter, then 11, a “rude, thoughtless little pig.” 

“I’m here to roast this big old ham I call my father,” Ireland said at the show. “Speaking of pigs. Some of you may remember me as that thoughtless little pig you read about. That was a decade ago, and my dad and I are in a much better place now. He would never say something like that – because I’m 6-foot-2 and I would kick his (butt).

“The truth is, that whole awful period nearly killed him emotionally. I wouldn’t see my dad that upset ever again … until I showed him my first tattoo. OK, my second tattoo. I couldn’t show him where I got the first one.”

Like All the Moms?

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

READ MORE:

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2L80D6f

Tulcan, Ecuador – Jorge Briceno made it 1,400km across Colombia after fleeing his home in Venezuela more than week ago. After exiting Colombia on Saturday, he was just metres from the Ecuadorian town of Tulcan, before he found himself stuck with an encampment of migrants who were huddled at the border checkpoint as nightfall approached.

By midday Sunday, the number of Venezuelans in the 200-metre stretch between the Ecuadorian and Colombian borders swelled to nearly 1,000, owing to Ecuador’s decision to block them from passing through its territory unless they had valid passports. 

Briceno, like many bottle-necked migrants, left everything behind.

He quit his job, sold his motorcycle and left his family before making the journey to Peru, where friends planned to help him find a job to make enough money to bring his wife and children.

Bercino and others say returning to the poverty and violence in Venezuela isn’t an option. 

“To return is to die. If we have to die here looking for a better life for our families, then we’ll die. It’s better than dying in Venezuela [and] not doing anything,” Briceno told Al Jazeera. “We won’t return.”

‘Migration, motivated by hunger’

According to the UN, an estimated 2.3 million Venezuelans have fled the country since 2014, when oil prices suddenly dropped. Venezuela now has the highest inflation rate in the world as the country continues to reel from food and medical shortages, as well a political crisis that has left much of the country polarised.

More than 4,000 Venezuelans a day passed from Colombia to Ecuador across the Rumichaca border crossing since July, according to Colombia’s migration authority.

While many South American countries had offered to take those fleeing economic hardship or political persecution, Ecuadorian President Lenin Moreno told local media on Saturday that “everything has a limit”. He added that Venezuelans without passports “simply will not be allowed to come in”. 

The new passport rules came after Ecuador declared a state of emergency last week over the influx of migrants. 

Many Venezuelans have be unable to obtain passports, owing, in part, to the fact their country has all but stopped issuing them due to shortages of ink and paper, but also due to severe decay of its bureaucratic institutions. Those who can afford it, have paid fees and brides upwards of $2,000 to get a new passport, but for most in Venezuela, where the average monthly wage is about $1 a day, buying the official document is simply not an option.

According to Colombia’s migration authority, up to half the Venezuelans travelling through Colombia do not have a passport. Colombia has allowed Venezuelans to enter with paper ID cards instead. Until this week, Ecuador had done the same.

On Friday, Christian Kruger, Colombia’s migration chief, protested Ecuador’s decision to require passports for passage at its border.

“We can’t think that if we ask to see passports that the migration will end. When we have a migration motivated by hunger, it will not end,” he told reporters. 

“Within a few days we’re going to see a very large population in those places [along the Ecuadorian border].”

By midday on Sunday, Kruger’s prediction appeared to be right.

Hundreds had massed at the border and more were expected to arrive overnight.

‘They can’t just close the door on us’

Shivering and restless, many said they have been eating bread and crackers for a week. 

Among them was Caterene Gomez, who had spent two weeks walking and hitchhiking through Colombia to reach Ecuador on her way to Peru, where she said a cousin was waiting for her.

“I left my whole life behind,” said 32-year-old Gomez, wrapped in a blanket as she spoke. “If they say we can’t continue, we’ll just walk anyway.”

A group of several dozen Venezuelans, many of them agitated by new policy at the border, did just that, walking across the border and up the mountainous highway leading about 800km across Ecuador to Peru, suitcases in tow. Officials warn that if they try to leave Ecuador without a valid entry stamp or passport, they may be fined or detained.

UNHCR expressed concerned over the new passport rules, saying it may force more migrants to take more dangerous routes to other countries, or they may fall victim to human traffickers or armed groups.

“The magnitude of the situation really requires a regional and comprehensive approach,” said Yukiko Iriyama, UNHCR deputy representative. She told Al Jazeera that UNHCR was working with Ecuadorian authorities to arrange passage for those at the border, but an agreement had not been made yet.

