If you only know the story from the 1981 Brooke Shields movie or that glossy 2014 remake, you basically don't know the story at all. Honestly, it’s kind of a tragedy. Scott Spencer Endless Love is actually a brutal, sweat-soaked masterpiece about a kid who loses his mind to obsession, yet Hollywood keeps trying to sell it as a "Valentine’s Day" date flick. It’s not. It’s a book about arson, psychiatric wards, and the kind of "love" that acts more like a terminal illness than a romance.
Scott Spencer didn't write a "puppy love" story. He wrote a 1979 National Book Award finalist that starts with a teenager setting fire to his girlfriend’s house.
The Fire Wasn't an Accident
In the movies, the plot often feels like a series of "oops" moments or misunderstandings. The book is different. David Axelrod is seventeen, and he’s been banned from seeing Jade Butterfield for thirty days. He can’t handle it. He isn't just "sad"—he’s vibrating with a level of need that is honestly terrifying to read.
He decides to set a "controlled" fire on the Butterfields' porch. Why? Because he thinks if he saves them from the flames, he’ll be a hero. He thinks they’ll have to let him back into their lives.
It’s a delusional, narcissistic plan. It doesn't just "go wrong"; it destroys everything. David watches the house burn while the family is inside, high on LSD, which adds a surreal, nightmare layer to the whole scene that the films completely ignored.
✨ Don't miss: Cómo salvar a tu favorito: La verdad sobre la votación de La Casa de los Famosos Colombia
Why Hollywood keeps failing the book
People love a good romance. Studio executives saw the title "Endless Love" and a plot about two teenagers and thought: perfect, let's make a movie for girls to watch while holding hands with their boyfriends. But David Axelrod is an unreliable narrator. He’s brilliant, yes, but he’s also a sociopath in the making.
- The 1981 Version: Franco Zeffirelli directed this one. It’s famous for the Lionel Richie song and for being Brooke Shields’ big breakout. But it’s a mess. It tries to follow the book's plot but loses the internal logic. Roger Ebert famously hated it because it turned a "poem to passion" into a weird sociological case study.
- The 2014 Version: This one is basically a different story entirely. Alex Pettyfer plays David as a misunderstood "good guy" from the wrong side of the tracks. The fire is accidental. The ending is happy. Scott Spencer himself called it "egregiously and ridiculously misunderstood" in an open letter.
The Psychological Weight of David Axelrod
The novel is told entirely through David’s eyes. This is why it works. You’re trapped inside his head while he spends years in a mental institution (Rockville) dreaming about a girl who has moved on.
When he gets out, he doesn't go get a hobby. He starts hunting the Butterfields down. He finds Jade’s mother, Ann, in New York. The relationship between David and Ann is one of the weirdest, most uncomfortable parts of the book. She’s grieving, she’s lonely, and she’s almost as obsessed with David as he is with her daughter.
It’s messy. It’s human. It’s also kinda gross.
🔗 Read more: Cliff Richard and The Young Ones: The Weirdest Bromance in TV History Explained
Reality vs. the "Endless" Fantasy
Spencer is exploring a very specific American mania. The idea that if you love someone "enough," it excuses any behavior. David believes his love is a holy thing. The rest of the world sees it as a crime.
In the book, David’s parents are radical socialists. His dad is a communist lawyer. This background matters because it explains David’s disdain for "normal" rules. He thinks he’s above the law of the heart.
"When I was seventeen and in full obedience to my heart's most urgent commands, I stepped far from the pathway of normal life and in a moment's time ruined everything I loved."
That’s the opening line of the book. It tells you exactly what’s going to happen. He doesn't blame "fate." He knows he did it.
💡 You might also like: Christopher McDonald in Lemonade Mouth: Why This Villain Still Works
What Most People Get Wrong
Most people think Scott Spencer Endless Love is a celebration of teen passion. It’s actually a warning.
The title is almost sarcastic. The love is "endless" because David won't let it die, even when it's clearly dead and rotting. He spends a decade chasing a ghost. By the end of the novel, you aren't rooting for the couple to get back together. You’re rooting for David to leave everyone alone so they can finally stop suffering.
If you’re looking for a book that captures the "fever" of being seventeen, this is it. But don't expect a bouquet of roses. Expect a pile of ash.
How to actually approach this story today:
- Skip the movies first. If you watch the 2014 version, you’ll be bored. If you watch the 1981 version, you’ll be confused.
- Read the paperback. Specifically the one with the original 1979 or 1980 cover if you can find it. The prose is "precise and ferocious," according to the Washington Post, and they aren't kidding.
- Look for the "Waking the Dead" connection. If you like Spencer’s style, check out his other novel, Waking the Dead. It handles similar themes of haunting love but in a political setting. It actually got a decent movie adaptation (starring Billy Crudup and Jennifer Connelly).
- Treat it as a character study, not a romance. Approach David as a protagonist you’re supposed to fear, not emulate.
The real value of Scott Spencer Endless Love isn't in the "romance" at all. It’s in the way Spencer shows how easily a "good" emotion like love can turn into a weapon. It’s a masterclass in tension and first-person narration. Just don't go into it expecting a happy ending—because in the real world, setting your girlfriend's house on fire usually doesn't lead to a "happily ever after."