Split Decision: “Train Dreams”
Thursday, March 5, 2026 at 10:00AM In the Split Decision series, two of our writers face off on an Oscar-nominated movie one loves and the other doesn't. Today, JUAN CARLOS OJANO and CLÁUDIO ALVES discuss Train Dreams...
JUAN CARLOS: So why don't you like Train Dreams?
CLÁUDIO: Seriously, that's how you start our convo?
I guess it's an appropriately blunt opening to argue over a blunt movie that wears the costume of subtlety and gentleness without quite pulling it off. Well, in my opinion, of course, since being the one organizing this series has made me well aware that everyone on the team likes Train Dreams. And, to be fair, the picture's grown on me to the point I'm actually rooting for it in the Best Cinematography race and wouldn't even be mad if it pulled off an unprecedented victory in Best Original Song. It's a picture full of great elements that ultimately falters under the weight of one or two major failures, some misbegotten choices that collapse the potential it might have had in different circumstances…
I'm mostly talking about the screenplay, adapted by Clint Bentley and Greg Kwedar from a Denis Johnson novella. But, before I start to ramble about everything I don't like in the transition from page to screen, perhaps you could explain why you love Train Dreams? Because my issues are so focused on the writing, I'd also appreciate knowing what compels you about the movie as a text.
JUAN CARLOS: That is interesting because, as someone who has not read the source material, I have received this film more as a sensorial experience where traditional narrative structure is eschewed, and the spoken words are sublimated by the visuals and Joel Edgerton's beautifully understated narration than as a memorable piece of screenwriting brought to life. In other words, the screenplay rarely came into focus in my viewing experience, which is also one of the reasons why I was able to grasp the film’s emotional textures.
But for me, those were conjured by other elements - the cinematography and the score, both effectively evoking vulnerability and tenderness - as well as Edgerton. There is also the fact that Train Dreams feels like it demands to be shot on celluloid, and yet, the digital cinematography adds something to the project. It's not something that I feel passionate about, but it's a small piece of the visual style (which, in turn, is a big part of experiencing this film) that makes it distinctive.
But please, do expound on your issues with the writing. Would love to hear your thoughts on it.
CLÁUDIO: While I get your point about the film prioritizing the sensorial experience, it undoes that with the insistent narration, performed by Will Patton rather than Joel Edgerton. Indeed, I see nothing understated about it whatsoever. The text is beautiful, don't get me wrong, and the passages taken wholesale from the novella preserve much of its cadence. However, these words are delivered with such folksy sentiment that their rough edges feel sanded down to a smooth smothering thing. Bittersweet melancholy turns to schmaltz when that element is then paired with a score that's far too preoccupied with dictating what emotion the audience should be feeling at any given point. Such music can work well in movies, though I feel there must be a balance, a sense of harmony that I can't perceive in Train Dreams.
Denis Johnson's story is complicated in ways its film adaptation is not, so the narration is just another symptom of essential tonal shifts. For example, in the novella, we first encounter Robert Grainier as he is being pulled, from passive to active participant in the racist killing of a Chinese railway construction worker. This event appears in Bentley and Kwedar's screenplay, but the character's culpability is diminished, and his guilt is increased by the dead man's silent apparition afterward. To me, this is emblematic of an adaptation that takes what was trickiest and most uncomfortable about the novella, the deep tension between yearning for a lost America while looking straight at the ills and horrors of the past, and erases it out of existence.
Even some of the novella's weirder passages, tone-wise, are cut out. The episode where Robert glimpses Elvis passing through town on the train is mentioned in the end-credits song but doesn't register in the film proper. Robert is reduced to a perfectly pitiful, easily sympathetic figure that, to me, robs the text of much of its meaning, leaving it toothless and somewhat hollow. It becomes about platitudes, reaching for a universal appeal that tastes like cheap emotion in my mouth. I can understand those who felt moved by Train Dreams, especially its meditations on parental and spousal loss, yet can't surrender to those emotions. Because the pull toward them feels so calculated, so off-putting, rails oiled so I slip more easily into weepiness.
