Girl on the Train

Unfortunately there are 4 movies with this same title, all produced between 2009 - 2016, so before you watch this movie, make sure you are seeing the right one. At the time that I am writing this review there are only 10 prior reviews, with an average of just 4.5 stars out of 10. I almost didn't watch this movie because of its low overall score but I'm very glad that I did because it turns out that this suspense/mystery/love film is at least 9 stars. Compared to the usual mystery movie it is a big breath of fresh air. The dialog is very thoughtful, in most places philosophical, with the characters discussing the relationship of love to stories and of story-telling to reality (and much more). After so many mystery movies with standard dialogs and plots, this film is very refreshing.

The movie involves several parallel stories, with each addressing the nature of the role of deceit and love in life. For example, an elderly Jewish man tells of his experiences in Nazi Germany while interviewed by the hero (a film-maker named Danny Hart, played very aptly by Henry Ian Cusick). In parallel, Danny himself is being interviewed by someone else (I won't say who) and tells his own story of meeting a young woman on a train. Each character, in turn, tells their own stories about yet other characters.

There are so many twists and turns in the plot that I was reminded of The Magus. At the end of the movie I spent quite some time thinking about the statements made by the characters and about the film's conclusion, which in general is the sign of a very good movie -- like reading a short story by Somerset Maugham.

The movie's plot structure might be too difficult for the average viewer but will be thoroughly enjoyed by those who like a complex, thoughtful, intriguing movies regarding good, evil, love, betrayal, truth, art, reality -- for them this movie will deliver an unique experience (like Wood Allen's 1989 movie Crimes and Misdemeanors).

I normally don't review movies but I felt that this movie deserved a much higher rating. I will not give it a 10 just to raise it's rating. I believe it deserves a score of 9. The reason that it is not a 10 (at least for me) is something I cannot discuss here because I don't want to include any spoilers.

I think that a movie of this caliber (although shot in just 17 days) deserves a much wider audience. I have no connection of any sort to anyone involved in the making of this movie.

The plot in this one is a little disjointed and by the end you are wondering what the heck is going on, but it seems to wrap everything up kind of neat. The relationship between Danny and Lexi is confusing and unclear as you are only clued in by his conversation with the detective. Danny and Lexi's conversations are mostly soliloquies, nothing you would hear normal people discuss. Sounds more like they memorized lengthy passages of a thought-provoking novel and repeated them back and forth to one another throughout the movie.

The cinematography and music are very well done. The acting was good, but really not as horrible as some people have reported. I think the relationship between Danny and Lexi could have been fleshed out more. They never even get to a point where they get uncomfortably close to each other, so you wonder why he spent so much energy pursuing her if there is no emotional energy created at some point. It all seems suspiciously platonic, but the why is never clear. Again, the end clears thing up a little in this respect.

Like I said, in the end the confusion is cleared up, but you are left wondering why you were even confused to begin with. You should have enough information to be uncomfortable with what you don't know, not confused wondering what you might have missed, only to find out you didn't miss anything at all.

So see it and make up your own mind. It's a good story regardless.

Henry Ian Cusick plays Danny who is an Englishman making documentaries in the US. One day he sees a girl on a train who has been crying. He is strangely drawn to her and decides to act on his impulses. She is enigmatic and mysterious and he finds himself wanting to see her again.

Then they do meet and she uses her feminine ways to get him to act out of character and take him down a path that once he has set foot on it, there is no turning back.

Now this is a well written, filmed and acted film. There is a lot of clever observations on life and some real chemistry between the main players. The film works by using flash backs to flesh out what has already transpired and it is done rather well. The problem is that it is all a bit too contrived and unbelievable and the dénouement is just a bit too much to be taken seriously so it loses marks big time.

I came to this film on Amazon thinking I was going to see the 2016 movie by the same name. I must read the captions more closely. If I had I would have avoided what turned out to be a juvenile essay on the meaning of love and life.

When i was 17 or so. after being in love four or five times, and reading too much Sartre in between, I wrote several short stories about love and life filled with overwrought observations that didn't wear well with time. My Dad, a writer, tried to be kind. Save them because they will tell you who you were then and believe me you'll forget, he said. And while they're not very good they do have the virtue of being sincere.

Precisely what this film lacks; instead its gratuitous world-weariness is simply cynical. My juvenile efforts may have been sincere but they didn't ring true because I lacked experience.The author of this film seems to suffer the same deficiency - he fantasizes instead of seeing , thinking, and observing. Which is strange; you'd think someone who is experienced enough to make a technically proficient two hour movie would have moved beyond juvenile fantasies about these potent subjects. Alas, not so in the 2013 version of The Girl on A Train. Do yourself a favor and wait for the 2016 movie by the same name which by all accounts is pretty good.

Wow, this film is in love with itself. Another reviewer described it as having flatulent dialogue, and quite frankly, I can't think of a better way to describe the film as a whole.

The first hour is literally just 3 or so people pontificating about love and the ideal dream versus reality and slow evolving the plot (if you can call it a plot). Then there's a brief flash of action, and even more pontificating about the inevitable and painfully obvious conclusion. I'm sure its supposed to be intellectual and insightful but ultimately its just a dressed up airport romance novel. The acting is OK; the direction passable; the premise is as tired and unoriginal as it is interesting; the script is big lumbering mammoth that bores you to the point of wanting to rip off your own arm and beat yourself to death with it; and it certainly does't deserve its sense of superiority.

I cannot see anything redeemable about this pretentious pile of crap. Don't bother wasting the hour and 20 minutes; You can get the same amount of blistering insight in to love and perception in a far, far, shorter time - via one episode of the Vampire Diaries... And at least that will give yo a laugh! This is so bad its not even funny.