The Girl on the Train is a detective thriller based on a novel by Paula Hawkins of the same name that I have never read. And let me compare the tape with the original source, but as an independent product, the picture turned out to be quite average and could not find any response in me.
The first thing I didn’t like about the movie was the characters. None of them cause any feelings except disgust. The main character, Rachel, is a downtrodden alcoholic who is completely to blame for all her problems. Her ex-husband, Tom, is a womanizer and domestic abuser who has only one name from a man. Tom's current passion, Anna, who is well aware of his obscurity, but persists in living with him. Even minor characters are like picking up bastards. Except that the missing girl, Megan, evokes sympathy and pity. Not because she's a victim, or because she's a saint, no. It’s just that she’s the only character in the film who fully understands what she’s doing wrong in her life, and even tries to sort it out, albeit without much success.
It doesn't please the visual at all. A sad gray picture in which the eye has nothing to catch. I understand that we have a serious detective, but personally I am dull colors with twisted to zero saturation depressing, to watch such a physically difficult.
The detective component in general turned out to be interesting. Rachel’s alcohol-poisoned brain gives away memories of Megan’s disappearance, putting together a mosaic not only for the heroine, but also for the viewer. A separate storyline Megan also turned out not bad. As I said, the girl is not a model of holiness or a role model, but her story is truly touching. When the viewer is finally revealed what happened to her, the girl becomes truly sorry. Because, as I said earlier, it's the only character in the movie that evokes empathy.
Verdict: 'The Girl on the Train' I didn't like. It's too black a project where everything is bad and everything is around scum and cattle. Is it possible to call it realistic? Yeah. Without any problems, you can even imagine that such a story could actually happen. However, we still watch movies to escape from this reality for a while, and not to draw it with a deep spoon.
The film is based on the novel of the same name by Paula Hawkins. They say that the book is more interesting and there are better revealed characters, but it is understandable because the film has a strict time limit. The audience alternately tells about the lives of three different women: Rachel, Megan and Anna. Their stories are closely intertwined: Megan worked as a nurse for Anna for some time, and Rachel is the ex-wife of Tom, Anna's husband. Meghan also has a boyfriend named Scott. Being in deep depression, Rachel began to lapse in memory, the situation is aggravated by the fact that the girl strongly leans on alcohol. Driving on a train past the house where she once lived with Tom, Rachel notices something unusual. Then Meghan goes missing. Then Rachel decides at all costs to find out what happened and where Megan could have gone.
Despite the cute face
Alcoholic, alcoholic
Happiness burns like a match.
Alcoholics, alcoholics, alcoholics.
Emily Blunt played Rachel's drinking so convincingly and brutally that only doctors or alcoholics themselves can determine the stage of her alcoholism. Memories do not allow a woman to remember what happened that fateful morning. "The Girl on the Train" remotely reminded me of another movie, "The Driver," starring Christian Bale. There and there the character was in a borderline state of consciousness, which confused reality with fantasy. It's all because of a malfunctioning brain.
Unlike the series “In the Dark”, where the main character was also an alcoholic, the character played by Emily Blunt does not cause dislike and rejection. In addition, she played the drink much more realistically and convincingly than Perry Mattfeld. Emily Blunt, as if walking the razor blade between the image of an alcoholic and an altruist, managed to make her character positive. In general, the whole film looks in one breath, which can not be said about the series “In the Dark”. The atmosphere of anxiety and mystery is sustained from the beginning to the very end. If you do not think too much, do not guess, but just contemplate, then the inefficiency of events goes all the more well.
Some would call it boring. And for me, this is a great thriller that keeps in suspense: there are moments when the character is in real danger and even a little worried about him, all this is achieved thanks to a well-chosen cast and competent camera work.
The Girl on the Train is a movie about abusive relationships. Someone will call the movie strongly feminist, because in it all the characters of men are negative characters... aggressive, harsh, jealous, domineering. Women are shown with cockroaches in their heads, trying to look into the thoughts of girls, where sex flows into depression, then again into sex ... and in the end, the maternal instinct as the strongest feeling and cornerstone of the whole story. The film is instructive, I think it can help girls and women to better understand people and not make fatal life mistakes in relationships with both the opposite sex and each other.
7 out of 10
The film adaptation of the world bestseller came out solid, fascinating and unpredictable. No one knows how an everyday train ride can end, the main character constantly rides the same route, looks at people and draws conclusions. The highlight is that you don’t even know anyone, but you’re already worried about them. The main character is not credible, and you will not turn to such for advice.
Initially, the audience is introduced to the heroine Emily Blunt – Rachel, in order to fully verify her vices and humility, but after that, other characters are already connected. Intrigue and treason at the level of Brazilian series in a million episodes fit in 2 hours of timing. Who cheats on whom, what problems in the family and how to find solutions, make a great impression. Perhaps this thriller is aimed more at the female audience, because women can understand the problems of the heroine much deeper. When alcohol has become an indispensable part of life, when no one pays attention to a person, and no one needs him, such a person is best manipulated, exposing alcoholic brawls to his advantage.
The picture is not so much about deception as about a man’s struggle with himself, with his demons, and when such a weighty pretext as murder comes across, you need to think sanely. It is striking how a witness, aware of her worthless position, tries to fight and prove the truth. The detective component confuses the plot so that you can predict the finale as you like, calculate the killer, and the climax will still present unexpected facts that refute the conjectures of the audience. Again, the female half will taste the moments of infidelity and reasons for gossip, as the male half will beat the entire thriller basis and investigation. An extraordinary, unexpected disclosure of a case involving many people pleasantly concludes this story. Other people's secrets can be dangerous.
At the tests, a large caste of stars of world magnitude passed, so whoever was not called. Jared Leto was replaced by Luke Evans, who played his part well. I liked Hayley Bennett, who stood out for beauty, passion and good acting.
Scandals, intrigue, investigation... A very powerful film that won’t let you down to the credits.
The Girl on the Train is a 2016 film based on a 2015 book. That is, there are quite a large number of books, literally created for the film adaptation, to which the creators did not reach (or it was empty in their pockets), and they did not have worthy adaptations on the screen, and “The Girl on the Train”, being an unremarkable novel for three evenings, had a budget of 45 million and even paid off almost 4 times. It is necessary to understand how this happened, and why, with such a solid collection for a psychological thriller, the film has 44 percent on Rotten Tomatoes and 48 percent on Metacriticism.
The plot is trying to intrigue: there is a woman in whose life something terrible happened, after which she drinks endlessly, interrupting only for trips on the American version of “Swallow”. She keeps an eye on her former home and the home of former neighbors, who she thinks are perfect. But once everything changes, as does the life of the heroine. The novel on which the film was made, the author of the review read, and for a few days it was really entertaining reading, up to the denouement. At the end of the piece I wanted to know what to do with the finish line that Stephen King bit the author and what she wanted to say. Surprisingly, both the book and the film are the product of an additional, in fact, era – a time when “Moonlight” just appeared, and Netflix has not yet managed to get to the most famous heroes and make them black, drug addicts and pedophiles. At the same time, the attributes of the viewer who is unfamiliar with the book history are present: here the main character is oppressed, and the plot is built on female characters (male, even despite the finale, here is more for a message, there is no question of competent weaving into the history). What is funny is that the author of the novel cared, for example, about Tom: a real abuser in love with his wife, whose jealousy, nevertheless, was not groundless, and what the arch told him and Meghan specifically. The director of the film Tate Taylor, who did not receive a single project with a comparable budget after “Girl on the Train”, decided to cut this part – he is an artist, he sees this, but critics and the audience were in solidarity about the failure of the picture – apparently, it was not necessary to change the accents and rewrite the plot in their own way.
