Film No. 60 (2016) October 5th. 6.30 PM Greater Union Event Cinema, Innaloo.
"I don't remember, there's some time missing" (Rachel (Emily Blunt) explains where she was in the hours a woman goes missing).
The book of the same name by Paula Hawkings is a rollicking good read. A film of this popular book was inevitable and in the vein of Gone Girl, The Girl On The Train is a clever re-interpretation of the novel. I say clever because sociologically women read more than men and they are also more prolific film goers. This combination fits nicely with producers, so long as the film stays true to the narrative and has a uniquely shot surreal quality, audiences will flock.
The first adjustment for those who loved the book will be adapting your images of the passing English scenery on the train trips to London. Tate Taylor's version is shot in leafy North Eastern U.S. This may be off-putting for some. Next is the casting of Emily Blunt as the dowdy Rachael. Blunt does a good job of playing an alcohol dependent misfit struggling with life through intoxicated perceptions of reality. The extended close-ups and slow-mo visuals capture some of the essence of the liquid prose of Hawking's novel.
The Girl on the Train is a closed circuit when it comes to characters and location. Basically there is Rachel, her ex, Tom (Justin Theroux), his new wife Anna, their nanny Megan (Haley Bennett) and her partner Scott (Luke Evans) playing out their lives in their abodes adjacent to the all important train-line. Hitchcock was the master of these packaged narratives; this film has a little of Rear Window about it. Unfortunately Tate can't tighten the grip of tension needed in the all important final stanza to make the film as memorable as the book.
It is inevitable that there will be comparisons when it comes to the retelling of a book on the screen, especially when the genre of choice is the thriller. That is always the risk taken by production houses. The Girl on the Train is a serviceable redepiction. It is not as thrilling as it could be, Gone Girl is a far more tense film. There I go again, comparing. My image of Rachel in the book comes close to Blunt's wide-eyed work. Generally though, I have reservations but I doubt my view will affect the Box Office. 7GUMS.
The first adjustment for those who loved the book will be adapting your images of the passing English scenery on the train trips to London. Tate Taylor's version is shot in leafy North Eastern U.S. This may be off-putting for some. Next is the casting of Emily Blunt as the dowdy Rachael. Blunt does a good job of playing an alcohol dependent misfit struggling with life through intoxicated perceptions of reality. The extended close-ups and slow-mo visuals capture some of the essence of the liquid prose of Hawking's novel.
The Girl on the Train is a closed circuit when it comes to characters and location. Basically there is Rachel, her ex, Tom (Justin Theroux), his new wife Anna, their nanny Megan (Haley Bennett) and her partner Scott (Luke Evans) playing out their lives in their abodes adjacent to the all important train-line. Hitchcock was the master of these packaged narratives; this film has a little of Rear Window about it. Unfortunately Tate can't tighten the grip of tension needed in the all important final stanza to make the film as memorable as the book.
It is inevitable that there will be comparisons when it comes to the retelling of a book on the screen, especially when the genre of choice is the thriller. That is always the risk taken by production houses. The Girl on the Train is a serviceable redepiction. It is not as thrilling as it could be, Gone Girl is a far more tense film. There I go again, comparing. My image of Rachel in the book comes close to Blunt's wide-eyed work. Generally though, I have reservations but I doubt my view will affect the Box Office. 7GUMS.
No comments:
Post a Comment