From page to screen: Does The Girl on the Train follow in the novel's tracks?

To say there are high expectations for the movie The Girl on the Train is a bit like saying the story's protagonist, Rachel, likes to have a drink every now and then: a considerable understatement.

The debut novel by Paula Hawkins was a runaway bestseller in 2015, with more than 11 million copies sold to date. Movie rights were snapped up before the book even hit the stores.

So does the film live up to the book's page-turning, chock-full-of-twists reputation? 

• VIDEO | The Girl on the Train author Paula Hawkins talks success, suspense and the future
• FILM REVIEW | The Girl on the Train, The Birth of a Nation and more

What worked really well: Emily Blunt as Rachel

British actress Emily Blunt really can do it all, from eye-rolling cattiness (The Devil Wears Prada) to alternating fragility and toughness (Sicario). She shows the same commitment to the role of Rachel, the alcoholic, messy, voyeuristic central narrator of The Girl on the Train.

It's a tough role to perform and to watch — as Rachel wobbles between self-loathing to manic activity — but Blunt delivers it with aplomb. Her beauty is difficult to conceal (make-up and wardrobe departments do their best to depict neglect with smeared eyeliner and unfashionable pants), but at no point does Blunt's natural elegance detract from the role. Viewers are humiliated for Rachel, root for her and are frightened of her all at once: it's the essential unreliability that made the character so compelling in the novel.

What worked well: other casting

Justin Theroux might finally come out of the shadow of being Jennifer Aniston's husband for his role as Tom, Rachel's ex who left her for Anna, another of the story's point of view characters. 

Luke Evans is equally compelling as the sexy but tempestuous Scott: his potential for violence simmers in every scene. Kudos to director Tate Taylor for making Evans' muscle-bound physique an object of lust for both Rachel and the camera — staying true to the book's female gaze. 

Hailey Bennett, who portrays the third female narrator Megan, is a less obvious casting choice. The book consistently describes the character as frail and petite, her physicality connoting the "wounded bird" Megan is underneath. Tall and athletic, Bennett oozes vitality that's a little difficult to reconcile with Megan's frailty. But Bennett lends the character angst and rage that are compelling to watch.

Still, it's a pair of actresses in smaller roles who really dazzle: Allison Janney as the poker-faced detective Riley (a role bigger in the film than in the novel) and Lisa Kudrow as a sympathetic acquaintance who steers Rachel towards truth about her life. Both are excellent.

What didn't work: a change of location 

One of the things that made The Girl on the Train stand out was its essential English-ness.

Rachel commutes daily from a small town to London; glancing at brownstones and Victorian houses dotted along the way. She's an adult, but she lives with a roommate. Her drink of choice is a gin-and-tonic — the pre-mixed variety found at any British corner shop. These details paint a realistic portrait of middle-class England, but seem somewhat out of place in the movie's American setting.

One can only surmise that the filmmakers changed the location to appeal to a U.S. audience, but the decision strips something of the soul of the story, and makes the movie look more like Gone Girl minus David Fincher's direction.

Also inexplicable: despite the shift to New York, Rachel's still a Brit, which is only briefly referenced but never explained.

What didn't work: the structure and pacing

The Girl on the Train's narrative structure was one of its defining characteristics: the story is told by three women (Rachel, Anna and Megan), each of whom reveals and conceals details in her respective account. Plus, the story unspools as a nonlinear narrative. That's fine in a book when you can flip back and forth, but sticking to this structure for the film version creates plot confusion.

The Girl on the Train movie depicts characters — especially Anna and Megan — superficially, never truly touching on their motivations. Whereas the novel slowly reveals the layers of each narrator's inner demons, in the film they're unceremoniously dropped on viewers, who don't really have time to absorb it all, nor connect to the characters.

All said, The Girl on the Train movie has its charms: it's entertaining and well-shot, with lively performances that keep it ticking along. Ultimately, it may be a better fit for those who haven't read the novel than readers waiting to see a favourite book brought to life onscreen.