It’s hard to say anything specific about actors. Blunt plays a complete alcoholic Rachel, while not taking care of reincarnation, and also pregnant during filming. Light makeup does not allow you to see a fallen person in her - it's just Emily Blunt or any other Hollywood star on the morning of December 26 after Christmas. The main male role was given to Justin Theroux, about whom immediately there is nothing to remember. At the same time, Evans, the most charismatic in the entire troupe, was not paid attention (he certainly would have played out the suffering, and anger, and conflicts with Blunt could have turned out better, choose a screenwriter and director of other scenes from the book): banal do not understand why you should take an actor of such a texture and not give him either screen time or a historical role in the plot. Rebecca Ferguson was able to recover from the failure of this film, but the facial expression of her character Anna (yes, it is her, despite the caustic comments of some authors on Kinopoisk) – some misunderstanding, surprise 24/7 – is literally a ready-made meme, even if the day after the premiere do demotivators with it. Megan, played by Hayley Bennett, gathered literally all the features of a woman, because of which men become chauvinists, while she, not Anna, was originally the one who had to get all the empathy of the reader (and the viewer, since the film is not based on the original plot). That Hayley gave something wrong, or the viewer did not take – the young actress has not received major roles since then.
The verdict of a very gray film with a decent cast on paper, but completely ugly script work: watch “Get knives” or “Gentlemen”, the good they now have and waste time on such a dull something more needless.
5 out of 10
For a long time hesitant to see the picture because of the criticism and low ratings of the audience. But after all, the thriller is one of my favorite genres, in addition, Emily Blunt and Luke Evans play here, which I can count among the actors I respect, who are always interesting to watch, and the trailer intrigued me terribly, so I did not care about all the negative on the Internet, I still watched the film and it surprised me very pleasantly. It seems to me that those to whom he did not come had simply high expectations.
Emily Blunt appears before us in a completely uncharacteristic image for herself - usually a calm, restrained woman, an exemplary wife and a mother here unemployed alcoholic Rachel in deep depression. This condition has an explanation - her beloved husband cheated on her and threw in favor of another woman, with whom he was also able to have such a desired child. The only joy for a woman is a daily train ride, during which she observes one married couple. She idealizes her, imagining herself in the place of a girl. But one day the idyll is broken - Rachel sees the girl in the arms of another. This destroys her fragile world and she, once again drunk, goes to a showdown, but manages to pass out near the couple’s house. When she wakes up, she finds out that the girl has disappeared. Now she has one dilemma - whether she is guilty of her disappearance. Rachel is simply obliged to help the investigation to solve the mysterious disappearance, otherwise she risks being afraid of herself.
One of the main advantages of the picture I still consider the game of Emily Blunt, before us a real alcoholic - cloudy eyes, shaking hands, a characteristic blush. But the woman does not want to blame - her story is very sad, especially when you learn everything to the end. The other actors are also very good. All the characters are revealed to the smallest detail, but this happens not through a primitive exposure, but in fragments, pieces of the puzzle, which by the end is formed into a single, not the most joyful picture.
The authors play with the audience, and this game is the juice. We don’t know what to believe, we are being pushed to conclusions. In fact, I predicted the ending and the main plot moves by the middle, but this does not mean that they are weak and uninteresting, just we threw enough hints and hints.
What I would correct would be less erotic scenes, on the other hand they add dirt and help in the disclosure of characters, so there is nothing out of the ordinary.
Maybe not the most perfect thriller, but not at all the bottom as many write. Yes, there is a lot of drama, a lot of emotionality and sentiment, but not all about maniacs and torture to shoot!
7 out of 10
Excellent psychological thriller with admixture of a detective
I love psychological thrillers, and if they are also seasoned with a detective component, the film will hook me 100%. That's what happened with this movie. I saw a lot of negative reviews, someone the film seemed boring, someone annoyed the main character, I saw here a magnificently woven web of fates, where each character has their skeletons in the closet.
The main character Rachel is hard going through a divorce with her beloved husband, trying to drown out the pain of alcohol. She can't let go of her past, and every day there's one scenario - she gets on the train and drives "to work" past the home of her ex-husband and his new wife. To convince herself that it is not an obsessive desire to be closer to him, she watches out the window for his neighbors.
One day she sees that the usual way of life of the neighbors changes, then the neighbor disappears somewhere, and Rachel finds a new meaning of life - to help these people who saved so much time for herself. With her suspicions about what happened, Rachel goes to the police, but her help unexpectedly goes sideways.
The film is incredibly interesting, it’s like candy in dozens of fantastics – you unfold and unfold one at a time, discovering something new in each of the characters. And only by the very end, everything finally falls into place, and you open your eyes wide in amazement - this is it, means that.
The picture perfectly combines several different genres, harmoniously intertwined with each other - there is a psychological drama, a thriller, and a detective. The actors convincingly play their roles - and you completely immerse yourself in the world of their heroes, spinning and spinning the storyline along with Rachel.
I highly recommend it!
Every day, the alcoholic Rachel rushes by train past a cozy house in which the perfect couple in love lives. Often Rachel watches fleetingly from the window as the couple cling to each other on the balcony or indulge in sweet pleasures without blinding the windows, driving the lonely main character into even greater depression. But one day the idyll is destroyed - a shameless stranger disappears without a trace, and Rachel tries to get to the truth. . .
A psychological thriller, where the viewer should prepare for two hours of deep inner drama of the main character, seasoned with detective investigation.
Abandoned, deceived and trampled by Rachel, Rachel still cannot let go of the past, betrayed by her hypocritical husband. When you blindly give yourself to a loved one completely, and in response you get a “knife in the back”, then after such a blow it is impossible to recover for years, because the heroine has to flood her broken heart with liters of burning vodka, wandering aimlessly through the streets for days like an urban madwoman.
The picture slowly rolls up to the final denouement, gradually and slowly unravelling the tangle of events that occurred. The film can be recommended to fans of deep psychological dramas and thrillers, where many details are based on the emotions of the main characters.
Moral: if after drinking, you do not remember anything, then hang a video recorder on your head before a splash.
In the end, a depressing and painful psychological thriller.
7 out of 10
An example of a neighborhood in one film of good elements with bad
The crumpled and disgustingly presented beginning of the film, which roughly flows into a formless entanglement, with some confidence trying to develop into an interesting climax ... but crashing into the incomprehensible script depths of the denouement! Even a beautiful visual, a suitable musical accompaniment, good camera and sometimes directorial work will not be able to do anything if they oppose the obviously weak plot, which is often the most important component of a good thriller, rough acting and slurred message in the end. At times, the characters simply amazed with their stupidity, non-interference in the affairs of others. What is it? A personification of the oppression of women in post-imperial America or an attempt to lengthen the film's timeline? Perhaps, armed with this question, which cannot be answered with certainty, the pseudo-depth of thought shown in the film, and a complaint to the beautiful half of humanity, the director and producers managed to tease a lot of moviegoers who mistakenly put him any rating above mine:
5/10.