Honestly, it's a bit of a miracle that I like Joel Edgerton's performance as much as I do. At times, often because he's so much older than Robert is supposed to be, there's a weariness to him that prickles against the sentimentality. So much so that I wonder how Train Dreams would've affected me if it cut down on the narration and let this central, taciturn tour de force breathe in comfortable quiet. I don't think I'd ever love how much it sanitizes the novella, though it'd be a more interesting piece of cinema, that's for sure. Do I make sense? I guess it's weird that I like Edgerton so much, as I basically hate the adaptation of his role. Am I sounding insane?
JUAN CARLOS: Wait, what? That wasn't Edgerton? Oh, wow. Fooled me. To save face, I think it's further proof for me that Patton's narration is very much in synchronicity with how Edgerton brought his character to life. I received this interpretation of Robert Grainier - the convergence of the spoken word with the physicality of the actor on screen - as one of a gentle soul with an abundance of observations about the tumultuous life that unfolds in front of him. I am also the one looking for friction between major elements, but the emotional earnestness of it worked for me in general. Hence, I got the bittersweet melancholy of it and not the schmaltz that you see. There are darker shades of what's happening in Train Dreams - and they are a prickly reminder of the world that he occupies in - but there is a firmness in the story's emotional space that I appreciated and received wholeheartedly.
Of course, it's clear to me that this is me just receiving the film with no comparison to the novellas' actual text. The specific points you mentioned that didn't work for you worked for me, given the context of what has transpired in adaptation. The parts that you felt were diminished from the novella are moments where I feel Bentley’s feature registers its emotional punches beyond the sentimental rumination. They become echoes of the darkness of the world that this Grainier experiences. His passivity also registered as something deliberate and intentional; the version of Grainier that we see on screen moves around the story and the world with meandering gentleness. If that sounds broad on paper, then Joel Edgerton finds the specificities within that experience. We can debate about how the text is sanded down (but I'm not doing that), but Edgerton finds the edges of Grainier. I do not see this as a hagiography of this character (that usually feels dead inside). Instead, I am moved by how tacit his performance is. It's up there with Loving as one of my favorite performances of his, proving his force as an actor even in roles that demand somber solemnity for the most part.
"Am I sounding insane?" You usually do, but not this time. I think we've seen enough films in our lifetimes where our appreciation for the performer runs in direct contrast with the text that they have to deal with. You also don't like the score; I thought it was moving. I'm actually curious about how you feel about the other Bentley-Kwedar collaborations. I do remember Jockey fondly, and Sing Sing was heartrending. And are there other elements that appeal to you more? How about the other actors?
CLÁUDIO: I liked William H. Macey quite a bit, and can see why he garnered some scant Best Supporting buzz in select groups. Less impressed by Jones - that's my usual response to Jones - and kept wishing Condon had more to bite into. I also wanted a whole lot more of Clifton Collins Jr., as young Grainier coming across the dying Boomer is probably my favorite passage in the entire novella, and I was eager to see such a great, underrated performer tackle the material. Oh well, in the final cut, he's lost in one of many montages, those editing choices that seem keen on evoking Malick and are just as willing to sacrifice an actor's work in the name of cinematic flow.
But speaking of Malick and Train Dreams' rhythms, I'm not as in love with the editing as most seem to be. It's easy to throw accusations of Malickian derivation at many filmmakers in the American indie scene, though this is often a very surface-level critique, not to mention a dismissively clichéd one. And still, I feel the temptation to aim this very lambast at this movie. Which isn't something you'd expect from, essentially, the same team that brought us Sing Sing, which, for all that it echoes the Taviani brothers' work, never feels as directly indebted to it nor as slavishly referential. This wouldn't be an issue if the copy or adaptation were smoother. At least, it'd feel less like a mark against the entire enterprise. Yet, Train Dreams risks clunkiness at times, often shifting between images without the benefit of gestural follow-through or a deeper sense of connection that goes beyond merely illustrating what Will Patton's prattling about in his narration. I guess the point is to abide by emotional lines, not caring as much about the friction between images. Of course, for someone who was decidedly unmoved, merely appreciating the putative sentiment on an intellectual basis, it further alienated me from the flick.