Most at the border waited in limbo, saying attempting to cross Ecuador without documents was too risky and turning back to Venezuela was too expensive.

Many worry they won’t make it to Peru before next Saturday, when it too will shut its borders to those without passports.

“We need them to fix this problem,” said Miguel Romeo, 46, a former police officer from San Felipe, Venezuela.

“They can’t close the door on us.”

Standing on the stage where nearly 35 years ago he stood to help eulogize her father, the Rev. Jesse Jackson on Sunday lionized Aretha Franklin not for her music, but for her service to the civil rights cause.

In a voice so soft at the beginning that people in the packed auditorium at New Bethel Baptist Church were shouting for his microphone to be turned up, Jackson painted a picture of the world Franklin was born into — one where being black meant a life of struggle.

“Aretha was born in a shack in Memphis,” Jackson told the crowd Sunday morning, adding there were 225 blacks lynched that year in Tennessee. “She was born in the midst of oppression. No one was saying Black Lives Matter then.”

He told of how when Franklin toured as she was starting out as a singer, she often stayed in private homes, because there weren’t hotels that let blacks stay.

More: Jesse Jackson on Aretha Franklin’s quiet but profound civil rights legacy

More: Aretha Franklin’s message to black women was a powerful gift

But Franklin was committed to overturning that, Jackson said. He noted her father, C.L. Franklin, the superstar pastor of New Bethel, was a leader in the civil rights movement, something Aretha Franklin did as well, even working behind the scenes.

Jackson recalled once when Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was facing bankruptcy.

“She went on a 11-city tour with Harry Belafonte and gave all the money to Dr. King,” Jackson told the church.

“She has a crown of jewels (now in heaven). Jewels for singing. Jewels for serving.”

The crowd filled New Bethel, located at Linwood and W. Philadelphia, to honor Franklin at her home church just days after her death from cancer. The cornerstone on the outside of the church building notes that when the congregation moved to that site in 1963, Rev. C.L. Franklin was the pastor. Aretha is listed as a patron on the large stone.

A memorial covered the walls and sidewalks on either side of the main entrance. Balloons stirred in the breeze as parishioners walked by and flowers, some still in their plastic bouquet wrappings were propped against the wall. All morning, people driving — 
or in one case riding their bike — stopped to take pictures or add their own tribute to the walls.

Inside, New Bethel pastor Robert Smith Jr. opened the service.

“It’s a sad day … Aretha is gone from our eyesight and the reach of our hand” but it’s a happy day because she is in heaven.

Carissa Wells, 45, of Detroit, came to New Bethel Sunday morning, even though she didn’t know Franklin personally, or attend church there.

“My mom played (Franklin’s) music all the time when I was growing up,” she said. “Anytime I hear something of hers, I feel like I’m 8 years old again. My mom died a few years ago, but I know she would have wanted me to come today. It’s way to honor them both.

Franklin’s drive for civil rights didn’t fade away with the passage of time, a point Ralph Godbee, the former Detroit police chief and current police chief for Detroit Public Schools Community District, made. Godbee had been scheduled to speak Sunday in honor of New Bethel’s Homecoming day and picnic and was asked to keep that schedule. He spoke before Jackson did.

“I remember one time when I was police chief, my assistant coming in and giving me a note that said Aretha Franklin was on the phone. I went into my office and straightened my uniform, like she could see me. There wasn’t any Facetime then. There’s something about when a Queen calls.

“I picked up the phone and she cursed me out. I’ve never been more honored to be cursed out.”

Turns out a Detroit officer had done something to one of Franklin’s family members that Franklin felt was over the line. Once the officer learned the person was connected to Franklin, the officer stopped and apologized.

Franklin told Godbee that was wrong — what if the person hadn’t been connected to Franklin? Why weren’t his officers treating Detroiters better?

That was an example of Franklin’s commitment to standing up to people and her love for Detroit, Godbee said.

“There’s a revival in this city and it will be on the back of the spirit of the Queen,” he said.

Franklin’s funeral will be on Aug. 31 at Greater Grace Temple. It’s by invitation only.

The funeral will follow a public viewing Aug. 28-29 at the Charles H. Wright Museum of African American History in Midtown Detroit, where Franklin will lie in state. The viewing will run 9 a.m.-9 p.m. each day.

