The Girl on the Train (2016)

[Silver Raven]

Wow, what an outstanding movie.  And Emily Blunt is really Oscar material here.  I never read the book (though I think I'm going to pick it up), so it had me twisting and turning trying to figure out the result.

[BitterApple]

Maybe I read too many mysteries, because I had it figured out two thirds of the way through. I thought the movie was good, but not mind blowing. I never read the book so I can't really compare the two.

Edited October 8, 2016 by BitterApple

[Spartan Girl]

Emily Blunt was definitely the best part of the movie. For all the crap her casting got for being prettier than the "dumpy" Rachel described in the book, she definitely went all out in portraying the absolute ugly side of alcoholism. The scene with her hunkered down on the sidewalk, sipping her "water" bottle was powerfully pathetic.

Yeah, the twist that her ex husband not only was the killer, but had been gaslighting her drunk blackouts for the whole marriage should have been obvious. I'm ashamed to admit I didn't figure it out until it was revealed that he was sleeping with Megan. That made me realize that this and Gone Girl really are just prettier, well-acted/written Lifetime movies.

Still, the scene of Megan's murder was so disturbing...and then Tom getting stabbed in the neck with the bottle opener? Nightmares forever. I'm just glad we were spared the sight of the drowned baby.

Also am I the only one that thinks Megan/Haley Bennet looks a lot like Jennifer Lawrence?

[AimingforYoko]

Emily Blunt nailed the drunk scenes. Most actors' instinct is to overact, something she resisted.

It was a little confusing, with Rachel being the most unreliable narrator since Verbal Kint, but it was pretty obvious that Tom was the culprit. But I also did not guess that Tom was gaslighting her. For what purpose? He just could've dumped her if he was unhappy with her being a sad drunk. I also was glad Anna backed up her story, I almost thought she would throw Rachel under the bus.

[methodwriter85]

2 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Also am I the only one that thinks Megan/Haley Bennet looks a lot like Jennifer Lawrence?

You're far from the only person. I think she looks like a prettier, more delicate-looking Jennifer Lawrence.

Luke Evans is hot as hell. Man.

Emily Blunt really acted out her heart here. It's a shame this film is getting trashed by critics.

[Scarlett45]

16 hours ago, BitterApple said:

Maybe I read too many mysteries, because I had it figured out two thirds of the way through. I thought the movie was good, but not mind blowing. I never read the book so I can't really compare the two.

I read the book and critics held it out to be the next "Gone Girl", but it wasn't. While not poorly written, I figured out the twist pretty quickly. 

I thought Emily Blunt didn't a good job of playing an alcoholic, and her emotional vulnerability was written all over her face. I wish we had gotten more of Luke Evan's character (Megan's/ husband) and Megan herself was written a little flat. 

Edited October 9, 2016 by Scarlett45

[Scarlett45]

12 hours ago, AimingforYoko said:

Emily Blunt nailed the drunk scenes. Most actors' instinct is to overact, something she resisted.

It was a little confusing, with Rachel being the most unreliable narrator since Verbal Kint, but it was pretty obvious that Tom was the culprit. But I also did not guess that Tom was gaslighting her. For what purpose? He just could've dumped her if he was unhappy with her being a sad drunk. I also was glad Anna backed up her story, I almost thought she would throw Rachel under the bus.

Tom GasLighted Rachel to emotionally manipulate her into believing the marriage ending and affair was all her fault because she was just that disgusting of a person. Had Rachel's behavior (as described by Tom) really been accurate (getting him fired, breaking mirrors with hot pokers near his head etc), no one would've blamed him for ending the marriage because she would've been the abusive one (endangering herself and him as well in her drunken rages). This way Tom got to play with Rachel's mind and exert power over her. Had he been a loving husband he would've suggested she get help rather than use her depression and vulnerability during her addiction against her. Of course an addict has to take responsibility for themselves, but that doesn't make it okay for a supposed loved one to take advantaged of their weakened mental state during a blackout. 

