Book vs. Movie
Those who have read the book first will be slightly thrown off when watching the movie. The reason is because in this case, there are quite a few differences, even though they are minor or not very important. The biggest distinction is the location. The novel takes place in England while the film is set in America. More details are included in the book, of course but one of these details is how Rachel actually sleeps with Scott and even gets threatened/held hostage by him—as opposed to the distant relationship between them that is shown in the movie. On screen, Rachel never goes to a job interview set up by her friend Cathy and the red-haired man is a more serious figure, rather than a friendly drinking stranger. It is also never mentioned in the movie how Megan’s dark past about killing her baby is revealed through the media. And although the story ends the same way (thank goodness), Rachel’s memory comes back to her differently in the film. We are meant to think that Tom’s boss’ wife is the one who helps her remember her blackouts. The readers will know that in the novel, the memories just eventually start piecing themselves together in Rachel’s mind. I will admit that I watched this in the cinema before I borrowed the book. It’s possible that if readers really enjoyed the story, they may have issues with how it is portrayed on the big screen. However, the movie alone, was certainly well done for an entertaining psychological thriller. The actors were appropriate for the characters. How precisely it followed Hawkins’ work, remains to be debated. If you read the novel, do you think the film did it justice?