Greater Grace, which seats about 4,000, has been the site of funerals for many notable Detroit figures, including Rosa Parks, Marcus Belgrave and the Four Tops’ Levi Stubbs.

Contact David Jesse: 313-222-8851 or djesse@freepress.com. Follow him on Twitter: @reporterdavidj

Read or Share this story: https://on.freep.com/2L94YpF

Former world number one Novak Djokovic became the first player to win all nine Masters 1,000 tournaments with victory over Roger Federer in Cincinnati.

The 31-year-old Serb, a five-time runner-up at the event, beat seven-time champion Federer 6-4 6-4.

Wimbledon champion Djokovic had lost the Cincinnati final to the Swiss on three previous occasions.

“It’s a very special moment,” he said. “It’s the first time I get to stand with a winning trophy in Cincinnati.”

Victory for world number two Federer would have brought him his 99th career trophy, as well as levelling the long-time rivals’ head-to-head record at 23-23.

Djokovic will now look to take his form into the US Open, which starts on 27 August, having previously won two titles at Flushing Meadows.

Federer was under pressure from the start, saving two break points before holding to win the first game.

World number 10 Djokovic eventually broke his opponent’s serve for 4-3 before holding to win the opening set.

But Federer started the second set the strongest, racing into a 2-0 lead before Djokovic fought back to level at 2-2.

He earned another decisive break at 4-3 before serving for victory on his first championship point in one hour and 24 minutes to complete a career ‘Golden Masters’.

Federer said: “Congratulations to Novak for your amazing effort not just this week, but throughout your whole career, it is an amazing achievement.

“It’s been a great week, tough on the players but we had a fun time.”

Earlier, Kiki Bertens held off a championship point to upset world number one Simona Halep in the WTA tournament.

If Manchester City or Liverpool approach fixtures at Brighton with the tactical set-up and collective body language Manchester United did, I will be stunned.

After a defeat in which Paul Pogba said United lacked “hunger”, I am keen not to overreact but some fans will be raging as their side looked like they did not really want to compete.

United were cautious when, with their quality, they should be turning up and for the opening 20 minutes asking: “This is what we have, can you live with us?”

The tactical plan comes from the manager and, putting the result aside, my big concern now is if United’s players are still on board with what he is asking them to do.

‘Subconsciously tuning out’

Only once in my career did I have a manager where eventually players were at odds with his style.

Lawrie Sanchez wanted a direct, combative approach at Fulham but it became nearly impossible as we didn’t have the personnel to fit the task. Eventually, we had a run of bad results and players lost belief in the demands.

It is not a conscious thing. Players are not sat in the dressing room stating they will not follow the orders, it happens subconsciously and if that creeps in with just a couple of players then the collective performance will inevitably suffer.

Despite all their quality, United were not on the front foot early on and did not really press Brighton high up the pitch at all. The impact is that home players get early touches, grow in confidence and begin to realise they have space so settle down.

Then United fell behind and it is hard to change the mentality to suddenly chase a game. We expect to see one of the big sides in the league have at least one 20-minute spell where they stretch and force the lower-ranked outfit to cling on but it never came, there was simply no real urgency from minute one and it gave Brighton a platform they should not have been afforded.

Mourinho’s cautious approach would be fine if you have players who like to defend and sit in but if your personnel are collectively more expressive, they will find it harder to excel.

Forget the result, as anyone can lose on the road in the Premier League, it is the nature of the body language and that lack of early conviction which is a bigger concern and fans will want a reaction because at the Amex – against a side who lost last week – their players just did not look engaged.

Is Mourinho emanating negativity?

We watched Pep Guardiola’s Manchester City side go for Huddersfield from the off in their 6-1 win on Sunday. City and Jurgen Klopp’s Liverpool will undoubtedly go to Brighton and test them by pressing immediately.

It is a mindset of positivity in contrast to what United delivered, with one shot on target in the opening 45 minutes.

Mourinho has fuelled paper talk with comments about a disrupted pre-season, transfer frustrations, or even the form of Pogba, who was one player trying to do something on the south coast.

All the big teams have got these problems. Take Tottenham as an example, they have loads of players who were at the World Cup until late, as did Manchester City.

If you look at Spurs boss Mauricio Pochettino, he’s not moaning about not getting any players in, he’s even pacifying fans over new stadium problems – not whinging – and working with his players he has two wins from two.