Paula Hawkins’ novel “The Girl on the Train” became a world bestseller for a reason. This is a strong, stylish and very fascinating work that I managed to read in the original language and it pleasantly amazed me. The detective story is interesting not only with unexpected plot twists, but also with the characters of the main characters, each of which is special. And based on the novel, an equally cool thriller with the same name was shot.
The story is told from the perspective of Rachel, an unhappy divorced woman whose life collapsed after being abandoned by her lover. Now Rachel is forced to live with an old friend and drown her grief in alcohol. Also, the unfortunate woman continues to travel on the same route by train to the city, every evening while returning back in a frankly distressing state.
Having no other entertainment, Rachel begins to peer into the windows of the random home and notices one very attractive married couple. They become almost native to her, but one day something happens and the girl disappears. The investigation believes that she was kidnapped, and Rachel plans to help him, as she thinks that she saw something and can become a valuable witness. But it will be difficult to prove her right, because her reputation and alcohol do not lead to anything good.
The film follows the letter of the original novel quite accurately, but there are still some logical digressions here that I can take and skip with a clear heart, because bringing the book to the screen is not that easy. We need edits that we can't get away from. Good. That director Tate Taylor approached the matter neatly and did not let us down, creating a tense spectacle that arouses interest.
The best part of the film is Emily Blunt, who played Rachel. That's what I understand as an Oscar-worthy reincarnation. Blunt plays so natural that I think. It was like she was really drinking on the set. But the whole thing, of course, in a good acting and high-quality makeup. One or two, and from a fighting woman blinded an alcoholic, in the sufferings and experiences of which honestly believe.
I liked Luke Evans and I, as always charismatic and brash. He brought tension and fierce energy to the plot. And it's just nice to watch him. He is a representative man, and he knows how to present himself so sexually and brightly that everyone around him just dims. Except for Emily Blunt, of course.
Whether you read the book or not doesn’t really matter. The main thing is that the film came out accessible and understandable for any viewer. For me, this is a very good film adaptation, which is worth the free time and attention allocated to it.
8 out of 10
It was with this novel by Edgar Poe that I formed associations when watching this film. Mostly thanks to the almost eponymous early film of Denis Villeneuve, who, however, considered his early films to be a complete suck and did not want to remember them (and if so, I will tell you: he does not understand a damn about real cinema, this Denis Villeneuve).
As there, here, with stunning force and piercing hopelessness, the gray, rainy, drenched depression of a young beautiful woman is shown, confusing her hands and feet, dragging her to the bottom, into the funnel of a dead whirlpool from which they do not get out. No doubt you won’t get out either.
Only instead of the sea theme here - the symbolism of the endless train, then here, every day, which is like two drops of water similar to the previous and subsequent. It probably also symbolizes time, which in the nonlinear and ragged narrative of the film is constantly spinning back and back, trying to restore in the heroine’s brain events that she witnessed and/or participated in... or could be.
Rachel (Emily Blunt) commutes to and from New York City on this train every day, seeing the same cottage outside the window where the perfect couple lives: a golden-haired wife and a loving husband. The girl realizes that the story created by her imagination may have nothing to do with the real life of these two people, but she likes to think that they are serenely happy. That they have everything she doesn't dream of. As, however, and the new wife of her ex-husband, who adjusted his life after leaving a drunken Rachel. They, by the way, live next door to the same couple: both women are golden-haired, ephemeral, like twins in the ghostly perfection of their happiness. At any rate, this is what they look like in the eyes of a girl who sees them every day from the window of a passing train.
Whether this is true, and how this picture corresponds to reality, the viewer cannot know. The narration is shown through the eyes of the characters - primarily through the eyes of Rachel, faded, watered and drenched in alcohol. She does not believe herself, because she does not remember what she did once again in a deranged state. Hearing from loved ones about her drunken antics, she drives herself even deeper into alcoholic dope with shame and horror.
So when that beautiful stranger suddenly disappears, Rachel finds herself in a strange and awkward position. Is it possible to take seriously the words of a half-adequate drinking girl? And what does she have to do with the missing person, what did she do there? So pure psychological thriller inevitably develops into the genre of detective.
The main and most obvious advantage of this film is the amazing Emily Blunt, broken, extinguished, somehow trying to collect scraps of the past remarkable will. Even with a meaningless, expressionless face, she plays not with her face, but with her entire presence on the screen. Her heroine plunges into shock, then into burning pity in half with irritation, and it is almost physically painful to watch.
Another advantage of the film is its viscous, dark, disturbing atmosphere. But that's also his flaw. Why, one wonders, shoot another Fincher when there is one already? Undoubtedly, a talented director could add his own unique style, so that it does not feel like watching again ' Gone ' (I have no doubt that my precious Denis Villeneuve would have done so.) Who knows? Well, I just love him.
The film, billed as a super-duper thriller, turned out to be a soap opera without a sequel (thank God). Where the thriller is, I don’t know. Tell me...
The first part we watch some drunken woman mourning and drowning in degrees her unsuccessful marriage. She rides on the train and looks at the house in which she once lived with her husband, and at the same time at the neighboring house, where the couple kisses sweetly on the balcony. She's sorry she didn't have that kind of love. She's jealous... And she's drinking more and more.
Somewhere in the middle, they drove up to some intelligible event - to the disappearance of the very "kissing and happy" neighbor. Our heroine, seemingly quitting drinking, and overnight (although this is unrealistic in the case of female alcoholism), begins her investigation, along the way pestering her ex-husband and his new wife.
Honestly, even the second half of the film was not particularly impressive. Although there was an element of the detective (the disappearance line itself is a good detective line in any case). But the detective turned out ... not even in the spirit of D. Dontsova. I have never seen such an outspoken primitivism.
In general, the film may appeal to the female audience, and then not all. If someone liked Mexican TV series, someone did not stop watching the adventures of Marianne-simple Marie and others - this way.
I have to move on.
Everyone knows about the harmful effects of alcohol on the health and psyche of a person, on each bottle we are warned about the dangers of its excessive use. Its impact on the psyche of a woman who is in deep depression against the background of life failures and personal family drama, and does have a completely destructive effect. It is on this that the authors of the psychological detective 'The Girl on the Train' decided to play, where the main character Rachel, driving daily on the train past her former home and looking out the window, involuntarily witnesses her shattered hopes for family happiness.
' The Girl on the Train' is a classic detective with the main mystery of the type ' guess who the villain is?' However, the main focus here is on psychology, the emotional state of the characters and family relationships. Against the background of all this, the constant alcoholic frenzy, in which the main character is most of the film, confuses us and prevents us from understanding what is happening, periodic lapses in memory and strange flashbacks of Rachel aggravate the situation and play on nerves. The film is made in a viscous, depressing atmosphere, in places it seems that the plot does not develop at all, and in places events unfold too quickly.
There are quite a few characters in the film, and it will not be easy to understand all this drama. In order to help the viewer not get lost in all the intricacies of the local relationship, the authors broke the plot into several time segments, gradually, episode by episode, bringing us closer to the culmination of this everyday drama. However, it is not a fact that the chosen approach in the narrative helps a lot, in places - even vice versa, not much that is clear. In my opinion, in terms of psychology, the film is similar to ' Gone' if you liked this tape, do not miss 'The Girl on the Train'.
In the end: 'The Girl on the Train' - a psychological detective, executed in depressive tones, against the backdrop of the unfolding drama of human relationships and domestic violence. A detective where it is very difficult to determine the line where reality ends, and the suggestible fiction begins.
