The Girl On The Train

I watched this movie last night, and mostly liked it … to the point of sitting down and trying to determine the storyform afterwards. But then I checked the reviews and found they generally weren’t very good, which I was surprised at; I tend to be pretty critical of movies. Maybe the book was stronger and because I was watching it with my wife (who read the book), something of the book somehow rubbed off on me?

There was definitely something not quite right, I think it lacked some of the RS throughline and the IC hand-offs (if I’m seeing IC throughline right) were a bit messy.

Has anyone else seen it? What did you think? I was wanting to discuss the MC Resolve which I found rather interesting, because the MC Rachael has a big revelation moment that is super important and changes everything for her – yet I still feel like she’s a Steadfast character.

I haven’t seen the movie because I honestly didn’t think much of the book. The genre is (mostly) up my alley, but if I remember correctly, the overwhelming majority of the book was written in first-person between two characters and it just became a tedious reading exercise. I may get around to watching it as I’ve pretty much expunged the majority of the story from my head already, but wouldn’t be surprised if I didn’t care for it.

I read the book, but also didn’t think too much of it. The movie changes a couple details of the book, but nothing groundbreaking. I found the movie to be incredibly unengaging, though. Emily Blunt was great, but the rest was kinda bleh. I don’t think there’s a clear-cut storyform because certain elements are far too vague and it keeps switching perspective.

Her resolve is a challenge, but from what I remember (it’s been a few months) I think she’s a change character. She starts as an alcoholic mess whose life is crumbling after a divorce and ends as a sober woman getting her life together and moving on. That seems like a concrete change to me.

Interestingly, if the revelation moment you mentioned is what I’m thinking of, I remember it as a really unsubtle IC moment. IC signpost of Memories, I’d imagine. “I’m really sorry about that thing I did.” “Don’t you remember?”

Thanks guys. I think you’re both probably right … I was probably “giving” the movie a lot. I tend to do that when I have low expectations!

For the revelation, I was thinking of when her ex-husband’s old employer explained to her that she wasn’t the reason he was fired, she never went on a tirade etc. I actually thought that the MC Concern was Memories (and I think in the storyform I picked, Signpost 3 came out as Memories too, which could’ve fit). But yeah, at least in the film, her blackouts were a HUGE source of conflict for her.

I thought the IC was a combination of the girl who was killed (Meagan?) and Anna, the ex-husband’s new wife. Meagan’s concern of the Past with her dead baby was obvious, and both kind of influenced the MC in the area of her past life, past relationship. Anna’s concern of the Past had to do with the fact that the ex-husband wasn’t faithful before… one of her lines was even like “now that I’m the wife, I miss being the mistress”.

I think that was what I liked about the film – I wouldn’t say it was great, but I was left with the idea that the influence from the IC throughline was kind of cool, hardly any kind of argument or interaction between MC and IC other than “get away from my baby”, but you could see how it worked. Well, mostly. :slight_smile:

That said, I have NO IDEA when the story actually starts and what’s backstory. That part of it was definitely messy. Is the First Driver when Rachael sees Meagan with her other lover, the therapist? If so, all the stuff months in the past is not any signposts, just backstory, and a lot of the films scenes’ were in that backstory. Perhaps that could explain the story’s issues, that so much of its time was devoted to backstory?

That’s the revelation I thought you were talking about. That felt like a huge, blatant Memories signpost to me. It was a clear IC hand-off, but it was like Lisa Kudrow existed just to scream “DON’T YOU REMEMBER THIS?!” at her and influence her to think back in her memories.

I just can’t see Rachel being a Fixed Attitude character. She’s a serious drunk, separated from her husband that’s blacking out constantly. That’s her problem alone, but it screams situation to me.

The memory loss thing comes under the umbrella of the OS, I think. It’s the thing that drags her into the Overall Story – she can’t remember anything, so she becomes a suspect.

Whereas her pain about her separation from her husband is hers alone, and is the thing that drives her to the drink and destructive lifestyle.

That’s a great point, and I think it backs up the broken storyform. They absolutely wanted the ICs to force Rachel to see the life she ruined. But none of it really adds up in the end. I can’t remember enough to make an argument, though.

That’s what I said the minute I left the theater. It felt like there wasn’t a lot of story because we were recapping so much backstory. It was no Gone Girl.

That’s funny, I hated Gone Girl … 2.5 hours of my life I want back!

I saw Rachael’s fixation with her old house, the nearby “perfect” couple, and her ex-husband’s baby as all part of her Fixed Attitude (MC Throughline). She was stuck on those things, unable to move on, unable to stop staring out the train window … as though she sensed something wasn’t quite right. That fixation drove her to alcoholism, but in the end she was proven right; she had a good reason for her fixation.

See, sometimes with a fixation you actually shouldn’t move on, you need to figure out what’s bugging you first. That’s why I saw her Resolve as Steadfast, I guess … her perspective on things didn’t change, it’s just that she was finally able to fix what was bugging her. The ending that showed her still on a train, looking out the window (but now looking forward) was a good illustration of this, which I felt showed Growth rather than Change.

Meanwhile, Anna being the Change character was shown when she admitted to finding the cell phone, then later twisted the corkscrew into the husband’s neck, and finally backed up Rachael’s story with the police. She gave up trying to keep up the appearance of a perfect life and embraced Rachael’s perspective that there was something very wrong that needed addressing.

I wasn’t crazy about Gone Girl, either, but I liked it a little more. Slightly. Not a lot.

I can’t remember enough about the movie to provide an alternate argument, honestly. I just thought it was a little too muddled and light on actual narrative to have a solid storyform.

Does this count as a Steadfast character? I thought the Change characters fixed what bugged them (e.g. Elliott and his father issues), and the Steadfast characters continued on more-or-less the same path they began. Or am I looking at it too black-and-white? I have a tendency of doing that.

1 Like

The Resolve is specifically about whether they change their perspective, i.e. the perspective or world-view they have that relates to their personal issues. Oh, and I guess it also determines whether they adopt their Solution (which sort of goes hand-in-hand with changing perspective). Whether they actually fix things has more to do with Judgment.

The reason I brought up Rachael’s “fixing” things was that it sort of appears like it’s showing Resolve of Change, because she is able to go from alcoholic to sober etc. But I think that is actually showing the Judgment of Good as a result of her remaining Steadfast. I think so anyway.

Thanks for the discussion! (especially since you didn’t care for the film much!)

1 Like

I never really thought of it like that! I think this movie’s a tough one because so much of it is backstory (and just stuff thrown in to confuse the audience) that it’s near impossible to actually get a grasp on what is happening in regards to the actual story. I’d bet if you cut all the backstory and just stuck with the actual storytelling, you’d get maybe a fifty, fifty-five minute movie. And I think that’s all down to the book, which is obviously a medium in which you can get away with a little more backstory. I don’t know. I was hoping for a Hitchcock-esque throwback movie.

I also bet that the reason I didn’t care so much was that I’d read the book, so knew how it ended. Same with Gone Girl. The journey’s not so fun when you know the destination.

Man, these discussion boards are awesome.

Right back at ya, buddy!