Mourinho, as we know, is a far more successful manager and a winner so I am not questioning him but sometimes it is better to not make excuses and just get on with it.

He may well be saying one thing to the press and then telling his players his motive for saying it, but that would be rare. And, to be honest, if his players are hearing the messages in the media then I do think it can create a bit of negativity.

It’s hard to judge the mood of a group of players based on reports but you would have to concede that there’s often not much smoke without fire and too many players looked off it at Brighton.

Lingard a key midfield tweak and defensive questions

Dale Stephens ran further than any other player on the pitch on Sunday and saw more of the ball than any other Brighton player in his central-midfield role. There were times when he had 20 yards of space despite United using a midfield three of Pogba, Andreas Pereira and Fred.

From Mourinho’s perspective, that should not be happening when you ultimately have better players.

His midfield struggled as a trio and generally their displays were a bit safe and their positioning too predictable. None of them wanted to make positive runs in behind Brighton’s back four, with Pereira and Fred both particularly negative.

Mourinho changed it at half-time and recognised the issue, as good managers do. His side were crying out for Jesse Lingard, who likes to run in behind. When you’re on the ball in midfield, if you have someone making those kind of runs it is so helpful.

Juan Mata and Anthony Martial in wide areas did not threaten the space behind Brighton, and even though there may not have been much of it at times, Lingard is so clever that he is great at mixing his game up and will drop into pockets to get on the ball if needed.

I’m not sure you need Pogba, Fred and Pereira in the same midfield, so there is a balance which will need to be found, and at the back there are some questions to be answered too as the central defenders were a problem.

Eric Bailly and Victor Lindelof were given a tough afternoon by Glenn Murray, who was absolutely superb. Mourinho verbalised his desire to sign another central defender and there were links with Leicester’s Harry Maguire but somehow he needs to get more from those he has for now.

‘No need for the panic button’

It is key to point out that Brighton were collectively and individually superb and when you get both of those together you are in a fine position. The decision-making was bang on, there was a lack of sloppiness and they made the most of their chances. Everything about them was well drilled and solid, a complete contrast to the visitors.

I can understand some United fans may be wound up and concerns may be deepening but when you step back, Mourinho has options aplenty to change things. Ander Herrera could come in and give some steel, Marouane Fellaini could start and of course Alexis Sanchez can return.

Those kind of introductions can quickly see a club like United rattle off four or five wins and the mood changes. Pogba admitted they were found wanting on Sunday so there needs to now be a reaction against Tottenham next time out.

It will be a real test but is a game which may suit United given Spurs have an awful record at Old Trafford.

Much will be said about Mourinho in the week leading up to that outing but I’d be loathed to have big concerns over them in terms of a potentially disastrous season.

The ease with which they went down at Brighton was not good but if they are engaged properly and their body language is righted, United will start getting the most out of a quality squad.

Danny Murphy was talking to BBC Sport’s Luke Reddy

Dear friends and family: If you’ve ever gotten a drunken text from me about one day owning my prized possessions when I’m outta here, unfortunately, that’s all null and void. 

According to a recent ruling from a French court, a text message of someone’s last will and testament actually has no legal value. My bad. 

As the BBC reported, the case was brought to court because of a dispute. In a text message to his sibling, a man mentioned that he wanted a portion of his estate given to his mother after he dies. When the man tragically took his own life in 2016, his wishes were reportedly ignored — so the mother took the texts to court. 

Ultimately, she lost her case. According to the court, via the BBC’s reporting, “a will can only be valid if it has been written by hand, dated and signed.” This is reportedly to make sure the will is not forged or a mistake.

For what it’s worth, while the ruling in France may not apply everywhere, you probably won’t have any more luck texting your will in the United States. Wills typically need a signature of some sort in addition to witnesses, who also have to sign the thing. 

For all you romantics out there, this unfortunately means you can’t sky-write your last testament. Or send a GIF representing who gets what. 

But the ruling in France still leaves you with plenty of creative options. Maybe write it all out on a piece of wood, or fold it up into a cool origami puppet. Just no Notes app wills, please. I beg you. (Obviously check with a lawyer IRL before doing, well, any of this.)

While we’re at it, maybe people should stop divorcing others over text messages, too. Just an idea. 

Kevin Kwan’s rollicking satire Crazy Rich Asians is the latest blockbuster book to get the Hollywood treatment, bringing its story of a Chinese-American NYU professor meeting her boyfriend’s obscenely wealthy family in Singapore to the big screen this weekend.

