‘The Girl on the Train’ fails to live up to hype
October 12, 2016
“The Girl on the Train” stars Emily Blunt as a very disturbed, alcoholic, depressed, recently divorced woman who rides a train every day without a destination. She rides this train every day because it passes by her old home where her ex-husband and the woman he was having an affair with now live happily in.
Next to her old house, there is this seemingly perfect couple that she seems to live vicariously through and only dreams of having that happiness once again. When mysteriously the woman in this “perfect” relationship disappears, the woman on the train might be the only one who can solve this mystery based off of what she might have seen as the train was passing by.
“The Girl on the Train” has been one of the most hyped up movies of the fall. Advertisements and commercials have said it will be the next “Gone Girl” and will be one of the best mystery thrillers in a long time. However, that is not the case. Now, is this movie entertaining? Yes, it is. It is an interesting story that has a very intriguing plot. However is this a good movie and worth the time and money? No.
Before I get into why this movie doesn’t live up the hype and expectation, we need to get into the best part of the film: Emily Blunt. Well to be blunt, she is phenomenal. It is unsettling almost to see how well she portrays this character. If there is any reason to see this movie, it is her performance by far. She isn’t given much when it comes to the dialogue (nobody really is) but it is her physical mannerisms and look that she has that is completely convincing and mesmerizing. Along with the incredible acting of Emily Blunt, we have a cast of characters that you will recognize that range from excellent performances to borderline bad based off a certain scene. This brings me to my first critique.
The writing for this A-list big budget film feels very poor. Sometimes it feels really well done and then at times it was actually awful and very cheesy. There are lines that just don’t make sense and character choices that just don’t add up as well. For a best-selling novel and a movie hyped up to the amount this film has been, I was very disappointed in the writing throughout the film. Along with the writing was the poor direction. Tate Taylor was not the right choice for this film. Since people have been comparing this story to “Gone Girl,” why not get David Fincher, who can bring that same intensity and mystery that “Gone Girl” has? Fincher would have done an incredible job with this story and would have made all the little qualities of the film that was missed under Tate Taylor come alive and work alongside the positive qualities of this film.
Now I have not read the book so I really can’t compare the movie to the book, but is the book really this predictable? Does the book really have all of these cliché qualities? I will admit that the twist in the story did have me somewhat surprised but the whodunit and why is completely predictable. Due to the saturation of cliché moments, poor writing and the lack of emotion throughout, I cannot recommend that you spend your time and money on this film. If you are dead set on seeing it, then go see it for Emily Blunts performance. She is an Oscar contender for sure, or should be. However, nominations rarely go to actors or actresses of movies that aren’t that good. It really is such a shame because she deserved more than how this film turned out.