Edited October 9, 2016 by Scarlett45

[GreekGeek]

I'm a bit surprised by the bad reviews. I thought it was effective overall, especially Emily Blunt's performance. To me, the chief flaw was that the actresses playing Anna and Megan looked too much alike, so that I wasn't always sure who was who. They could have been sisters and Lisa Kudrow could have been--not quite their mom, but a much older sister. I liked Allison Janney's detective and Laura Prepon's friend. For a while, I thought that 

Spoiler

Anna killed Megan.

The "Did the alcoholic woman commit murder during a blackout?" question took me way back to The Morning After, the 80's movie with Jane Fonda. 

[Chas411]

The book is a lot better although I figured out the twist a few chapters into it so I wasn't as bowled over as other readers have been.

i thought Emily Blunt and Justin Theroux were excellent in the movie. The other characters were ok but the above two were exactly how I imagined the characters to be while reading the book.

[thuganomics85]

I didn't read the book, but I figured it was Tom pretty early on, because I thought they held on his face a bit too long when Anna told him that Megan quit, so I figured there was something going on between the two.  And I knew it wouldn't be Scott because the husband is too obvious, and once Edgar Ramirez's character was shown to be a red herring, I figured it was Tom.  Plus, out of all the men, Justin Theroux seemed to be getting the most press and advertisement, so I figured there had to be a reason.  So, him being the killer wasn't a surprise.  That said, I didn't predict the gas-lighting bit, which was nuts.  He was pretty scary in those moments.

Overall, I didn't love it, but it was an entertaining enough film to kill for two hours.  I do think it always had an uphill battle, due to the Gone Girl comparisons, but I did think Tate Taylor was probably not the right choice for this.  His directing wasn't horrible, but it felt kind of cold and lacked intensity that more experienced directors would have probably brought (like, well, David Fincher.)

Emily Blunt though was fantastic and probably would have gotten award consideration had this film been better received.  Easily the best thing about it.  Haley Bennett was pretty solid too, and like with The Magnificent 7, it's kind of cool seeing her get big roles again, after she seemed to disappear for a bit after she debuted in Music & Lyrics.  Sadly, I did think Rebecca Ferguson was wasted as Anna.  I actually was hoping Anna would be the killer, because that would have at least made her casting worthwhile.  Oh, well, there's always the next Mission: Impossible film.!

[partofme]

I loved the book, I think the movie was okay, but it needed to do a better job explaining why Anna decided to help Rachel in the end.   Anna is a sociopath and I don't think this was clear in the movie.   In the book Anna was okay with Tom killing Megan, and she would have let him kill Rachel, she was just worried that he'd someday find someone worth replacing her with and would kill her.

[Chas411]

While I agree Anna was a sociopath I'm not sure I believed that she'd have let him kill Rachel. Although you're probably right in that she wouldn't have stopped him if it meant saving herself and the baby. I do vaguely recall her goodbye to Rachel being interpreted as a threat that she should never tell anyone what really happened to Tom aka her also stabbing Tom to death.

The movie didn't do Anna Justice. She was just a generic wife whereas she was a lot darker in the book. The final scene of her stabbing him in the movie came across as darky funny whereas in the book it's more of an OMFG moment.

[Proclone]

I saw it a few nights ago.  I thought it was a pretty good thriller. I was entertained while I was watching it.  Emily Blunt (as others have said) is really brilliant at playing drunk convincingly.  She doesn't overact, I think the one best scenes of her drunk is while she's on the train and the mother and baby sit down next to her.  It takes a moment for the audience (and the woman with the baby) to realize how loaded she is, which is completely accurate.  People who are drunk (especially if they are drunk quite often) try and act sober.

