The Girl On The Train

[Lowri]

I've just finished reading “The Girl On The Train” by Paula Hawkins. So I thought I’d try a review,I heard and read a lot of good things about this book and it had good reviews. I thought it was a good read,Didn't quite knowThe Girl on the Trainhow it was going to pan out. My only criticism,I suppose, would be that I found the main character “Rachel” a little annoying at the beginning,Getting drunk,forgetting this and doing things that make you go “Oh FFS”,But maybe that was the point because she was a drunk. I also figured out the questions the reader has (Trying not to spoil anything) like “Is she alive?” “Is she dead?” “Was it her?” “Was it him?” quite early on in the story,It was kinda obvious who it was and wasn't (To me). But other than tha,t this was a good book. If you like thrillers and twist,Give this a read

[Chloe]

I found the Rachel really annoying too! This book was so hyped up I really didn't think it lived up to expectations... Rachel was annoying and I wasn't really bothered or felt sorry for her when Tom (?) was being mean to her about everything.

I couldn't tell what was happening, but I never can!

[Lowri]

Thank god I wasn't they only one who found her annoying.I think your right it didn't live up to they hype. I knew she wasn't the murder it was to obvious to be her (To me anyway). I guessed it was Tom - I think your right quit early on.

[Chloe]

Haha, I knew it wasn't her, she's too 'do I don't I' to be a murderer. I recommended it to a friend who thought it was dragged out leading up to the discovery, then the ending seemed rushed and abrupt! It would probably be an ok read if it wasn't hyped up to be so great - I know with me personally I try to read books that no-ones speaking about so I can actually find my own opinion before getting influenced or expecting too much!

I wouldn't tell someone not to read it, just not to expect too much.

[Lowri]

Yeah I completely agree. I don't normally read thriller books - If that's what you'd call this one. But because alot of people were talking about it and that it was #1 maybe on Amazon I thought I'd read it. Yeah I'd recommend it to people but just be warned the ending is abit.. And that an alcoholic killed him with a corkscrew,I don't know if that's meant to be irony.

[Chloe]

I quite like thriller books, but I don't think I'd call this a thriller to be honest. I felt it lacked a lot of... thrill haha. That's the only reason I heard about it, I check Amazon a lot for books and saw this was #1, so I assumed it must be good. Hah I never thought about that actually, maybe it is supposed to be. I think the author used to write under another name but those books didn't take off very much, romantic comedy. Fair play to her for trying something new, but maybe thriller isn't her genre either.

Saying all this, I'd never be able to write a book anyone would read so!

[Lowri]

No maybe thriller isnt the right word,I'm not sure what you would call it. Oh really,I never knew. Yeah I can't fault her for giving it a go,It wasn't terrible. Ha! No nor me,I couldn't write a book.

[Murrill]

I enjoyed this book. Rachel was annoying, yes, but the author captured the quintessence of alcoholism. Each of the three women had something to offer, but their various character flaws undermined any credibility they might have had: Megan had a dark secret, lied to her husband, and had affairs. Anna was Tom's mistress, and she embellished the record of Rachel's harassment. And then there is poor Rachel: She is a hot mess, desperate for connection, for attention....she lies and manipulates, and she toys in other people's lives. Ironically, the character least deserving of respect--Tom--is the one with enough charm and finesse to demand it. I liked the diary-style of the first 75%, but the up-tempo voice of the ending was startling. I think of this as more psychological drama than thriller.

[Betsy]

I, too, really enjoyed this book, as did my retired teachers' book club.
I didn't find Rachel annoying , although she sure did have her flaws; I actually felt sorry for her: a divorced, unemployed, alcoholic who has totally lost control of her life and who pretends to go to work in London on the train every day = actually pathetic but.... then we learn that so much of what she was told by Tom were lies, he telling her things she did while drunk when he actually did them, he lying about everything.... I actually started rooting for Rachel.
It wasn't until ~ 80% of the book when the killer plays his hand, is discovered for what he really is and.... I had no clue. You guys are much sharper than I for figuring that out early on; I must have missed some very important clues?

[Murrill]

Frustrating might be a better word than annoying regarding Rachel. I was pulling for her, but she kept sabotaging herself. Such is the nature of chronic alcoholism. Her drinking made her vulnerable to Tom (and others), and her self-esteem was so damaged that she did not know how to protect herself.