After watching Dani Villeneuve's Killer, in which I really liked Emily Blunt's performance, I decided to watch a few movies with her and eventually came across this one.
I knew absolutely nothing about this film. For the first 20-30 minutes it seemed to me that this is a banal female drama and I was wrong, but then the film began to unfold the plot near the detective and catch up with the gloomy atmosphere of the colorless world of a person suffering from alcoholism. The plot after half of the film begins to develop more rapidly and causes more interest, feelings and sympathy for the main character. The very end of the film seemed a little dry, but the overall impression of the story it does not spoil.
Most of the characters in the film are either simply not revealed or the actors are banally underplayed, but this is not felt much because 85 percent of the screen time is given to Emily Blunt, who, in my opinion, just pulled the film with a magnificent dramatic play and very well revealed the character, on the example of which the destructive power of alcohol becomes obvious.
The picture and sound are quite ordinary, several scenes with well-set light stand out against the general background.
Even though the film was clearly aimed at a female audience, I liked it, probably because I didn’t expect anything from it. If you are looking for something within certain genres of thriller, crime, detective, then you will most likely just be bored. In general, the film is a strong average, holding on to one actor.
Tate Taylor is almost a stranger to me as a director: before The Girl on the Train, I had only watched The Help, but a few times it was so good. The Girl on the Train wasn’t just about Taylor: the trailer was impressive, the cast was impressive. So from the moment the film started on the screens, the thought constantly revolved in my head that you need to see the picture.
The viewing was postponed indefinitely, but I periodically remembered that I should have seen The Girl on the Train. I got there yesterday, I saw it and I’m ready to take it out.
The plot of the story - what we saw in the trailer - is immediately interesting: the girl, passing the same houses every day, sees how life flows in them. By chance, she becomes a witness to what changes her perception of life in this house. Therefore, she believes that she can help the investigation to find out the killer. In fact, what she sees, how she sees it, is not what she seems. Thus, we can conclude that through the plot "from the side you can see" no idea is realized, because for various reasons in the end, the girl from the train does not really see anything.
Let’s go deeper into the story itself. The main character is Rachel, an alcoholic. We are shown her story, we imbue her, sympathize with the heroine, so she, despite this, should not cause negative emotions. The tragedy of her personality is revealed perfectly, the very connection of Rachel with the characters “on the other side of the train window” is properly argued, so from the point of view of the film as a drama of one person, there are no questions. Although, in my opinion, the drama is strained by Rachel's excessive tragedy. From the point of view of the film as a drama between several characters, the question arises why these characters are superficially spelled out (with the exception of Megan, but her participation in the plot is secondary). More than by the end of the film, the characters Theroux and Fergusson begin to manifest themselves, but the whole first half, both they and Evans’ hero appear episodicly, shown through the prism of one or two traits, which, of course, does not give an illustrative portrait of each of the characters.
From the detective’s point of view, the story is weak: the plot, although well packaged and consistently revealed, is quite banal. To guess who the killer is, any person who watched detective series, you can in 10-15 minutes from the beginning of viewing. The detective in the series is a formal figure. The investigation (if it can be called an investigation) is led by Rachel. And it mainly consists in the fact that she tries to remember what she did that fateful evening, but can not, because she was drunk.
For personal dramas of heroes and excellent performance I put 6 out of 10. The rest was unimpressive.
If Anna Karenina had not thrown herself under the train, but had gotten into it...
The wonderful game of Emily Blunt is the only thing worth watching this lifeless and oppressive detective.
Maximum female, confused, autumn and imbued so popular in recent years in the West ideology of the victim (victimhood) cinema.
The creators of this film are balancing on the brink of hatred against the endangered species of white men, but frankly and enthusiastically break into the abyss of pity for women and themselves sprinkled with autumn leaves.
This bitter self-pity is everywhere in this film, it rains from the sky, fills the glasses and plastic glasses of the heroes, freezes in the mesmerizing eyes of the main character.
But between self-pity and love for others, there is a huge chasm that cannot be crossed by train, even if you board it every day.
Treason, lies, lust, betrayal, the desire for complete power over man - all this is here forgiven to women, because they are victims.
The same vices in men are brought by the authors to the absolute, followed by sentence and execution.
Today we have the film 'The Girl on the Train'. This picture is based on the novel of the same name by British writer Paula Hawkins, which became a bestseller. The narrative (with a lot of flashbacks, which makes watching the movie only more interesting) is conducted on behalf of three different women. Each of them has its own tragedies, experiences, skeletons in closets. Their fates are closely intertwined and eventually give birth to one dramatic story. A story of love, betrayal, despair, hatred and anger. This film is both a thriller and a detective story, but for me it is primarily a drama. And very strong. The picture in the film is appropriate - autumn. Cold, rainy, gloomy autumn. So the bright colors of the viewer do not spoil. Thanks to this, he, the viewer, is completely devoted to this story, experiences with the heroes every moment.
The performer of the main female role, actress Emily Blunt, brilliantly entered the image of Rachel - a woman whose life is rapidly going downhill. Her husband left her for another, they had no children, she lost her job. In the wake of all this, she developed alcoholism, Rachel stopped parting with the bottle. As a result, periodic lapses in memory, uncontrolled outbursts of anger. Well, that's a real life. Blunt played brilliantly, how much pain, despair, some hopelessness was in her eyes (very, by the way, beautiful, despite all this). (As often happens, I immediately wanted to see other paintings with her participation, I am waiting for your recommendations.)
Haley Bennett played the role of Megan, a girl whose fate and history seems even more tragic than Rachel’s. During some scenes with her participation, goosebumps just ran on the skin - so they were filmed, so much she played in them.
The third actress, Rebecca Ferguson, is also very good on screen. The story of a woman who was the mistress of a married man, then became his wife herself, and in the end also experienced all the pain from the betrayal of a loved one. Feeling cycle. Ferguson accomplished the task well. And, as often happens, in the finale of the story, she came to the very peak, magnificently playing in the last scenes, where her heroine splashed out all her emotions that she had previously kept in herself.
Justin Theroux and Luke Evans (the most famous of all the cast to me) have done just as well. At first it seemed that each of them is a loving husband, but later comes the realization of how different they are and how fake was one of them. The hell in the pool. . .
Yes, it is not easy to share your impressions about the film without touching the plot. I really want to talk about it, but then it will not be interesting to see the picture, right?
I’ll just say that the film drags on from the very first minute and does not let go to the very credits. This movie reminds me something of the amazing film by David Fincher ' Gone', 2014 release.
So if ' Disappeared' you liked, as well as if you like high-quality detective thrillers with real, live acting and stunning, though not colorful, atmosphere, then ' Girl on the train' - what the doctor ordered. If you watch a movie on a cold rainy evening, the effect will only be stronger.
Now I really want to read the book, I hope I get to it.
Have a good evening and only quality movies!
Thank you very much.
P.S. Women's alcoholism is a terrible thing.
Rachel Watson is an unemployed woman suffering from alcoholism after divorcing her husband and losing her permanent residence. The only bright spot in her life is the daily train ride past her old home, where her ex-husband Tom lives with her new wife Anna and their child. Nearby lives another family – Megan and Scott Hipwell, producing the impression of the perfect couple. But one day Megan disappears without a trace. Rachel, the only witness to her disappearance, begins her own investigation and tries to remember what happened that day, but she becomes the main suspect, which will threaten her life.
