Review: The Girl on the Train

Do the creep...

Rachel is an alcoholic. She spends her days riding the train back and forth to Manhattan. She watches the same house every time she passes and looks at a woman, Megan (Haley Bennett) She envisions her as "Jess" with the perfect life and perfect husband. Rachel used to live two doors down from her, when she was married to Tom. (Justin Theroux) Now he's married to Anna (Rebecca Ferguson) with an infant daughter. She drunk dials them often. One day, She sees Megan with another man, then she goes missing. Soon Rachel is questioned on the disappearance.

This was one of my favorite books I read last year. I love mysteries and this was a good one. Then the trailer came out a few months ago and it got the Lifetime treatment. It was so disappointing. I'm happy to say that the movie isn't nearly as bad as the trailer suggested, but it did have some problems.

The direction is weak. I felt like they made Megan more salacious. Yes, she was having an affair in the book, but I felt like they focused every scene of hers on her overt sexuality and not why she was doing the things she did. She gets her moment to explain eventually, but it feels overshadowed by the way they decided to handle the flashback that accompanies it Then there's the annoying change of location. The book took place in England. Rachel is still English in the movie, I have no idea why they moved it to New York. 

The use of title cards to introduce characters and periods of time in the past was helpful. It worked for me since that's how the book was, but I don't know how that will translate for other views. If there's one thing this film has to its advantage, it's the acting. Emily Blunt is absolute perfection. Rachel is a mess, and Blunt doesn't hold back. It's written all over her face (and there's a lot of close up shots in this movie..almost too many) Ferguson also plays Anna exactly as I pictured her. Theroux on the other hand was kind of awful. Chris Evans originally had this role, and he's better suited for it. Theroux was miscast.

Recommended: Sure. Not a bad movie, just not as good as I wanted it to be. 

Grade: C+

Memorable Quote: "Your alimony is paying for tickets to nowhere? - Cathy (Laura Prepon)


18 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If the film was set in England with the train service going to London you would hear "The 8:04 train to London Paddington is delayed by approximately 10 minutes because of leaves on the track" or Rachel wouldn't get on the right train because of the recent strikes. I'm joshing, of course.

    I agree that Emily Blunt was terrific, personally I feel Haley Bennett, she's exactly how I imagined Megan. I feel Scott was massively underwritten in the film.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They made Scott too obvious for what he ended up being, IMO.

      Delete
  3. I'm still salty about that location change!
    Going to see this myself tomorrow, and I'm still looking forward to it, despite the lukewarm reviews. It was a really good book!
    - Allie

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is just a film I have absolutely no desire to see. The trailer didn't sell me at all; maybe the awkward and misused Kanye song did it in for me :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The trailer was awful. It killed nearly all my excitement for this film.

      Delete
  5. Aside from the blatant underuse of Allison Janney, the most frustrating thing about this film was the big reveal/flashback. They spent what felt like 40 minutes filling in holes that I was able to fill in as soon as I knew for certain that the husband did it. The film often assumed an ignorant audience.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I blame that on the casting. Theroux already looks like a serial killer. People suspect him just while looking at him, while the book makes you think a bit longer.

      Delete
  6. Leto was supposed to be Scott, what a waste :) Good to read Blunt is great although she still looks too good for that part

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I forgot Leto was supposed to be in this too. Scott was underused, but it would've been nice to see him in there nonetheless.

      She looks terrible in this movie, they don't do her any favors lol.

      Delete
    2. Yeah but still her hair is like better than mine and I spend time trying to fix that shit, sober :lol: Is Kanye's annoying song from the railer in this movie? hopefully not

      Delete
    3. I don't think so, I didn't notice it.

      Delete
  7. I'm not sure if I'm going to catch this one, but I've definitely set my expectation to LOW. I didn't read the book, but I love Blunt...so I might end up liking it, huh?

    Oh, but there's too much sexiness, right? Sounds like a real bummer. *leaves work immediately*

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL. No boobs though, it's PG-13 sexiness. ;)

      Delete
  8. I'm yet to read the book (I know, shame on me!), and I still wanted to give the film a try because of the book's reputation, but now I'm not that sure anymore.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe just read the book? That is at least good.

      Delete
  9. I love how the internet was trying to make Blunt an Oscar contender for this.

    I will see it...eventually, but the marketing makes this look so trashy and dumb.

    ReplyDelete

It would be lovely if you commented.