I haven't read the the book so, to be honest I thought for a little while that they might have the balls to make Rachel the killer.  I did like the twist (or should say I was surprised by the twist) that Tom was gas-lighting Rachel about her behavior while she was drinking.  Though I suppose it was foreshadowed by her telling the shrink that what her husband told her she had done never felt like things she do.   I kind of wish they had done something a little less cliched than Tom screwing the nanny though and the reason for her being killed was that she was pregnant (which I assume is a flaw of the book as well so it hard to blame the film for being faithful to the book).  I'm sure there could have been a slightly more original reason to have him kill her, but Justin Theroux was very menacing at the end and the murder scene was really disturbing.  But there were some other little things I really liked about the movie, like Lisa Kudrow's character being really nice to Rachel on the train.  You just assume (or at least I did) that she's going to be this rich nasty bitch who's going to be really nasty when Rachel goes to talk to her.  It was oddly refreshing that seemed like a really nice normal person.

[Yokosmom]

I haven't read the book either and I enjoyed the film, though thought that it dragged a little in the middle section.  I'm not sure why it is getting such bad reviews. Realized that the killer was Tom about 2/3 of the way through, because really, who else was left at that point?

Quote

 I did like the twist (or should say I was surprised by the twist) that Tom was gas-lighting Rachel about her behavior while she was drinking.

Me too.  That was the biggest surprise of the film for me. 

Quote

 and the reason for her being killed was that she was pregnant (which I assume is a flaw of the book as well so it hard to blame the film for being faithful to the book).

Calling him impotent didn't help her much either.  By the way, she was incredibly foolish to take her married lover into a secluded spot and drop that on him--that's what crowded, noisy cafes are for.

Quote

Anna is a sociopath and I don't think this was clear in the movie.  

It wasn't clear at all--her behavior made no sense to me.  I guess that I could see her ditching Megan's phone because she wanted to preserve the marriage and what looked to be a great lifestyle.  I thought at the end that she wouldn't help Rachel.  She didn't do anything until Rachel was outside and it was obvious that the jig was up.

Also, book readers--was the father of Megan's first baby her own brother?  I was confused on that point.  I think that I'm going to have to read the book now...

Edited October 11, 2016 by Yokosmom

[partofme]

Quote

 

Edited October 13, 2016 by partofme

[Athena]

I read the book earlier this year. The father of Megan's first baby was not her brother, but another guy who basically left her. The whole sequence in that part of the book makes me think Megan was using drugs around that time and had isolated herself (or her partner isolated them). I was not a fan of the book, but I think I will watch the movie if only for the acting.

[dusang]

6 hours ago, Yokosmom said:

Also, book readers--was the father of Megan's first baby her own brother?  I was confused on that point.  I think that I'm going to have to read the book now...

 

14 minutes ago, partofme said:

No the father was another guy, I don't remember if he was her brother's friend, I think he was older and I think he abandoned her with no way to get help months before the baby died, I'm a bit confused on how that would be possible, I feel like it's time to read the book again.

I haven't read the book but in the movie she said it was "Mac, my brother's best friend.  My brother who died."  She and Mac lived in a hunting cabin in the woods for a year, where no one knew where they were, "everyone thought they were dead." After she accidentally killed the baby, Mac helped her bury the body and then left and never came back.  It's never explained in the movie why or how she and Mac came to be living off the grid like that or how she got back on the grid and married to Scott.

As others have noted, Emily Blunt played drunk exceptionally well.  I was also impressed with Luke Evans, I'm not sure why maybe just because I've never seen him in a non-action film.

Edited October 11, 2016 by dusang

[Sweet Tee]

Quote

Anna is a sociopath and I don't think this was clear in the movie.

No, it wasn't.  I haven't read the book and I couldn't get a good read on Anna.  She seemed normal through most of it but she later showed a really cruel side.  Telling Tom that she enjoyed being the other woman and lying to him about Rachel getting aggressive with her.  At the end, I wasn't sure if she would back Rachel or not. 

 

I liked the movie overall.  It was solid.  I'm surprised the reviews are so bad.  Yeah, I don't think it's as good as Gone Girl but it was a fun way to spend two hours.  Agreed with others that Emily Blunt was fantastic.

 

Quote

 By the way, she was incredibly foolish to take her married lover into a secluded spot and drop that on him--that's what crowded, noisy cafes are for.