Usually family dramas and family thrillers are not as interesting because of their predictability and mundane nature. Also, the detective line is very dynamic and shrouded in mystery until the very end of the film. How and why are completely different people connected to each other and what they are hiding in reality.
An amazing film, the beginning is slow, boring and endlessly boring. The main character is as if in the agony of her dreams and memories of the past, she does not live but exists. Everything that happens in her life only happens with her shell, since the soul is crippled by the betrayal of a loved one.
But everything changes when Rachel witnesses the disappearance of a woman. Maybe all the nonsense of her inflamed imagination, who knows? But she begins to unwind a tangle of misunderstandings and problems that have accumulated not only in her life, but in the people around her.
The ending, holding up to the credits. Leaving to guess what really happened and whether the missing husband or Rachel's ex-husband was involved.
In general, the film is very powerful psychologically and emotionally. Emily Blunt, played just for a break, so amazingly she was able to create the image of an insecure and broken woman.
7 out of 10
“The Girl on the Train,” no matter how strange the comparison may seem, reminded me of Mikhalkovskie’s “Prestody” with “The Citadel.” What is it? Yes, the ability to remove multi-budget schizophasia - so to speak, to convey your non-trivial look to the viewer with the involvement of recognizable faces. And if Nikita Sergeich overestimated his abilities, then Tate Taylor fulfilled the primary task, returned the money invested. The plan worked, the viewer intrigued by competent marketers, although spit, but paid for tickets. However, unlike us, the industry rarely fails there.
Directed by Taylor, this is not a lost master, but a hired worker thinking about his professional future, who shot one good film with Chadwick “Black Panther” Boseman, which is good, but not enough for confidence in the future. So you can’t be wrong and go overboard. If you remove the mud that will make money, then critical articles and negative comments can wipe one place, counting profits. And if you have failed, then you will have failed.
What if you don’t have a lot of talent and your name is not Lars von Trier, whose arthouse will be eaten and added? The answer is simple. Right positioning. Speak, mention, do not let forget, attract popular faces, a potential viewer should be remembered – it is necessary to look. I have to look at it, so I have to keep up to date.
From the very first seconds, the director Taylor tries to introduce strangeness into the behavior of the heroes, they are all abnormal, behave in such a way that it is difficult for the viewer to show them understanding. Everyone has a skeleton in their closet. I'm not even talking about the motivation of the villain. He killed a man, let's say by accident, but he acts as if it was a trivial routine for him to kill. Is he a maniac? So a film about a maniac or the problems of the heroine Emily Blunt, explain who is clearer than me.
I was visually deceived, hoping to see something interesting plot and actorly well played. However, I can’t say that the film is bad, rather unsuccessful. The actors did not manage to convincingly portray their characters, although Emily Blunt tried. The director lacked the skills to whip up intrigue, which resulted in the secondaryity of the presented story. And understanding how to bring the storylines to mind, and also explain to Luke Evans why he's even here. Worst of all came the bundle, it was worth calling the film - life on the balcony (heroes are always at home and constantly on the balcony), as well as a tedious finale.
“The Girl on the Train” is like the Ford Focus, a good car, but most would like a Mercedes, Audi or BMW, and certainly never sit in a VAZ classic. A huge number of films that we have, that abroad are much worse, some are simply disgusting, but this is not an excuse, you should always strive for the best. An hour and a half drive I was not convinced of the expediency of further use of this product, I forget about it forever.
5 out of 10
In our time, it becomes very much to be deceived by the competently constructed and subtly embodied post-production of a particular picture. When the creators of the tape mount a very profitable trailer and promise something truly grandiose, but in fact not always the final material meets the expectations. A similar situation is observed with this film directed by Tate Taylor.
After all, only an inattentive person did not notice some similarity with the “Gone Girl” of David Fincher, with which all this film was identified by the director. However, even when viewing the picture, it becomes obvious that both films have in common two different directors, it turned out not so much. Since, if the film of David Fincher was a unique symbiosis of detective and drama, behind which the theme of trepanation of the institution of marriage was hidden, then this film directed by Tate Taylor puts the emphasis in a slightly different direction.
This film director Tate Taylor almost from the very first frames of the tape, pushes the viewer "from place to career." Where almost immediately acquainting the audience with the three main characters of the story, Taylor develops the plot of the picture in a very non-traditional and non-trivial way. Repeatedly jumping between the storylines of each of the characters, retelling individual events on behalf of each of them and in another variation, constantly jumping from the present to the flashbacks of the past and repeatedly introducing viewers into deliberate deception. As a result, creating a rather confused and complex mosaic on the screen, it becomes quite difficult to unravel from the go.
Being quite an experienced director of the dramatic genre, the director of the film Tate Taylor could not fully switch to a purely new genre for his work. Hence, it is not surprising that in this tape, contrary to expectations, there is more drama than detective and thriller. The latter is given much more modest attention and the process of investigating what happened to the disappeared Megan sometimes takes a back seat. But here is the dramatic component Taylor developed on the screen above all praise.
Hence, it is not surprising that the main role in the film and even the key to the solution of what happened in this tape are no evidence and other detective elements. Rather, the inner demons of each of the three main characters of the picture, which play a direct dominant role in the narrative, are the foundation of the moral basis of the picture and generally move the film to the meeting of the final. Where Taylor almost throws down on the viewer almost all the answers to questions of interest. Although guessing before the finale about what happened to Meghan and who had a hand in it, in principle, is not difficult. But even so, the film looks very exciting and interesting. Since all the rules of the detective genre are observed on the screen more than decently, and the musical accompaniment of the composer Danny Elfman fully adjusts to the desired mood and mood. Moreover, Elfman unambiguously gave one of the most inventive, atypical and strong works in the last years of his work.
Similar to the huge role of three women in shaping the foundation of the film, the whole film is a real benefit of three wonderful artists in the person of Emily Blunt, Hayley Bennett and Rebecca Ferguson. Ferguson perfectly reflected the image of a bitchy wife. Bennett to the last holds the veil of the mystery of his heroine and willingly pleases the eyes with his burning attractiveness. Blunt, however, it does give an absolutely enchanting game. Reincarnated as an alcoholic with a nervous breakdown is so convincing and natural that it is simply impossible not to applaud her game. Perhaps this female three literally drags the entire film throughout screen time and demonstrates an absolutely perfect hit in the image. Thus, even slightly lubricating the achievements of their film partners in the person of Justin Theroux, Luve Evans and Edgar Ramirez.
8 out of 10
The Girl on the Train is far from David Fincher’s “Gone Girl,” but certainly a worthy example of feature film, which combines elements of intellectual, authorial and entertaining cinema on the screen. Along the way, representing a rather unusual and non-trivial product of crossing genres into drama, thriller and detective with an absolutely enchanting acting game of the trio Blunt-Bennett-Ferguson.
The beginning of the film may not even delay its originality, but the switch from hero to hero, the interweaving of fates. You begin to grasp the essence of what is happening and immediately switch your attention to another development of events.
By the middle of the film, I was worried that the ending would be disappointing. But the intrigue persisted until the end.
A little bit about the way. The train is a symbol. She had to go there, and no matter what anyone said, she just needed it. The pain she endured, the betrayal and the diagnosis broke her, and the train is all she has left. This road gives her a sense of life.
