Average

[Felicity]

Well it was a half interesting read that took me less than a day to get through, certainly enjoyed it however I found nothing origional about it nor will I remember it, not too sure how it reached the top, then I suppose if you were a journalist or whatever it was it wouldn't be too hard. I'd love to see more original or in depth novels come out, I had no issues with how the characters were not could I really relate to them either, another book to gather dust.

[Deanna]

I felt somewhat similar. I mean, it wasn't good, but it was shocking to me or really super suspenseful. It was a like, not a love. I thought and were more suspenseful and and interesting.

[Melana]

Felicity wrote: "Well it was a half interesting read that took me less than a day to get through, certainly enjoyed it however I found nothing origional about it nor will I remember it, not too sure how it reached ..."
I agree, "The Girl on the Train" is a mediocre read. Being a number one best seller only means that a lot of copies have been sold.

[Tanya]

I really enjoyed "The Girl on the Train" but it depends on the style of books you enjoy reading. This was a very dark story about some really damaged people. Those types of characters are not for everyone. If you are the type of person that needs at least one likeable character to root for, this book wouldn't meet that criteria. I did think "The Weight of Blood" was a better book. Unfortunately, I really didn't enjoy "Dear Daughter." I thought it was a bit annoying and kept picturing a Paris Hilton character. The story seemed like something that was only half serious because it seemed so out there to me.

[Cher]

I found The Girl on the Train entertaining, but I certainly feel that it is over-hyped. The voices of Rachel, Meghan, and Anna are too similar in tone, the characters weren't really brought to life. However, I did enjoy the fact that several characters embodied real menace through Rachel's gaze and were viable contenders for murderer. I'll check out the others you've mentioned, thanks for that.

[Deanna]

Cher wrote: "I found The Girl on the Train entertaining, but I certainly feel that it is over-hyped. The voices of Rachel, Meghan, and Anna are too similar in tone, the characters weren't really..."

I think you just described the book perfectly!

[[deleted user]]

I agree with the above, and largly, I found the main characters really irritating! On the plus side I thought the depiction of Rachael as an out of control alcoholic was very well written. As a first novel, not too bad - hopefully other books by this writer will improve

[Lesley]

I thought the book was dreadful. It is one of a very few books that I never finished. I got halfway after really forcing myself to keep reading then I thought life is too short and there is so many good books out there why waste time on this rubbish

[Marian]

I also loved this book and many people compared this book to Gone Girl..Gone is a more complex psyc thriller and a lot of people didn't like that one either. some people sort of mumbo jumbo the two books together?That,I didn't get.But anyway,I enjoyed both Gone Girl and The Girl on the Train.To each there own I guess.Happy Reading

[Frannie]

i agreee with you. while i enjoyed the hours i spent reading this, i wont remember it. i had too many questions and i feel like the characters were underdeveloped. they all lacked something and some of them just fell off which was super weird. thanks for the recs guys, im dying to dig into dear daughter.

[Read On!]

Before reading The Girl On The Train, I'd seen the critics classing it as a thriller. I disagree with that. To me, it read more as a psychological murder mystery.
I found it started off very bleak with Rachel's narrative but then as you learn everything she's lost in her life I began to empathise with her and her alcoholism as I've experienced certain experiences she has.
Initially I couldn't help thinking Rachel should just stay out of things and concentrate on sorting her own life out. But then I remembered she has no life, no friends, she's obsessed with Megan and Scott and she's an addict.
Interfering with Megan and Scott gave her a sense of purpose and meaning to her life.
I enjoyed it. It kept me guessing up until the end. But I thought, could all this have been avoided if Rachel hadn't made that fateful inebriated trip to her old street on the Saturday evening to "see" Scott.
Gone Girl it definitely is NOT.

[Marian]

I agree with you Read.This book is a psychological murder mystery..Gone Girl is a more complex psychological thriller.

[Taryn]

I felt Rachel to be the most fleshed out character. While I've never been an alcoholic, I couldn't help thinking Hawkins portrayed it quite accurately. It seemed to jump off the page. The remaining female voices seemed to blur together. I agree with Cher's post above. I often found myself flipping back to see which girl was speaking, they seemed rather similar. I figured it was Tom at about 70% of the way through and everything after that became predictable. It was certainly entertaining.

[Gene]

Ditch and I read this for the May issue of WritingRaw.com, Between the Sheets. If you want to read our review, please check it out here: http://www.writingraw.com/Reviews.html

[Sandy]

Weeb wrote: "Ditch and I read this for the May issue of WritingRaw.com, Between the Sheets. If you want to read our review, please check it out here: http://www.writingraw.com/Reviews.html"

Great review, guys. I kind of felt like I was a in the minority after I read an ARC & grudgingly gave it 3 stars. The raves that followed made me feel like I missed something. You pinpointed beautifully why this is just an ok read.

[Monica]

Actually I enjoyed this book. One of the few hyped books that actually delivered. The characters were interesting and it had a nice flow to it. The characters which I loved were quite flawed and actions were something I could believe people would do in certain situations. It had a predictable ending but a fun ride. Not great but imo most thrillers r not great books I guest I'm in the minority because the author I find to be mediocre is Gillian flynn. Bringing her up because this book has been compared to hers. I can't understand the hype surrounding her. Gone girl was the best book I read from her and even that didn't sway me to believe she is worth the popularity she gets. But to each their own

[Frannie]

Monica wrote: "Actually I enjoyed this book. One of the few hyped books that actually delivered. The characters were interesting and it had a nice flow to it. The characters which I loved were quite flawed and ac..."

Its great how all of our opinions are so different. I adore GF sharp objects being my favorite. I do agree though that thrillers are tough, not all of them are great. i love thrillers and its hard to find a good one. This one, however ,was def not my favorite.