As is always the case when adapting a book, some notable changes were made from page to screen. Kwan’s novel, for example, has a biting tone and follows a wide range of characters, while director Jon M. Chu’s film is more of a carefully calibrated romantic comedy. Here’s a rundown of the other major differences between Crazy Rich Asians the book and Crazy Rich Asians the movie. Warning: There are copious spoilers for both the book and film below, so read at your own risk.

Rachel in her element

Though the book repeatedly tells us that Rachel Chu is a successful economics professor at NYU, we don’t get a chance to see her in action in her classroom. In the film, we meet her (played by Constance Wu) kicking butt in a poker game as part of a lecture demonstrating game theory and the concept of “playing to win.” That’s another change: In the movie, Rachel is specifically a professor of game theory, which plays a key role in the film’s climactic mahjong game. Seeing Rachel at work gives us a better sense of how much she has to offer her boyfriend, Nick Young (Henry Golding), and the traits that make her a worthy adversary to his mother, Eleanor (Michelle Yeoh).

Spring break, woo!

On the page, Nick invites Rachel to join him in Asia for the entire summer, with his best friend Colin’s wedding proposed as just the first stop on a multiweek trip. On screen, everything is condensed into the span of a spring break, raising the stakes on the amount of time Rachel has to make a favorable impression on the Youngs.

The Youngs’ wealth

In the novel, the Youngs are such a classy, old-money family that none of the nouveau riche in-gossip heavy Singapore, like Peik Lin’s (Awkwafina) family, have even heard of them. They guard their family and their wealth by shrouding them in secrecy. In the film, everyone has heard of the Youngs and their jaw-dropping assets: When Rachel reveals to Peik Lin’s family that the Nick she is dating is Nick Young, they freak out. This prompts another change, in that Peik Lin accompanies Rachel to the party at Tyersall Park, Nick’s grandmother’s house. She gets invited to stay and therefore can help Rachel navigate the rough waters of upper-class society, as well as hilariously select an alternative outfit from the emergency clothes in her trunk.

Astrid and Michael

Astrid (Gemma Chan), Nick’s cousin and one of the only women in the story who looks kindly on Rachel rather than seeing her as a gold-digging threat, gets perhaps the biggest onscreen overhaul. We see a great deal more of her life in the book, opening with her in Paris conducting her annual couture shopping trip, following her to Shanghai to purchase jewels, and more. In the movie she’s much more of a supporting character — and there’s a pretty significant change.

In the novel, Astrid discovers early on that her husband, Michael (Pierre Png), is having an affair, and she spends much of the book chasing after him. She eventually learns that he faked the entire liaison to secure a divorce from Astrid because he can’t stand the pressures of being married to someone with a wealthy family and being looked down on by her relatives. Amid all this, she reconnects with old flame Charlie Wu (Harry Shum Jr.), who works to help her rekindle her relationship with Michael out of his love for her. In the movie, Michael’s affair is real (at least as far as we’re told). Charlie is absent from the proceedings, except for a brief, wordless appearance in a mid-credits scene suggesting that a sequel might delve more into this relationship if it comes to fruition. Additionally, Astrid gets to have a bit more inner strength here, standing up to Michael and his indiscretions rather than pleading with him to return to their home.

The bachelor party

Colin Khoo’s (Chris Pang) bachelor party is still an epic fail from which he and Nick resolve to escape, but it’s more condensed on screen. Bernard (Jimmy O. Yang) makes a joke about bachelor parties with dog fights, drugs, and hookers being something any “a—hole” can plan, and ironically, that’s precisely the party he plans in the novel. Here though, everything is moved to a large shipping freighter converted to a bachelor bacchanal on the open seas. In the novel, Colin escapes with a few other friends from his school days, but in the movie it’s just him and Nick, leaving them open to discuss Nick’s desire to propose to Rachel and the challenges he’ll face.