Exactly.  Maybe I'm too paranoid, but I don't think I would have even told him that the kid was probably his.  No way was he going to take that well.  And I certainly wouldn't have asked him to take me to the woods.

[Silver Raven]

On 10/11/2016 at 1:21 PM, Athena said:

I read the book earlier this year. The father of Megan's first baby was not her brother, but another guy who basically left her. The whole sequence in that part of the book makes me think Megan was using drugs around that time and had isolated herself (or her partner isolated them). I was not a fan of the book, but I think I will watch the movie if only for the acting.

I thought the father of her first child was her brother's friend, that she was living with in the cabin? What did I miss?

Why did Edgar Ramirez's character, whose name sounded Arabic, speak to Megan in Spanish?

[wanderingstar]

I read and really loved the book - not so much for the mystery, but for the character study. The movie is a solid adaptation, though it skimped on the character study part. Emily Blunt was perfect casting for Rachel. She did a great job capturing the character's sadness and loneliness. And as others have said, she played drunk really well. 

The rest of the cast was fine, though only Justin Theroux really stood out to me. He was actually quite scary.

I thought I would hate it, but I actually didn't mind the addition of Lisa Kudrow's character. She was a nice presence who helped move the plot along.

I do wish they had kept the setting from the book.

[Empress1]

On 10/8/2016 at 8:09 PM, Spartan Girl said:

Emily Blunt was definitely the best part of the movie. For all the crap her casting got for being prettier than the "dumpy" Rachel described in the book, she definitely went all out in portraying the absolute ugly side of alcoholism. The scene with her hunkered down on the sidewalk, sipping her "water" bottle was powerfully pathetic.

Yeah, the twist that her ex husband not only was the killer, but had been gaslighting her drunk blackouts for the whole marriage should have been obvious. I'm ashamed to admit I didn't figure it out until it was revealed that he was sleeping with Megan. That made me realize that this and Gone Girl really are just prettier, well-acted/written Lifetime movies.

Still, the scene of Megan's murder was so disturbing...and then Tom getting stabbed in the neck with the bottle opener? Nightmares forever. I'm just glad we were spared the sight of the drowned baby.

Also am I the only one that thinks Megan/Haley Bennet looks a lot like Jennifer Lawrence?

I read the book for my book club and I described it as a Lifetime movie. (My book club, myself included, was pretty meh on the book. One person hated it.) I figured out the twist in the book too.

On 10/13/2016 at 0:25 AM, Silver Raven said:

I thought the father of her first child was her brother's friend, that she was living with in the cabin? What did I miss?

Why did Edgar Ramirez's character, whose name sounded Arabic, speak to Megan in Spanish?

Nothing, that's what happened. She lived with Mac, her brother's best friend, for a year when she was 17-18. She had, and accidentally killed, a baby with him. He left her afterward.

No idea why they kept Dr. Abdik's name but had him speak Spanish - and then backed away from explaining that when Rachel asked where he was from. Weird.

In the book Rachel actually does sleep with Scott; they have a sloppy encounter. I was glad to lose that. Lisa Kudrow isn't in the book but I get adding her; she's how Rachel figures out Tom's been gaslighting her.

Emily Blunt is the standout, but I didn't think this was a good movie. It meandered. Because I knew whodunnit, it felt like it took forever to get there. I also thought the actress who played Anna was pretty mediocre, and some of the dialogue was terrible.

Edited October 17, 2016 by Empress1

[tinaw]

I just saw this movie and thought it was excellent. Emily Blunt was great. Very believable.

I didn't read this book and was surprised to read that Anna was a sociopath. After seeing this movie I would say Megan was the sociopath

I didn't think the husband was gas lighting Rachel's blackouts and why he left her. I was hoping Anna would tell the truth as well

I was glad when they showed Rachel at the end in a happier state. She looked great

[choclatechip45]

I saw the movie and didn't read the book. I really enjoyed it. Most people at my job didn't like the movie. I would have never guessed Anna was a sociopath in the book. 

