It's been called the fastest selling adult novel in history and so it's of little surprise that the film rights were snapped up within weeks of The Girl On A Train's publication. Like us, you probably read the book and will see the movie. Fans will be familiar with the lead character Rachel; the over-weight, badly out-of-shape alcoholic fixated on her former life. So when Emily Blunt - the polished English actress who years ago underwent a Hollywood transformation (she lost weight, got her teeth fixed and developed the kind of arms only seen on those whose second home is the Pilates studio) - many were underwhelmed, to say the least. After all, she's not known as the type of actress who dumb's down her looks to fit a part.
Today, the first pictures were released of Emily on set in New York, where the film is based instead of England (we don’t know about you but we’d like to know what’s wrong with London – but then maybe we’re being overly patriotic.) Whilst she’s hardly undergone a transformation a la Charlize Theron in Monster (Theron won an Oscar for her incredible portrayal of a trailer-trash serial killer) she’s undoubtedly lost some of her sheen. The eyes are redder than usual, her grey roots need attention whilst her lips look like they need to make friend’s with a Chapstick. The clothes, meanwhile, are what Kate Moss might refer to as ‘basic;’ you certainly wouldn’t look twice at her if she walked past you on the street.
Even the author, Paula Hawkins (who is not involved with the movie, BTW) has acknowledged that Emily is nothing like [the novel version of] Rachel BUT thinks the acclaimed actress can deliver on Rachel’s desperation, her maddening bad decisions and her complete despair. Hawkins thinks this is more important than their physical resemblance. We’re still on the fence. What do you think?