The Girl on the Train’s film was more or less a “Great Value” version of its predecessor, the best selling novel by the same name.

Now, I’m going to try to avoid being that annoying person that complains about how “the book is soo much better than the movie” however I will say that  I didn’t hate the movie, even though it’s a bizarre film, it’s not  necessarily unenjoyable.

“Girl” is a psychological thriller centered around a troubled woman named Rachel Watson, riddled with depression and alcoholism due to a recent divorce from her cheating husband. During her train commute to NYC she passes by her old neighborhood, where she gets a perfect view of  both the house she previously lived in with her ex-husband, and of one of their neighbors, a seemingly perfect couple, Scott and Megan, that Rachel has become obsessed with.

One day, Watson witnesses something shocking unfold in the couples backyard and goes to the police with that she saw when she learns Megan has gone missing.  

The film has a few redeeming qualities, one being the decision to cast Emily Blunt, in my opinion a perfect choice, to play Rachel. Blunt has taken her acting career to a completely new level with this character as it’s a type of person she’s never played before. She does a very good job of portraying someone in as much emotional pain as Rachel is and makes you feel compassion for her despite her mistakes.

As far as directing goes I had no real complaints, I could appreciate the execution of the time jumping aspect and putting you in the perspective of someone trying to piece together a mystery.

I didn’t, however, think the director did the best job of  explaining how Blunt’s character is putting them together, just that she suddenly remembers bits and pieces rather than has a certain experience trigger a sort of deja vu moment for her. Without reading the book the viewer wouldn’t have any sense of  Rachel’s inner monologue and her thought process of exactly how she’s piecing together the mystery. This makes the film a lot more confusing for viewers.

Obviously I’m predisposed to be bias because I am a book fan, and let’s be real, everyone knows the books are always better. Like any film adaption, it was necessarily made for the critics but for the fans.