The actors were very happy. Especially Hayley Bennett, she so fascinated me that every time I waited for a shot of her. Emily Blunt looked very harmonious in the lead role. My feelings for her character never left me throughout the film.
Back to the end. That’s the weakest part of the movie, and it lowered my grade. Not because it was too predictable, but because it lacked tension. So much emotion and interest in the beginning that you end up thinking, '. '.
The bottom line is this. Very good, tense thriller with a beautiful acting and exciting plot.
8 out of 10
"The Girl on the Train" doesn't come out at her station.
The release of this film was noticed by me on the Internet and the site "Kinopoisk", respectively, its viewing was not long in coming.
The film tells the story of Rachel’s routine life, which runs along the railway on a rushing train, from the windows of which Rachel observes the lives of people living in houses near the aforementioned railway. Until one day he decides to get off before he stops.
I did not expect such an atmospheric thriller. Despite the rather late time, I watched this creation to the end and did not sleep, despite the hard work day. Suspense, which the filmmakers managed to produce by narrating the film, felt great and it was quite exciting to watch the twists and turns of the plot. In addition, the detective component of the film was also not bad, and I was tormented by doubts about the events that would occur in the final film. The intrigue of the film smoothly unfolded, each time opening the viewer the veil of new secrets, while confusing even more. Among the acting works, of course, it is worth noting the main character of Rachel performed by Emily Blunt (“Edge of the Future”, “Changing Reality”). The appearance of the actress at first caused a feeling of bewilderment, but during the viewing of the picture, this fact was given a logical explanation, besides the brilliant play of Emily Blunt once again proved that she correctly chose the direction of her kind of activity. Luke Evans was not enough ("The Musketeers", "War of the Gods: Immortals"), he did not turn around, although the actor is not bad.
Special thanks for the atmosphere and style of the film. I recommend it to fans of the genre.
Regarding the title of my review, I want to make it clear right away: I do not intend to compare the film The Girl on the Train with the work of director Milos Forman. It just so happens that one sentence that I would describe my impressions of this film was somewhat similar to the famous title of another. I suggest you take it as a play on words and nothing more.
As for The Girl herself, I thought she was a long way from the success of Foreman’s film. At the same time, in my opinion, it was quite far from an unequivocal failure. Well, I'll share my impressions.
The movie about the girl on the train is positioned as a thriller. The genre, the plot of which should terrorize the viewer’s brain with the task of “finding a bad guy.” And it seems to me that it is the degree, figuratively speaking, of brain “terrorism” that thrillers can be divided into “good” and “bad.” In my opinion, “The Girl on the Train” turned out to be a good thriller rather than a bad one: with outstanding merits and predictable shortcomings.
The good stuff first.
The main advantage of this film, I would call the acting Emily Blunt. She's really extraordinary. In my opinion, such an incarnation of his character on the screen could safely claim the Oscar for the main female role. Blunt got used to her role so much that her on-screen alter ego was able to elicit in me, as a viewer, a whole palette of emotions, from irritation to compassion.
Besides playing Emily Blunt, it would be unfair not to mention the other actors. After all, in my opinion, the cast was selected in this case with one hundred percent hit in their on-screen embodiment. In other words, each actor played the “right” hero.
Also, to the merits of this film, I would like to include the work of the operator. She, by the way, with skillful embodiment, can become the pepper of any thriller. In this case, the prank worked. Landscape plans and demonstration of the actions of the heroes do their job: admire and frighten.
More a virtue than a disadvantage, I would call the story as a whole. Yes, the plot of this film is not very intricate. But it is definitely not easy to call it. I would describe this plot as a “middle” version: it contains scripted tricks, an attempt to confuse the viewer and confuse him, but the fact that the “garden killer” can be understood even when the end of the film is still half an hour.
I think the ending is one of the shortcomings of this film. In my opinion, it turned out to be a “gallop through Europe”. The plot seemed to wriggle and develop so well, and suddenly "Batz!" and a predictable ending. I wish the finale was a little better. It’s a little more complicated than that.
In general, I would recommend this film at least once. My husband and I were not a waste of time. Will we watch it again? The answer is more positive than negative.
The girl on the train was a promising premiere this fall. The success and popularity of Paula Hawkins’ best-selling book worked half of the preview marketing and lured the audience to theaters.
In the media, the film was positioned as a competitor to “Gone Girl”, released by Fincher in 2014. There are definitely similarities and overlaps, however, the ratings of these two paintings speak for themselves.
How does Tate Taylor see the novel? The narrative concentrates the plot around the main character Rachel, in the face of the strong and beautiful Emily Blunt, presenting the viewer with her own first-person reasoning. Rachel survived a family drama that completely broke her desire for an adequate peaceful existence on earth. She fails to stop and let go of the past, she spends the remaining strength on eternal drunkenness, trying to cling to her old house and resentments. The actress herself did not go to big changes in appearance, however, the image so turned out to be more than convincing. The smell of vodka saturated everything, and the foggy look of swollen eyes replaces all other attributes of female alcoholism.
What happened, and how the heroine slid to such a life, the viewer learns the stages. Short flashbacks, taken out of the context of different periods of the life of each hero of the thriller. Ex-traitor husband Tom is shown mercy at their family home with their new wife and child, while a couple next door tease a train passenger with their sweetness and calmness. But the perfect life from the window is not a paradise in a hut, illusions collapse, and panic sets in Rachel’s head. Her beloved character has gone missing, he has changed her expectations and dreams. The heroine, in addition to her already sensitive position in society, is involved in an unpleasant story.
The picture does not stint on close-ups and details - attention is paid to the faces of the heroes, most emotional shocks are read in the eyes, facial expressions and movements. The whole plot works psychologically and mentally, quietly, calmly, without loud shootouts and large-scale operations in the small world of Rachel and the territory of her residence. There are not so many heroes, but all of them are given enough time for close acquaintance with the viewer. Timekeeping is reasonably divided between events – actions do not fall on each other, at once losing meaning and detail. There is no unnecessary tragedy and tears that usually put pressure on the viewer. The storyline (women's alcoholism and family schism) is simple and does not stand out with special creativity, but "The Girl on the Train" does not prevent it from being interesting to formalize such an idea and keep interest until the final denouement.
The atmosphere of the current investigation already carries a certain style and charm of a psychological thriller: the theme of a fast train and a small territory, a nearby forest with the sun breaking through the trees, damp air and tension in it.
The director brings to the fore less "star" Hayley Bennett and Rebecca Ferguson, placing full responsibility on their talent and emotional appeal. Luke Evans, this time no more, no less, as a supporting character, and his acting skills have to be judged by the cubes on the press and the manner of kissing, which can not be said about Edgar Ramirez and Justin Theroux. All the characters are tied to one story, sneaking the viewer throws new facts for thought, slightly changing the sympathies and accents.
It is safe to call “The Girl on the Train” a worthy competitor to good-quality Hollywood thrillers, but Taylor failed to overcome the techniques that have developed in the cinema and make the picture on a separate pedestal. The romance of the film focuses mainly on the topic of female psychology and beautiful soundtracks to it, rather than on a shocking plot.
A neat, decorated thriller with a decent game of actors and actresses, moderately cruel and interesting to its viewer, as the final verdict for going to the cinema. Shock therapy will not be accurate, but you will get understanding after watching.
