The Girl On The Train
Thanks to extremely high Internet speeds liberating through the household of America, an increasing number of people able to telecommute, work from the comfort of their homes. Still, the traditional forms of commuting to work still exist and for many getting to work require a substantial time in a car or a commuter train. It is just common experience, particularly the latter mode of transportation that provides the basis for the consideration here, ‘The Girl on the Train Capital.' The foundation for the source material used in the script was the freshman novel of the same name by Paula Hawkins. Taking on the responsibility of bringing this story from pages of the screen was a relatively new screenwriter, Erin Cressida Wilson and helmed by another talent in the early stages of their career director Tate Taylor. This film did not quite live up to its potential, but I always admire filmmakers that are willing to take a risk during that period that they are still establishing their artistic style by taking on a project greater difficulty than they have previously encountered. The advances in technology have gone beyond altering the necessity actually to commute to your workplace. The commuter always fills that monotonous time sitting on a train using any of some standard of ways including reading or perhaps a quick nap. While tablets, Kindles, and laptops have replaced newspapers and paperbacks people still have to find some means to cope with the monotony of his mandatory daily activity. Within the context of the story, the protagonist of the story routinely takes a window seat so as to watch the neighborhoods go by as she travels to work. There’s nothing at all unusual about her imagining what goes on in the house and she passes on such a regular basis, held the people who live there deal with their lives. This film is a solid history serves as a platform for some excellent performances only marred by a few technical missteps that more the "effectiveness of movie.
In a tradition set by mystery and film noir movies of the 30s and 40s the story opens with a voiceover narrative by the main character, Rachel Watson (Emily Blunt). I found this to be a very familiar touch, one that efficiently sets the tone of the story by invoking memories of mystery and thrillers I’ve enjoyed throughout my life. This introduction to her character is crucial to help the rest of the movie will be perceived. Ms. Blunt has undertaken the arduous task of playing a character with some personality traits that many would consider negatives. To its credit, the movie unfolds her back story and a well-paced fashion; quick enough to bring the audience up to speed early in the movie get a sufficient loving time for the audience to come to know our character on an emotional level. Rachel has recently divorced her husband, her husband, Tom Watson (Justin Theroux), after catching him cheating with a real estate agent space real estate agent, Anna Boyd (Rebecca Ferguson). This damage left this young woman psychologically damaged and emotionally raw state of mind that you addressed by self-medicating with alcohol. Drinking problem has become so severe that on several occasions she has blacked out only to engage in self-destructive behavior that cannot recall after she sobers up.
Having left the family home after the separation, Richard has taken an apartment sharing the expenses with her friend, Cathy (Laura Prepon). To fill the hours that Rachel spends commuting on the train the mind fixated on her ex-husband and his new family. Rachel has begun to stalk Tom, Anna, and their newborn daughter Evie and making her trip she obsesses over the young couple that on neighbors to her ex, Scott (Luke Evans) and Megan Hipwell (Haley Bennett). In Rachel’s mind, Scott and Megan represent the perfect married couple, that unattainable ideal that she and Tom fell so dismally short of achieving. The truth of their relationship is the opposite of that fantasy. Scott is highly belligerent with the need to control everything and everyone around him. Megan has rebelled against this by remaining distant and detached, almost pathologically unable to tell the truth compulsively addicted to sex. There is a problem inherent in a person’s belief in such a fantasy as a perfect relationship. It inevitably fails at some point forcing the observer to realize the stark reality of imperfection. Much of the exposition for providing these critical details is related in a rather natural format, details revealed during therapy sessions with therapy sessions with Megan’s therapist, Dr. Kamal Abdic (Édgar Ramírez). The pivotal moment rents a fantasy smashed occur when Rachel, looking out the train’s window watches a passionate kiss between Megan and Dr. Abdic.
The reason why this particular family is so engrossing to Rachel that the home shared by Scott and Megan was only a few doors away from the house she lived with Tom during happier days. The method of handling the psychological implications of the proximity of the house very heavy-handed fashion. The house shared by the idealized couple was so close to the one where own marriage disintegrated. There is a vast difference between the use of psychological motivations to provide nuances to a firmly established plot and permitting them to become integral to the main driving forces of the story. Great care is to be observed to prevent them from becoming so obtuse that the narrative becomes tangled in its plot twists, providing directors and screenwriters still on the learning curve an opportunity to miss the mark. The overall effectiveness of the film does remain entertaining, and afterward, I did have the distinct impression that the potential of the writer and director is not yet begun to find their voices. The efforts here displayed such latent talent that I will be certain to watch their careers as they grow.
Even before I was asked to review this film what caught my attention because of the featured leading lady, Emily Blunt. I have been a fan of Ms. Blunt for some years having first seen her in a poignant independent, coming-of-age film, ‘My Summer of Love.' Playing such an unstable character so early in her career was an accurate indicator of how her significant talent would grow and continue to mature. In the years since that 2004 youthful appearance, Ms. Blunt has undertaken some roles that showcased her ability to master an eclectic range of characters. In some respects, the performance here exceeded the material. Most skillful actors can readily assume written roles with ease, but it takes a unique innate level of ability for me to do so much with the limited amount of details describing the character. The film tries too hard to succeed ranging beyond the obvious influences of such great masses as Alfred Hitchcock is not yet possessing sufficient experience even to attempt to reach this impossible goal. One aspect of the films of Alfred Hitchcock that has not been duplicated to any degree that held this genius filmmaker was able to create a linear storyline interwoven with numerous subplots and character details. These movies were tapestries where each thread consisted of multiple contrasting strands. This will try to accomplish this but instead winds up painting itself into a corner resolution are entirely dependent upon the plot contrivance rather than the natural confluence a previously established point. At the point when the ‘ideal’ wife goes missing, presumed dead, the distinctive identity of the characters has already been trapped by it inescapable quagmire of convoluted story threads. It almost seems to be at the climactic by the time an official investigation is underway led by Detective Sergeant Riley (Allison Janney), becomes fixated on Rachel is the main suspect. The film does make a good popcorn flick to pass the time of a rainy Saturday evening but the shame of it is a could’ve been so much more.