[Lowri]

I think Frustrating is actually a much better word to use actually. Some times I felt sorry for her but then she would pick up an other bottle (Alcoholic I know). Tom wasn't helping her like he said,Instead he was sabotaging her life. I don't know why I figured it out,I think it was to easy to be Rachel because she was drunk most of the time,He seemed to mentioned in the story alot but didn't have much part - Until near the end,I thought that was leading it to be him - And when we found out he was having an affair with Megan. But maybe that was some of point about the affects of alcohol regarding Rachel.

[Shellie]

I too found her intolerable at times. As I mentioned in my own review of the book, I understand that's the point of alcoholism, having a few in my family who suffer from it. I would just get so frustrated and scream at the book, "Just stop drinking and you won't have these problems!!" But alas, that was the whole point of the storyline. I think her alcoholism needed to be a part of the story or else her involvement in the whole affair would never have been questioned, and in turn the events needed to happen in order to force her to kick the drinking habit which got her into the mess in the beginning. A very well written book and well worth the read.

[Murrill]

I agree, Shellie. Her alcoholism was really the point of departure for the story line. Without Rachel Megan's disappearance might never have been questioned. Her alcoholism muddied the plot, giving it the friction and uncertainty that kept me intrigued. The ebb and flow of the story--he did! no, he did! or maybe....--was mirrored by the progression of Rachel's drinking.

[Mayor]

Murrill wrote: "I enjoyed this book. Rachel was annoying, yes, but the author captured the quintessence of alcoholism. Each of the three women had something to offer, but their various character flaws undermined..."
Thanks Murrill--this was sort of my take, that it was more psychological than physical because of the natural lack of credibility in all the characters. I didn't know who to believe. Rachel's alcoholism was really the center of the story rather than the murder per se.

[QueenAmidala28]

Chloe wrote: "I found the Rachel really annoying too! This book was so hyped up I really didn't think it lived up to expectations... Rachel was annoying and I wasn't really bothered or felt sorry for her when To..."

Exactly

[QueenAmidala28]

I also wasn't keen on the way the author set up the female characters. The males were ALL insane and the females kind of just took it! I have never been in their situations but those men had too much control of their lives (literally and figuratively!)

I also listened to this on audio-book. If I had READ this maybe I would have liked it more but for now it was just annoying. I did enjoy hearing the British accents though :)

[Mayor]

QueenAmidala28 wrote: "I also wasn't keen on the way the author set up the female characters. The males were ALL insane and the females kind of just took it! I have never been in their situations but those men had too mu..."

that's an interesting perspective on the male v female characters. had not considered that. I listened to the audiobook and thought it was better because easier to tell which character was speaking.

[Dan]

It was good read though somewhat drawn out.

[Magnus]

I'm also not a fan though I respect the fact that it was very readable, at least for two-thirds of it. One thing that didn't work for me was the devision of 'Morning' and 'Afternoon' chapters. It felt laboured and unnecessary. On the other hand she must have done something right to sell that many copies, even though it's beyond me

[Beccy]

I'm afraid I had to grit my teeth to get through this book. (If it wasn't a book group read then I wouldn't have bothered finishing it - and I'm not usually a quitter.) I didn't like any of the characters, the storyline was boring, and the mystery to me was that there was no mystery. I'm still perplexed as to why it was hyped up so much.

[Ilana]

it's funny - i never really thought much about this book until just about everyone who works for me started talking about it and i have to say that their thoughts and mine/yours are pretty diversified.

i'm not always a huge fan of stories being told from various characters' perspectives and in this case, i'm not sure that i wholly follow the need for the 'morning / evening' bit as well as the time stamps because i was never tracking properly with the, but otherwise i think that seeing what was going on parallel path with some of the characters was interesting.

where you guys thought Rachel was annoying, i don't necessarily disagree, but i feel like she was serving the purpose of keeping the story inconsistent. like you never really knew what was going to happen since she wasn't remembering things and it added to a bit of the twist that Anna discovers at the end as well.

while i kept wondering if the killer was someone that it wasn't - i think that the way that it wrapped up was nice - i think that the progression there was a nice build and i was pleased overall. it's not my go to genre though so i think that it was a nice shift for me at least.