Truly, this all comes down to the disconnection that stems from being overly aware of the filmmakers' dubious priorities in adapting the novella. Since so much of Train Dreams is built around that emotional investment, the moment it doesn't click, most everything else follows suit, like dominoes. I will say that, beyond Edgerton and the song, I very much enjoy the costumes and production design, and count myself among the fans of cinematography. As you pointed out, Train Dreams seems to beg for the film medium, both in terms of its subjects and the themes at hand. To capture these ruminations of a man standing still while the world goes by, time forever unconcerned with the individual, through sharp digital footage, is a very odd choice. This likely stems from budgetary constraints, yet it gives Train Dreams its greatest claim to dramatic and aesthetic tension, combating nostalgia with every new, crisp vision of a past we cannot return to but in our collective screen dreams.
JUAN CARLOS: While Train Dreams rests squarely on Edgerton as a performer, I also find myself enamored by the gentleness of the other performers. Macy, Collins, and Condon populate the narrative with glimpses of characters that provide rich texture to Grainier's personal journey. Honestly, I like Jones as a performer (my favorite work of hers remains The Aeronauts), and I think she fits well into the emotional world of the film. But then again, it is the marriage of Edgerton and Patton's dramatic works where Train Dreams lives and dies. And for me, it is a beautiful backbone.
A part of me thinks about experiencing this story through the awareness of the adaptation process. I'm admittedly a person who — in the rare instances that I actually get to read written narratives — almost exclusively reads the source material after I've watched the big screen adaptation. This shifts how I receive the published material. Only once have I read the source material before watching the film: David Nicholls's One Day. Maybe it's not the best point of comparison, but there's a part of me that thinks that a level of disappointment is almost always expected in the adaptation process. I'm bringing this up because most of your problems are within the adaptation, and I do not have that frame of reference.
But moving past that, I will address your concerns with regard to the filmmaking itself. I do think the editing is a sturdy spine that weaves together Grainier's introspection vis-à-vis the environment in which his story unfolds and belongs. The solemn atmosphere that permeates the film, for me, is a result of its montage in conjunction with the score. As for its digital cinematography, I'm also surprised that it worked for me. More importantly, it didn't distract me. I remember it was one of my biggest holdbacks with 2020's Mank, but as for this film, it didn't bother me. It's probably the intentionality that it was utilized (even if it's most likely a budgetary decision) and how it gave a period film like this another dimension or perspective, and how it felt. I think your use of the word 'tension' is very apt here; there is a visual awareness that this is a rumination, but stripped of the nostalgia. There is always a tinge of detachment from its period setting that gives space for memorializing through Grainier's eyes.
CLÁUDIO: I disagree that disappointment is the default response to reading a work and then seeing it adapted to the screen. In fact, in 2025, I made a stronger effort than usual to read texts whose film adaptations I'd be seeing, and there are cases where I honestly think having that reference made me value the flicks more than I would have done otherwise. The way Ramsay preserves the very uncinematic, even anti-narrative vibe intrinsic to Ariana Harwicz's book is nothing short of spellbinding, making me appreciate the virtues of Die My Love with a clearer mind. Familiarity with the source material is central to my appreciation of what Bill Condon and PTA are doing with Kiss of the Spider Woman and One Battle After Another, respectively. And then there's Pillion, a film I'd have loved anyway, but whose relationship to its literary origins reveals the genius within Harry Lighton's first foray into feature filmmaking.
Back to Train Dreams! While I think I'd have responded to the film more positively had I not read the novella, I don't believe there's a world where I'd feel as affectionate towards it as you do. In truth, the comparison to the source material mostly helps shed light on other choices and the artistic approach guiding the project across the board. The embrace of sentimentality and the look away from possible complications in the audience's allegiance to the characters would still register if this were an original screenplay. Because notions of the American experience in the 20th century, as told through the tragedy of a lonely white man, grieving and feeling lost out of time, would always require a bolder take than what Train Dreams provides.
It's safe to a fault, aiming at universality when honing in on the specificity of Grainier's life would've been the way to go, historical attritions and all. Not an awful movie, not an undefendable piece of trash, nor something that would have me second-guess the taste of those who love it. Nevertheless, it's the kind of film that concentrates within it a lot of my personal pet peeves and annoyances about how narrative artists regard the past and represent loss through a prism of epochal portraiture, romanticism, and forced identification between the public and the dramatic subject.
And I guess that's as good a conclusion as I'll get to in this convo. Would you wrap us up with a final expression of love for Train Dreams?