[wanderingstar]

My one disappointment with this adaptation was how it took away most of Megan's characterization and backstory, specifically,

Spoiler

the fact that she and Mac were drug addicts, and she was high at the time her baby drowned.

They did a similar thing with Anna, who was a lot more vicious and vindictive toward Rachel in the book.

[cpcathy]

I enjoyed it, but for a long time I wondered why it was in fragments, why the narrative was hazy. I really felt for Rachel, her pain seemed very real. I suppose being a female alcoholic is like being a non-entity in this world.

And I couldn't help thinking that Megan looked exactly like Jennifer Lawrence, it was really offputting. We need two Jennifer Lawrences now?

[AimingforYoko]

10 hours ago, cpcathy said:

We need two Jennifer Lawrences now?

Director to Casting Director: "Get me Jennifer Lawrence!" 

CD: "You can't afford her."

Director: "Then get me Haley Bennett!"

[Ms Blue Jay]

I'm so happy to read all of the positiveness in this thread!  I tried to bring up these points in the Oscar thread and was brutally rebuffed. LOL.  Anyways, I'm excited to read all of your thoughts further.  I loved the movie.  I LOVED the book, 5/5, and loved the movie 4/5.  I agree that Emily Blunt was Oscar-worthy.

I also thought Haley was great.  I'm very affected by her and Emily's performances. I keep thinking about Haley long after the film.

Superficial changes from book to movie:

They cast a Venezuelan actor to play what was obviously a Middle Eastern man, Dr. Kamal Abdic.  Now this really bothered me, because casting people in America treat minorities as interchangeable.  His name was still the same after casting someone Venezuelan.  The Martian did this too by casting a black actor to play someone East Indian, while also keeping the same character name.

Emily Blunt is obviously very thin - like, "I work out with Tom Cruise" FIT! - but Rachel in the book is a chubby alcoholic.  Obviously this change bothered me.  Hollywood doesn't want to look at chubby women, or Middle Eastern faces, that's how I felt...  My joke is always, when I was drinking a lot, I certainly never looked like Emily fucking Blunt.

The book was changed setting-wise from England to Manhattan.  Now I'd imagine this might bother some people.  Very funny that they kept Rachel as being British but made everyone else American!  The only British person in the film is a drunk!  LOL, goodness.  This didn't really bother me so much but I'd totally get if others were put off by it.  It was strange.  Good thing they kept Bridget Jones in England!!

Quote

Lisa Kudrow isn't in the book but I get adding her; she's how Rachel figures out Tom's been gaslighting her.

I also get the addition.  I didn't mind it.  And as a Friends fan I was really tickled by her appearance.  I'm only now just putting together that Justin Theroux's wife = Jennifer Aniston whom I hope is still very friendly with Lisa Kudrow.

Edited October 30, 2016 by Ms Blue Jay

[Ms Blue Jay]

On 10/9/2016 at 8:24 PM, thuganomics85 said:

Overall, I didn't love it, but it was an entertaining enough film to kill for two hours.  I do think it always had an uphill battle, due to the Gone Girl comparisons, but I did think Tate Taylor was probably not the right choice for this.  His directing wasn't horrible, but it felt kind of cold and lacked intensity that more experienced directors would have probably brought (like, well, David Fincher.)

As a fan of both books, though, I was much more a fan of Tate Taylor's adaptation than David Fincher's.  Watching The Girl on the Train I was just so SATISFIED.  That's exactly how I'd want the movie to be.  Fincher's vision was so, so completely different from mine, as a reader.  I'm no fan of that film.  And I like Fincher usually.  And of course, critics disagree very strongly with me on this, so it's confusing.  Loving both books gives me a strong bias.

On 10/13/2016 at 0:25 AM, Silver Raven said:

Why did Edgar Ramirez's character, whose name sounded Arabic, speak to Megan in Spanish?

Casting stupidity, that's why!!!

[Silver Raven]

6 hours ago, AimingforYoko said:

Director to Casting Director: "Get me Jennifer Lawrence!" 

