Skip to main content

The Girl Just Missed the Train


          The Girl on the Train is another mystery thriller novel-turned-movie following on the heels of 2014’s Gone Girl. It’s not as good as that movie, but is this adaptation of the best-selling novel by Paula Hawkins compelling enough?
          Rachel (Emily Blunt) is a depressed, jobless alcoholic who often blacks out, leaving blank spaces in her memory where she’s unsure of her actions. It’s this that led to her divorce from her husband Tom Watson (Justin Theroux) who’s now married to Anna (Rebecca Ferguson) and they have a young child. Every day, Rachel commutes to New York by train, passing by her old neighbourhood where she watches neighbours of Tom and Anna’s, Megan (Haley Bennett) and Scott Hipwell (Luke Evans), who she imagines must have the perfect relationship. But those presumptions aren’t quite what they seem. When Megan, who coincidentally works for the Watsons, goes missing on the same night Rachel wanders into that neighbourhood and blacks out, she wonders if she might have something to do with the disappearance.
          The plot is presented through three points of view: Rachel’s, Anna’s, and through flashback, Megan’s. And this structure though useful and necessary to relate important plot points, doesn’t work as well in film as it would in a book. We have to keep in mind if something important is dropped in a Megan flashback, Rachel in the present doesn’t know about it. The story doesn’t flow steadily when we’re being taken out of the linear progression at various intervals, especially when in those detours we’re privy to information that puts us ahead of the protagonist. This gives the film a feeling of sluggishness as we have to wait for Rachel to catch up. That doesn’t necessarily mean it should have been construed differently, considering some reveals in the flashbacks or in Anna’s storyline can’t be brought up earlier than they are. It just comes off as unfocused. The black-outs though are a believable way to keep Rachel in the dark and allow the audience to question her reliability. It’s one of those great scenarios where you don’t know who to trust and anyone can be a suspect. Like any good mystery. But unlike any good mystery, the writing isn’t very strong, especially some of the voice-over narration. There are a number of moments you can tell are lifted straight from the book. Rachel’s and even Megan’s reflections or descriptions can be wordy and needlessly opaque which drag down the visual experience.
          Emily Blunt though is good in this role, portraying the pathetic nature and mental instability of her character with great dedication. One of the films’ stronger assets is its depiction of alcoholism, the repercussions of black-outs, and the damage it does to one’s life. Rachel is the saddest character I’ve seen in a film in a while and in spite of everything, you root for her to kick the addiction. Moments where she accepts a beer only a few scenes after being seen at an AA meeting, or when she fills a water bottle with vodka are thus really dispiriting. You buy her confusion when the cops question her about the incident but then also her interest in getting involved in the case due to her probably unhealthy attitude towards the Hipwells. Megan is also an interesting character as you find out more about her past and Bennett plays it well. The rest of the cast is fine too, but Anna, Tom, Scott, and Dr. Abdic (Edgar Ramirez) are more-or-less typical suspect characters in a story like this. 
          This isn’t the most creative kind of mystery: you know most of the characters have secrets, someone’s having an affair, and so on. The final reveal is foreseeable if not entirely obvious. However if you’ve seen or read enough of these mysteries you’ll be able to guess the right person. This is also a movie that goes into a few dark places with a couple of the reveals. That being said, there are are a number of reveals and details in the end that don’t add up, and the resolution didn’t go in the direction it should have. In actuality, it overcompensates.
          If you’re looking for the next Gone Girl, The Girl on the Train definitely isn’t it. The pay-off isn’t very satisfactory if you know these kind of thrillers and the structure’s fairly incoherent. If you just want a mystery that’ll keep you intrigued for a couple hours with some decent performances, you may like it fine. But if you want a thriller that’s more investing, there are plenty of better movies or books to choose from.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Disney's Mulan, Cultural Appropriation, and Exploitation

I’m late on this one I know. I wasn’t willing to spend thirty bucks back in September for a movie experience I knew was going to be far poorer than if I had paid half that at a theatre. So I waited for it to hit streaming for free to give it a shot. In the meantime I heard that it wasn’t very good, but I remained determined not to skip it entirely, partly out of sympathy for director Niki Caro and partly out of morbid curiosity. Disney’s live-action Mulan  I was actually mildly looking forward to early in the year in spite of my well-documented distaste for this series of creative dead zones by the most powerful media conglomerate on earth. Mulan  was never one of Disney’s classics, a movie extremely of its time in its “girl power” gender politics and with a decidedly American take on ancient Chinese mythology. It got by on a couple good songs and a strong lead, but it was a movie that could be improved upon, and this new version looked like it had the potential to do that, emphasizing

The Hays Code was Bad, Sex in Movies is Good

Don't Look Now (1973) Will Hays, Who Knows About Sex In 1930, former Republican politician and chair of the Motion Picture Association of America Will Hayes introduced a series of self-censorship guidelines for the movie industry in response to a mixture of celebrity scandals and lobbying from the Catholic Church against various ‘immoralities’ creating a perception of Hollywood as corrupt and indecent. The Hays Code, or the Motion Picture Production Code, was formally adopted in 1930, though not stringently enforced until 1934 under the auspices of Joseph Breen. It laid out a careful list of what was and wasn’t acceptable for a film expecting major distribution. It stipulated rules against profanity, the depiction of miscegenation, and offensive portrayals of the clergy, but a lot of it was based around sexual content: “sexual perversion” of any kind was disallowed, as were any opaquely textual or visual allusions to reproduction, and right near the top “No licentious or suggestiv

Pixar Sundays: The Incredibles (2004)

          Brad Bird was already a master by the time he came to Pixar. Not only did he hone his craft as an early director on The Simpsons , but he directed a little animated film for Warner Bros. in 1999, that though not a box office success was loved by critics and quickly grew a cult following. The Iron Giant is now among many people’s favourite animated movies. Likewise, Bird’s feature debut at Pixar, The Incredibles , his own variation of a superhero movie, is often considered one of the studio’s best. And for very good reason, as the most talented director at Pixar shows.            Superheroes were once the world’s greatest crime-fighting force until several lawsuits for collateral damage (and in the case of Mr. Incredible, a hilarious suicide prevention), outlawed their vigilantism. Fifteen years later Mr. Incredible, now living as Bob Parr, has a family with his wife Helen, the former Elastigirl. But Bob, in a combination of mid-life crisis and nostalgia for the old day