The Girl on the Train

tunguska

Surprised there wasn't a thread on this already........saw it tonight And overall it was alright. First 30-40 mins are brilliant, thought this was gonna be a crackin' film but then it just seemed to lose its edge or something and became less interesting. Not through any fault of Emily Blunt though, she plays an absolute stormer. I know there was a lot of **** over casting, she being very beautiful and not at all like the character in the book. But she does an amazing job and i cant imagine anyone whos actually watched the film would have any beef with her. In fact hers is the most interesting story in the film. I reckon a movie just with emily blunt acting drunk wouldve been better. Hayley bennett is very good too. Its a very slick film, high production values as you'd expect but it just disolves into standard thriller fare and the end is like a bad episode of murder she wrote.
For a saturday night at the movies it does the job, just didnt do itself justice in the end.

homerun_homer

Nailed it, pegged the killer in the trailer. It was the poor man's Gone Girl, never reached any level of suspense or have me really gripped like I heard the book would do.

Liam McPoyle

Saw it Saturday night with the missus.

She had read the book and loved it but was very let down by the movie.

Its very much an OK watch, nothing ground breaking but entertaining enough.

Blunt was very good in it I thought.

I just wanted to give her a cuddle.

LuckyLloyd

Excellent performance from Blunt fails to overshadow an incredibly formulaic and pedestrian thriller. The source material may have been considered a novelistic equivalent of Gone Girl, but the film version falls way short of Fincher's effort. The characters around Blunt are poorly drawn and the film feels very cluttered, jerking from event to flashback to event without ever creating any real depth or payoff from proceedings.

Outlaw Pete

Blunt's character kept my attention... but it jarred with the rest as a result in a way.

One of those films where you end up rooting for the 'bad guy/girl' as most of the 'good guy/girl' characters and so damn annoying and unlikable.

I kinda wish the killer had wiped out all of them and disappeared off with the kid to start a new life someplace.

razorblunt

I reckon I'll be skipping this and saving it to watch at home at some stage.
I read the book as it was getting rave reviews but I found it to be awful, the "twist" was completely out of left field (to me, at least) but I'd be interested to see how they'd foreshadow that in the movie itself.

Probably too blatantly judging that someone above knew who it was from the trailer!

tunguska

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Blunt's character kept my attention... but it jarred with the rest as a result in a way.

One of those films where you end up rooting for the 'bad guy/girl' as most of the 'good guy/girl' characters and so damn annoying and unlikable.

I kinda wish the killer had wiped out all of them and disappeared off with the kid to start a new life someplace.

Ha ha, yeah I'd pay to say that to be fair. I reckon it wouldve gotten better reviews had the went with that ending.

homerun_homer

So am I the only one thinking that

the ex-husband would have got caught anyway, as surely he had enough DNA left at the crime scene that eventually the experts would catch him? Although, given the quality of questioning and investigating by Allison Janney, I guess in this film's world the answer would be a resounding no.

nomadchocolate

Boring visuals. Boring drama and no real suspense.

Blunt was good.

Bowlardo

Great film. Great nights entertainment. surprised it is got so many average reviews. blunt was excellent in it

whiskeyman

Not slick enough for me.
It was if it tried too hard to deflect who the main villain was.
Still, not a bad nights entertainment. There aren't a lot of decent thrillers out there, so this will fill the void for the moment

3/5 from me.

Did anyone else cop the irony at the end

that the drunk woman who's apparent enemy for so much was alcohol was saved by her real enemy from a corkscrew!

FunLover18

I didn't want to see this, but when I got to the cinema last night I didn't fancy waiting 45 minutes for the showing of War on Everyone.

I didn't like the book so I didn't expect to like this and I didn't. The mystery is fine, I reckon had I not read the book I would have guessed

they show Megan having an affair with a man but his face is hidden, there are only 3 men in the film and there was no need to hide her husband Or therapist's given we knew of her relationship with them

.

But my main gripe with the film (and the book) is its old fashioned views. 3 women who are expected (by themselves/others) to raise babies in the suburbs and whose lives revolve around horny, deceitful men.

Blunt (who does admittedly play a stormer) plays a character whose life and marriage fell apart as a result of not being able to have children and that issue is never addressed.

SB_Part2

I enjoyed the book and left the film thinking it was ok.

The more I think about it now the more I think I didn't really like the film. It seemed very rushed and a bit lazy to me.

The kiss with the therapist came out of nowhere. In the book it was obvious they were bumping uglies but in the film, she just looked like she was desperate in his office and that he didn't have any romantic interest in her.

I liked that in the book there was a chance it *might* have been him but in the film it wasn't really a runner.

brickmauser

Boring predictable unrealistic and implausible crap.
End of.

FunLover18

SB_Part2 wrote: »

I enjoyed the book and left the film thinking it was ok.

The more I think about it now the more I think I didn't really like the film. It seemed very rushed and a bit lazy to me.

The kiss with the therapist came out of nowhere. In the book it was obvious they were bumping uglies but in the film, she just looked like she was desperate in his office and that he didn't have any romantic interest in her.

I liked that in the book there was a chance it *might* have been him but in the film it wasn't really a runner.

I only read the book once but I got the impression that

Megan had never actually been sleeping with the therapist and that the intimate scenes we thought were with him were actually with Tom.

Maybe I'm misremembering though.