The debut novel by the English writer Paul Hawkins "The Girl on the Train", written in the genre of a psychological thriller, gained immense popularity and took the first line in the bestseller list. The excitement was such that the rights to the film adaptation were bought even before the book was published, and professional critics rushed to give the book the status of a new "Gone". But if the work Gillian Flynn was successfully adapted for the big screen and marked by rave reviews, then the creation of Paul Hawkins can not boast of this.
Unfortunately, the film fell victim to its own aggressive advertising campaign. It was positioned as a tense psychological thriller and a famously twisted detective, which unfortunately is not. And although the plot is very confusing story, it does not correspond to the action genre. I would describe it as a psychological drama with elements of a detective thriller. Where the mysterious disappearance of the girl and further investigation is only an outer shell for revealing completely different topics. And this is very disappointing, since the tying itself was made in the best traditions of Hitchcock’s paintings.
Immediately throws the feminist background of the whole story. The story revolves around the lives of three women. Instead of detective intrigue, suspense and alarm, the picture turns into a dull melodrama. The gray, depressive atmosphere should emphasize the main issues of the film. This is a story about struggling with your own past, about trying to overcome your inner fears and vices. No wonder at the heart of the whole story is the struggle of the main character with alcoholism, as well as with his own nerves. Along the way, the topics of motherhood, family life, infidelity and other women's adversity are touched upon. Girls should definitely like the picture, but the male audience is not a fact.
If we consider the picture as a heavy life drama, then, despite its tearfulness, it looks bad or bad. But how an intense investigation into the mysterious disappearance does not stand up to any criticism. The rainy atmosphere of the tape is generally well executed, but suffers from the lack of proper musical accompaniment and more subtle directing. But I liked the camera work, by the way, there was a woman behind the camera. A coincidence?
Emily Blunt looks very good in the image of an alcoholic with a faded look. Of course, being a very talented actress, she managed to fully reflect the character of her character, her pain and emotional suffering. Swedish Rebecca Ferguson and charming American Hayley Bennett play their roles very well, although there is no serious drama to talk about. The same can be said for Justin Theroux and Luke Evans, who have important but secondary roles.
The girl on the train is not the intense psychological thriller that we were promised. It's more of a heavy, female drama, with elements of a detective. Not too deep and not full of philosophical load. Not everyone will like it, many will be disappointed, but you can watch it once.
6 out of 10
Nothing compares to the agony of ignorance, which will never end.
Personally, I'm a dramatic thriller 'The Girl on the Train' expected as something to be desired as soon as possible. No, it was not that the film became the adaptation of the bestseller, in a short time after the release of the first place in the charts, ashamed to admit, but the bestsellers, as well as the book charts do not follow completely. And the point was not even that the director of the tape was Tate Taylor, whose name before ' Girls on the train' strictly associated with the ripped applause 'Salvage'. And even the brilliant cast (Emily Blunt, Hayley Bennett, Rebecca Ferguson, Justin Theroux and Luke Evans) didn't affect my own expectations rating. And it's all about advertising, it's painfully good ' The girl on the train' was advertised, so I had to once again feel the action of ' the engine of trade' on my own skin. What did I see after I saw the movie? This will be discussed further.
So, at the start of the film, I watch the completely extinct look of the heroine Emily Blunt (from the film her name is Rachel Watson). There was a feeling that this woman, following the houses, forests and roads running out of the train window, ran her life, as if something had failed there. And the sixth sense did not fail: Rachel watches the windows of the house, where now settled her ex-husband with a new wife and child (they were played by Justin Theroux and Rebecca Ferguson, respectively), and Rachel drowns melancholy in a glass. And Rachel began to watch the house next door, where, in her opinion, lives the perfect family of Megan (Haley Bennett) and Scott (Luke Evans). When Meghan disappears, Rachel begins to suspect that she has something to do with the disappearance. Rachel starts her own private investigation, but she has no expectations of what it will lead to, and most importantly, Rachel does not know that this incident puts her own life in danger. . .
Here's this intricate plot we prepared Paula Hawkins, who wrote 'The Girl on the Train', and the screenwriter-adapter of the book Erin Cressida Wilson (from her previous works can be distinguished scandalous ' and ' Chloe', as well as the tape 'Fur: Imaginary portrait of Diana Arbus'). Personally, I would be very doubtful if someone claimed that he would have revealed the intrigue of the film in advance: the fact is that the Girl on the Train #39 has a colossal secret that is revealed only in the finale and to collect the whole picture will take not only time, but to realize everything in advance and set a dream will require a talent no less than that of Sherlock Holmes. Therefore, fans of dramatic thrillers without excessive caution can take up the viewing, because it is possible to be ' play detective' to unravel what is behind the disappearance of a young girl. But, of course, everything will not be as famously twisted as in 'Twin Peaks' (old), and still see there will be something to think about.
I personally liked the acting. First, playing Emily Blunt's first violin. I already spoke above about how her dull look betrayed her deep mental confusion, she positioned herself well and as a strong drunken lady, here is only one nuance: we all, unfortunately, had to see sleeping women, and the heroine of Emily Blunt was not like that. And it's not the quality of the drinks consumed, but rather, no one wanted to disfigure the beautiful Emily, especially the make-up artists had no right to do so. Why do we need unpleasant Blunt? Let her tongue be braided, her legs like spaghetti, bruises under her eyes, a stupefying look, but let her face be pleasant. Hayley Bennett also leaves a memory, but here’s the catch: it’s impossible to talk a lot about her character, as well as about Justin Theroux’s character and play, otherwise nothing will come out like 'spoiler' and we don’t like them all, do we? And did not spoil the pictures of Rebecca Ferguson (with Blunt, by the way, they learned the power of a man like Tom Cruise, in films, of course). And the heroine of Ferguson in many moments could be understood, and from that the character turned out to be very realistic and not a problem, which is secondary.
In general, as a dramatic thriller 'The Girl on the Train' quite lived up to my expectations. A long time ago, from films of this genre, I do not demand something supernormal, because not every director is given to be David Fincher, even though Tate Taylor had a trump card in the image of super-successful & #39; The Help' but the films - ' The Help' and ' The Girl on the Train' - so different that there is even nothing to compare. And as a result: I had a good evening with a not bad thriller and perhaps one day I will review it again, although the outcome I will already know.
8 out of 10
This review is written by a person who has read the book, and comparison with it is inevitable. Why, read below.
After reading the book, which I would have rated as a solid 7, I learn that Paula Hawkins’ work will be interpreted in cinema. However, everywhere it is indicated, oddly enough, that the film is based on the book, but this is nothing but a film adaptation.
But, alas, neither a beautiful picture nor my beloved Emily Blunt saved the film. The latter, I don't know why, was often filmed close-up, and very inept. And yes, the plot of the book is still distorted, not much, but this is a terrible mistake of the writers, I will explain why:
First, and most unforgivable, almost all of the characters are clowns. Some of their minor shortcomings and vices are exaggerated to such an extent that, except as idiots, forgive me for being straightforward, they cannot be called.
Second, the characters are not revealed. On the one hand, the actors are present in the frame, and on the other, it is not clear who their character is, what he feels and what motivates his actions.
Thirdly, the impression of the book and the film is very different. After reading the book, an unobtrusive image of a strong heroine is created, and after the film - honestly, I did not even understand which one.