CD: "You can't afford her."

Director: "Then get me Haley Bennett!"

I read somewhere before the movie came out that a lot of people had been recommending Haley Bennett for the role.

[Empress1]

1 hour ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

Superficial changes from book to movie:

They cast a Venezuelan actor to play what was obviously a Middle Eastern man, Dr. Kamal Abdic.  Now this really bothered me, because casting people in America treat minorities as interchangeable.  His name was still the same after casting someone Venezuelan.  The Martian did this too by casting a black actor to play someone East Indian, while also keeping the same character name.

Emily Blunt is obviously very thin - like, "I work out with Tom Cruise" FIT! - but Rachel in the book is a chubby alcoholic.  Obviously this change bothered me.  Hollywood doesn't want to look at chubby women, or Middle Eastern faces, that's how I felt...  My joke is always, when I was drinking a lot, I certainly never looked like Emily fucking Blunt.

The book was changed setting-wise from England to Manhattan.  Now I'd imagine this might bother some people.  Very funny that they kept Rachel as being British but made everyone else American!  The only British person in the film is a drunk!  LOL, goodness.  This didn't really bother me so much but I'd totally get if others were put off by it.  It was strange.  Good thing they kept Bridget Jones in England!!

I saw an interview with Emily Blunt and she said she offered to do an American accent when they changed the location, but they said no - they thought Rachel being British in America would add to how isolated she was. A lot was made of how attractive Emily Blunt is when she was cast because Book Rachel is chubby and sloppy (there are a couple of bodily fluid scenes in the book; she was a really messy drunk), and Emily Blunt is neither.

Why they didn't just make Dr. Abdik Dr. Silva or something, I do not know. Very sloppy.

[tongueincheek]

1 hour ago, Silver Raven said:

I read somewhere before the movie came out that a lot of people had been recommending Haley Bennett for the role.

Yep, I recall reading/hearing from multiple references that something like 2 directors, a costume designer who was working with Tate Taylor on another project, and Emily Blunt (they have the same stylist) herself all recommended Haley for Megan. 

I had read the book first and was completely underwhelmed by the twist reveal. Now having seen the film, I've concluded (I'm sure this is obvious) that the book itself -- with the way it's structured -- was just very challenging to adapt in a cinematic way. The filmed lacked the "thriller" aspect because it spent so much time in exposition, and yet I still feel like I wanted more character insight, especially since they really left out so much of Megan's and Anna's backstories (understandably, but still). A poorly adapted script made for choppy editing. Still, it's not the worst movie I've seen. The performances here really salvaged it, and were worth the price of admission, namely Emily Blunt and Haley Bennett. Emily alway's been wonderful to me, so I'm not surprised she turned in such an excellent showing (much more than the material deserved). And I've been rooting for Haley Bennett for a good decade now, as I've always seen the potential there. She was enigmatic and alluring here. It's a tough role quite thankless role. Rebecca Ferguson got the short end of the stick here, her talents completely wasted on what should've been a much more complicated role. 

Edited October 30, 2016 by tongueincheek

[wanderingstar]

Quote

They cast a Venezuelan actor to play what was obviously a Middle Eastern man, Dr. Kamal Abdic.  Now this really bothered me, because casting people in America treat minorities as interchangeable.  His name was still the same after casting someone Venezuelan.  The Martian did this too by casting a black actor to play someone East Indian, while also keeping the same character name.

Yeah - this was irritating, and unnecessary. If they wanted to cast Ramirez, why didn't they just change the character's name? They could also have just cast a Middle Eastern actor, or they could have cast an actor of Bosnian descent. That's the character's ethnic background in the book.

Edited October 31, 2016 by Gillian Rosh

[Ms Blue Jay]

Hmm, Thanks.  I thought Abdic's ethnicity was never revealed in the book; I did not remember him to be Bosnian.  I tried to Google but couldn't come up with anything.  