The bachelorette party

Araminta’s (Sonoya Mizuno) bachelorette party hews closer to its original version, but there are still a few key changes. In the novel, it’s Francesca who antagonizes Rachel at the bachelorette party, speaking loudly about gold diggers and her past relationship with Nick. Later, Rachel meets Nick’s high school ex, Mandy, and then at the wedding discovers Francesca and Mandy once had a threesome with Nick. All that cattiness and those major reveals are condensed and take place at the bachelorette party in the movie. Additionally, Francesca is nothing more than a bit player, with Amanda Ling (Jing Lusi) becoming a composite of Mandy and Francesca in the film. Lastly, while Rachel’s savior at the bachelorette party is Sophie, a relative of Astrid’s, in the movie it’s Astrid herself who comes to the rescue, helping Rachel ignore the mean-girl hijinks and opening up to her about Michael’s affair. In doing so, she cements a stronger bond between two women facing the pressures and disapproval of their families when it comes to their significant others.

Princess Intan

In the movie, the wedding of Araminta and Colin features a brand-new character who is essential to showing the families of Singapore just what Rachel is made of. Princess Intan (Kris Aquino) arrives, and Eleanor and her family make a fuss over how the princess has requested a row to herself to avoid contact with others. Rachel doesn’t know this, and when rejected by Eleanor, she goes to sit with the princess, complimenting the woman on an article she wrote about micro-loans designed to help women in need. This impresses the princess, earning Rachel her respect and surprising everyone in the church.

Eleanor and Rachel

Perhaps the biggest changes in the film involve Eleanor Young. On the page, she’s largely a scheming woman, determined to keep Rachel away from Nick at any cost. We hear whispers of the sacrifices she’s made for her family, but we get no clear idea of what those might be. Additionally, in the book, she doesn’t actually meet Rachel until nearly three quarters of the way through the story. She misses the party at Tyersall Park because she’s in China meeting with a private investigator to dig up dirt on Rachel. On screen, the two meet much earlier — at Nick’s grandmother’s party, where Rachel meets Nick’s entire family.

This provides numerous opportunities for the pair to interact in ways they don’t in the book. Invited by family matriarch Ah Ma (Lisa Lu), Rachel joins the Youngs for a dumpling-making party, where food and conversation are used for metaphor about family and Rachel’s potential place in theirs. We learn more about Eleanor’s past here — that she was not a favored choice to marry Nick’s father (hence her emerald ring, because Ah Ma wouldn’t allow her to have a family heirloom), and that she abandoned her studies and potential career once she met Nick’s dad and decided to devote her life to family. We get a much stronger sense of what Eleanor has given up and fought against to protect Nick, making her face-off with Rachel and her disdain for Rachel’s American-ness bound up in a whole lot more than Rachel’s net worth.

Finally, the pair meet in a climactic mahjong game in which Rachel lays everything out on the table, including the fact that she refused Nick’s proposal, leaving the ball in Eleanor’s court. So much is said between the two of them (much of it without saying anything at all), and though she is the primary antagonist, Eleanor gets a redemption on screen that she never has on the page: She gives Nick her blessing to propose to Rachel, which becomes evident when he pops the question with Eleanor’s custom-made emerald ring.

The proposal

You can’t have a rom-com without a grand romantic gesture, and Nick gets several in the movie — the most notable being two proposals he is denied in the book. In the novel, Rachel and Nick take a romantic getaway to his family’s house, the Cameron Highlands, in Malaysia. He intends to propose to her there, but they’re interrupted by Eleanor and Ah Ma, who reveal the truth about Rachel’s father to her.

On screen, there is no romantic getaway and the truth about Rachel’s father is more vague. In the novel, she learns that the man she thinks is her father is in prison and makes moves to fly to China to meet him before being intercepted by her mother, who reveals that Rachel is the love child of a man who helped protect her from her husband’s cruelty. In the film, the man is a school friend of Rachel’s mother, and she is told all this by Eleanor at the wedding reception. Her mom still comes to visit, but only as comfort for Rachel, not to make amends and explain herself. (It’s a welcome change, as it’s hard to believe someone as close to their mom as Rachel would be so angry as to refuse to speak to her under the circumstances.)

Here, Rachel gets two proposals. Nick proposes first at the side of the harbor with a ring he’s purchased after Rachel agrees to see him one last time before she leaves. We don’t know her response until she reveals it to Eleanor in their mahjong game and departs with her mother to fly home. But then, she gets another proposal cut from classic rom-com cloth: Nick chases Rachel onto her flight home to New York and gets down on one knee a second time, revealing Eleanor’s emerald ring and thereby her blessing. Instead of returning home to NYC, Rachel goes back to Singapore with Nick for a massive engagement party, giving them the happily-ever-after only hinted at on the page before being picked up in the sequel China Rich Girlfriend.