As a result, those who have read the novel by P. Hawkins, the film adaptation, most likely, will not like. A viewer who has heard of The Girl on the Train for the first time will probably enjoy the film a little more. It is “a little”, because even an uninformed viewer will not see the masterpiece here (for example, a friend with whom they watched the film rated it at 6, moreover, the book did not read).
I don’t recommend it, especially if you’ve read the book. Even if you have nothing to do and want to see some high-quality film adaptation, then watch The Island of the Damned (2009) or The Prestige (2006). And films such as “Girl on the Train” can be safely skipped and not kept on “beautiful packaging”.
5 out of 10
For high-quality landscape shooting and good color selection
To be honest, I had high hopes for The Girl on the Train. For the synopsis hinted that the plot in the film would be famously twisted in the style of David Fincher's excellent thriller "Gone Girl," with a share of the detective component and a great cast (one Emily Blunt worth it). Unfortunately, the film did not live up to my expectations.
First of all, I was disappointed that in such a synopsis, the film did not give me what I needed. Just imagine, there's a woman named Rachel who rides the train every day and looks out the window, watching the lives of the people whose homes the train passes by. But one home has a special meaning for Rachel. There's a young couple living there. Even though she doesn’t know them, she can’t get them out of her head either. And from her observations, you can see that they are happy. Happy as she once was. And Rachel lost that happiness. And she had no choice but to shed tears about her loss, and to numb the pain with alcohol. And it was a real idyll for Rachel. But the idyll will be broken and Rachel will see something she never expected. And then she disappears, along with the young woman she was watching. Therefore, Rachel decides to intervene, not knowing what story she will get involved in.
Not a bad story for a thriller, is it? But I didn't get it. Instead of a thriller, there was drama. Depressive drama with thriller elements at the end. As I said, Rachel, despite being a young and beautiful woman, can't get over her divorce. Thus, she drowns her sorrow in alcohol. You will have to watch a good half of the movie. And the other half, that missing woman who's not as holy as Rachel thought. And while their characters will be revealed, almost the entire film will pass. As a result, there will be almost no thriller here (and even more so a detective), since our heroine will solve this mystery in the most idiotic way you can imagine. Quite by accident. But at least in the part where there is a thriller left a little tension. Thank you for that.
But that's not what disappointed me. The movie is too predictable. For me, along with suspense and tension, there is another very important element for a thriller. Unpredictability. I just love it when the thriller gets so caught up in me that I try not to even think or guess what might happen next. This gives you even more pleasure from the unexpected turn. But since “The Girl on the Train” couldn’t win my interest in the story, I started thinking and thinking about what happened. I had at least three theories. But I immediately dropped two of them, because I thought they were either too banal or too ridiculous. There is only one that is most suitable in my opinion. And to my horror, I was right. Having received the answer to the most important question: “What happened?”, all that remained was to know: “How did it happen?” and “For what reason did it happen?” But these questions are secondary, so they are not so interesting. So when the time came for an unexpected twist in the plot (and there is one here), I had no choice but to be completely disappointed in the plot of this film.
However, the film has positive aspects. One of them is Emily Blunt. She's amazing in this movie. Although I didn’t like her character very much, I liked her performance, which made me feel for her character. In fact, on her fragile shoulders, she was able to pull this film out. And what to hide, the entire cast tried. Everyone played their characters well. Technically, the film will also look great. In terms of creating a gloomy and depressing atmosphere, the film is also to be praised. It is quite well reflects the mental state of the main character.
I will therefore refrain from my usual recommendation. It’s up to you to watch or not, but I warn thriller fans who have unpredictability and suspense (or just who hoped there was a detective in this movie) that this movie is likely to disappoint.
'Girl...' - The film, of course, is not for everyone, because it touches on such an exciting relationship between the sexes. The film is shown from the position of relations between three women - each has its own story and its own problem & #39; The men appearing in the film are background, but they are all different - who is positive, who is evil, who is simply neutral. There is a balance in this regard.
Honestly, as a thriller movie, it doesn’t create any intrigue or excitement for people on the other side of the screen. This was largely due to the fact that many emotionally charged scenes were cut from the final version. I advise everyone who has watched or is going to watch - do not forget about the great YouTube - deleted scenes =
Most of my assessment of this film was made, of course, by Emily Blunt - for the sake of her magnificent play, it is worth watching this film at least once - it is difficult to believe in the possibility of such a transformation on stage - she drinks, sobs, dances, brawls, and with watching deleted scenes, you really begin to believe in the drama of her character.
The second fascination in the movie is the train ride, which of us doesn’t love it? Perhaps these trips have a calming effect on the viewer because of what the tension when watching is not felt, but depression / gloomy - quite.
9 out of 10
The Girl on the Train, a film about the lives of people who always seem better, more interesting and richer than her own. The main character of the film, Rachel, draws her story of a young family, which she passes every day by train and gives her the perfect qualities that are lacking in her own. A young man with a nice house, a great job, a beautiful wife who is in love with him to the point of madness. Beautiful wife, young, energetic, loved, married to a wealthy man. Their lives are full of romance and entertainment.
Near their house, lives a young mother with a small child, beautiful neighbors. Live and live, but it's not that simple. The perfect picture in Rachel’s head breaks into small pieces and even her constantly altered consciousness under the influence of alcohol can not prevent the course of events in which she was involved of her own free will. A young man and his wife are not so perfect, and respectable neighbors with deep-hidden skeletons in the closet. And Rachel herself is a deeply lonely, alcohol-abusing woman who does not let go of her past. And so, at one point, their lives are intertwined together, in one big tangle that unravels throughout the picture.
Overall, nothing new. A worn-out plot and denouement of the film, flavored with a pinch of pity for the main character, since her own life failed. The central line of this kind of film plots is to intertwine all the characters among themselves, to unite them with one common cause, and in this case it is a crime, and then to bring to the fore the inconspicuous hero at the end of the film, which you least think about, throwing the motive for the crime again at the end. At the same time, the viewer has no chance to participate in solving and investigating the crime himself, since he was initially deceived, due to the fact that the characters of the characters were not fully disclosed. The moment of surprise is always associated with inconspicuousness and lack of obvious motive, because it always appears at the end. Here is such a stamp in the detective story, which was told very monotonous, boring and uninteresting. I didn’t like it, but expectations were high.
It's not a movie, it's a parable! In a good way, naturally. I won’t compare it to the original novel because I haven’t read it, but it’s really good! It is difficult to define the genre unequivocally. A thriller with a minimal detective component, perhaps. A drama of regulations. There's as little blood here as possible. No boo-effects, only rare flashbacks of the main character. The horror here is different. Every hero of the picture (well, except, probably, detectives) is tormented only by his known torment. But emotions are so real, so earthy and understandable, that it is admirable. Although the characters in principle in the film are few, they are all in their places, and without each of them can not do. Well, the story here is that first the tangle of relationships gets confused, and then, in fact, unravels, while ripping out of you a whole bunch of doubts that have accumulated in recent years. This movie seems to throw a gust of fresh wind on a hot summer evening. Especially if behind the shoulders there is a meat grinder of stormy relationships containing suspicion, inflamed perception and other charms of life.
Everything is arranged so smoothly, harmoniously that the immersion is guaranteed to be complete. Of course, you can guess the outcome of the plot, but I think it is not the main thing here. Characters are interesting, everyone has their dark sides. But some of them are definitely darker. Subjectively, the film reminded the thriller “Gift”, which is also a very worthy representative of the genre.
9.5 out of 10