Edited October 31, 2016 by Ms Blue Jay

[Athena]

8 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

Hmm, Thanks.  I thought Abdic's ethnicity was never revealed in the book; I did not remember him to be Bosnian.  I tried to Google but couldn't come up with anything.  

I still have the ebook and Scott is the one who explains it:

 

Quote

‘I think …’ he said, opening the machine and turning it on, ‘I think I might …’ He fell silent and I watched him, his face a picture of concentration, the muscle in his jaw locked. ‘Megan was seeing a therapist,’ he told me. ‘His name is … Abdic. Kamal Abdic. He’s not Asian, he’s from Serbia, or Bosnia, somewhere like that. He’s dark-skinned though. He could pass for Indian from a distance.’ He tapped away at the computer. ‘There’s a website, I think. I’m sure there is. I think there’s a picture …’

[Ms Blue Jay]

Thanks Athena.  "Dark-skinned".  They could have cast actors that fit the descriptions better but that was obviously not a priority for this film.  I think Emily did a fantastic job, honestly, I just wish she wasn't so damn fit ;)

Edited October 31, 2016 by Ms Blue Jay

[cpcathy]

Emily Blunt was pregnant during filming, so I don't know if that made her chubby enough. I didn't read the book, but I thought her makeup (or lack thereof) was so well done that I saw her as isolated and lonely and a total mess.

[Janc]

Just saw the movie last weekend, didn't read the book ... so what was the 'flashback' that Rachel kept having about walking into a kitchen and creeping up on a blonde sitting on a stool, and pulling her back by the hair and she crashes on the floor?  A false memory? Something she actually did to Anna? Whaaaat? 

[Ms Blue Jay]

Yes, a false memory.  Rachel had convinced herself that when she drinks, she blacks out, and can be violent - because her ex-husband had convinced her of that.

So when Megan went missing, I think she had convinced herself she had gone to Megan's house and been violent with her, and that she herself was the culprit in Megan's disappearance.

I think it was Megan in that false memory, not Anna.  Correct me if I'm wrong.

[turbogirlnyc]

Can't decide if I liked the movie or book better. Maybe I was underwhelmed by both equally. Read the book first & thought the movie might be better but meh. I liked the addition of Lisa Kudrow's character or at least that character being more than a memory. Emily Blunt was good. Haley Atwell was alright though she didn't have much to with. Rebecca Ferguson's talent was sadly wasted in her role.

Any comparison to Gone Girl is beyond me. Gone Girl blew TGOTT out of the water in both mediums.

[AimingforYoko]

18 hours ago, turbogirlnyc said:

Haley Atwell was alright

Bennett. Haley Atwell is luminous, but a bit old for Megan.

[turbogirlnyc]

On 11/17/2016 at 3:58 PM, AimingforYoko said:

Bennett. Haley Atwell is luminous, but a bit old for Megan.

My mistake. And yes, I agree.

[BitterApple]

On 10/31/2016 at 2:30 PM, cpcathy said:

 I didn't read the book, but I thought her makeup (or lack thereof) was so well done that I saw her as isolated and lonely and a total mess.

I did as well. She truly looked like a ravaged alcoholic hitting rock bottom. 

[Chaos Theory]

Didn't read the book but I thought the movie was a good thriller/mystery.  I liked the idea of Rachel being an unreliable lead and you were never quite sure if she was guilty or not.  The actual murderer was a little boring but I  not sure if I am disappointed or not.   A little anticlimactic but still a good movie.

[ketchuplover]

On 10/8/2016 at 10:04 PM, AimingforYoko said:

Emily Blunt nailed the drunk scenes. Most actors' instinct is to overact, something she resisted.

It was a little confusing, with Rachel being the most unreliable narrator since Verbal Kint, but it was pretty obvious that Tom was the culprit. But I also did not guess that Tom was gaslighting her. For what purpose? He just could've dumped her if he was unhappy with her being a sad drunk. I also was glad Anna backed up her story, I almost thought she would throw Rachel under the bus.

or under the train.   Emily Blunt should just play the full metal bitch in all her movies.

Edited March 5, 2017 by ketchuplover