[Cher]

Sharp Objects is my favorite Gillian Flynn book, too. Flynn's writing is so smart and dark and populated with flawed, damaged characters she brings fully to life.
Have you read Sara Gran's Claire DeWitt mysteries? Claire DeWitt and the City of the Dead is clever, darkly humorous and philosophical and one of my favorite reads of the past few years.

[Nancy]

I liked the book but certainly did not love the book. Had it figured out half way through. I is being compared to Gone Girl. No way! Gone Girl was great. Both are dark but Girl on the Train was a bit predictable.

[Lorrie]

Book reminded me of Halley Berry movie where she was police dispatcher.

[Jim]

I am also a Sharp Objects fan. I really liked Girl On The Train, the multiple narrators reminded me of Gone Girl, I think it is above average, but I am an easy critic, tend to enjoy most books.

[Sonja]

I agree that it was an entertaining book, but I had it figured out before it was over.
I would love to be able to figure out how it caught on so fast! Everyone seems (or seemed) to be reading it and talking about it! Wish I could do that with my own book!!

[JO]

I read this on a recent beach vacation, where I brought this book and a john Rebus (ian rankin) novel. I read this one first. It started out good and I had high hopes but halfway through I just wanted to finish it to get to my Ian Rankin book. I figured it out probably a little more than half way in. After a while the dates and recalling who was speaking/thinking just got annoying and I also had to look back to see who and when was talking. I did not think it was because the two main women characters were written similiarly until I read what someone wrote above. I knew the whole this is the next Gillian Flynn thing was just a marketing ploy. I loved Gone Girl and like dark places and have Sharp Objects on my night stand. Looking forward to it since many of the above posts say it was their favorite Gillian Flynn book. With all that said I did not hate the book but just felt Eh about it. I did think the alcoholism part was well written.

[Tanya]

Deanna wrote: "Cher wrote: "I found The Girl on the Train entertaining, but I certainly feel that it is over-hyped. The voices of Rachel, Meghan, and Anna are too similar in tone, the characters w..."


I will have to agree the characters were very similar in tone.

[Read On!]

Why is this book still at the top of the charts? Ok it's good but it's not THAT good. It's been in the charts for weeks! I'm baffled by it's success.

[Melissa]

I agree with many of you. The book was OK. The 3 main characters voices were too similar. I had to keep flipping around to see who was talking and what the dates were. Rachel is the one who I think was the most fully realized of the characters, which is why I gave it a 3.

[joepr]

Yes, average. I would had prefer that tom killed rachel and then see anna satisfy because she can start all over to play "happy family". There was a part i thought this was going to happen but the author prefer the "easy ending".

[Greg]

I liked this book (3-star rating) but Agatha Christie did this so much better with "4:50 from Paddington" (entitled "What Mrs. McGillicuddy Saw" for it's US release).

[Greg]

Read wrote: "Why is this book still at the top of the charts? Ok it's good but it's not THAT good. It's been in the charts for weeks! I'm baffled by it's success."
I don't know, except that it's sort of like 'Gone Girl' only shorter, so I guess that's what people were looking for this spring/summer of 2015. But, still, it was a good read.

[Greg]

Melana wrote: "Felicity wrote: "Well it was a half interesting read that took me less than a day to get through, certainly enjoyed it however I found nothing origional about it nor will I remember it, not too sur..."
You have to hand it to the marketing department for "Girl on a Train", they gave the public want it wanted, when it wanted it.

[JO]

Greg wrote: "Melana wrote: "Felicity wrote: "Well it was a half interesting read that took me less than a day to get through, certainly enjoyed it however I found nothing origional about it nor will I remember ..."

well I agree they marketed it that way, but it fell way short of the mark.

[Barbara]

Hype hype hype. I have, in the last few years, truly avoided the overly hyped books--it's all marketing. I work in a bookstore, so often I will read something just so I can make recommendations when people come in. But for my own reading, this is just the type of book that captures the attention of the public and it's in the stratosphere. But it's nothing special and you've forgotten half of it after you've read another 2-3 books. I put it in the same bucket with Da Vinci Code, Red Tent, Memoirs of a Geisha, 50 Shades trilogy, and Girl with Pearl Earring. Read a book with MEAT, people!!!

[Greg]

Barbara wrote: "Hype hype hype. I have, in the last few years, truly avoided the overly hyped books--it's all marketing. I work in a bookstore, so often I will read something just so I can make recommendations wh..."
Barbara, I agree, lots of bestseller's should be added to your same bucket. But I beg to disagree with "50 Shades" as I'd put it under the bucket, deep down and hidden from all readers. Even the most gullible consumers shouldn't be faced with it, in my humble opinion only. Comparatively speaking, "Valley of the Dolls" should have won a Pulitzer.

[JO]

Barbara wrote: "Hype hype hype. I have, in the last few years, truly avoided the overly hyped books--it's all marketing. I work in a bookstore, so often I will read something just so I can make recommendations wh..."

A book such as A Tale for the Time Being or The History of Love. Both deserved all the hype and get none.

[Mayor]

Felicity wrote: "Well it was a half interesting read that took me less than a day to get through, certainly enjoyed it however I found nothing origional about it nor will I remember it, not too sure how it reached ..."
You're probably right. I gave it five stars which sort of has an asterisk because for me five stars in a thriller is less than five stars in a classic. The time sequencing is similar to Gone Girl or others where people are playing with time. For me that main thing that felt "original" was the Rachel character who was having trouble remembering and sort of uncovering layers of reality. That part and her self-esteem issues related to her drinking rounded her out nicely as a character but I agree that it's not terribly a unique product. I listened to it on CD and enjoyed the actress who read for Rachel and that gave it some added dimension.