JUAN CARLOS: I think every awards season, we are in constant search of a "small film with a giant heart". It fascinates me how Train Dreams was in no way Netflix's priority early in the season, but it just had a rooting factor that kept growing until it got to where it is now. I do feel this is a "small film with a giant heart," and it's a part of why I left loving it.
As for this conversation, I love how we've been constantly split with many films throughout this season — Materialists, Sinners, A House of Dynamite, Hedda, Sorry, Baby, Sentimental Value — but I didn't expect that we would end up discussing Train Dreams. But here we are, and I love it. Here's to more agreements and disagreements about the films we watch, but without the toxicity. It can be done, people!
This year, in the Split Decision series, we’ll be discussing a mix of Best Picture and other nominees, including Blue Moon and If I Had Legs I'd Kick You. Are you excited?
Reader Comments (9)
When watching this movie I kept thinking of Nomadland as seen through the eyes of Malick. For me, its greatest fault is the makeup. Decades pass and the central character does not really age.
Train Dreams is an overrated flick that will be long forgotten in a couple of years.
@Claudio
A - you are on point about Jones,I never respond to her acting,she's just there in most scenes,I didn't like her in The Brutalist last year or in her oscar nominated turn over 10 years ago,Kirtsen Dunst would have added so many shadings to this woman.
B - You are very wrong about the narration,it perfectly fits in with what's on screen,I think if you'd have had Tommy Lee Jones on narration duty the film would have felt slightly off kilter,Patton is an unsung hero of mine,livens up so many films and if they nominated voice work which they should he'd be a hands down winner.
Mr Ripley79 -- Who talked about Tommy Lee Jones? Honestly, my preference would be no narration at all.
Finbar-true but it’s not a bad movie
You mentioned the cadence of the novel when you read it and mentioned the term "Folksy sentiment" whatever that means,no-one could possibly think the film is schmaltzy,it's very melancholy and reflective and is careful to shy away from overt sentiment,leaving you with your own interpretations.
At no point did my husband and I feel like we were being manipulated as someone like Spielberg could do with this kind of material,the score is evocative and anything but manipulative.
You also state that the rougher edges had been smoothed down so I tried to picture a more gravelly voice delivery and I pictured Jones.
I never said you mentioned TLJ just as you never mention you would have preferred no narration at all,that's the impresssion I got from what you wrote..
Mr Ripley79 -- "no-one could possibly think the film is schmaltzy" Well, I am somebody, so that is clearly false. I think I talked about my issues with the film without invalidating others' takes on it, and would appreciate being extended the same courtesy, thank you. Do you think anyone who disagrees with you on TRAIN DREAMS is lying about their experience?
When I was talking about rougher edges, I was referring to the text, as this adaptation constantly removes the novella's more overt oddities, most alienating period specificities, and Robert's rougher edges as far as his personality and actions are concerned, as well as the perspective reflected in the prose versus the film's narration. The delivery, warm and amicable, further exacerbates these issues by projecting a specific, unambiguously sweet, melancholic tone that leaves no space for thorniness. Apologies if that wasn't clearly articulated.
@Claudio,there's no disrespect to you meant at all,apologies if you assumed I was implying something,I wasn't saying you or anyone else was lying either and find the tone of your message a little curt,I respect your opinion,I just used a turn of phrase that's all.
I just thought it was a beautiful boid piece of filmmaking and how someone could say it's schmaltzy at all is strange to me,I think that's what it tries to get away from,I do admit it packs an emotional punch but never in a manipulative way,I feel like we watched 2 different films.
Films you liked/respected like Die My Love,Pillion and Kiss Of The Spider Woman I didn't like or connect with and if it wasn't for Lopez in KOTSW i'd have turned the film off,Pillion was just off putting in alot of ways,i'm tired of gay themed films focusing on the sex and i'm no Skarsgard fan either,I hated Die My Love,I don't think Ramsey can make entertainment if she tried.
Maybe we just have different tastes which i've picked up on before,you seem quite academic in your opinions and maybe i'm not so much,I haven't read the book because I am not a big reader so I can't speak about the Robert charter except what Joel put on screen.
The movie Train Dreams reminded me of the most was A River Runs Through It. Maybe it was the similar time and place, maybe because it was too genteel by half - an art movie for PBS pledge drive afficionados. I'd vote for its cinematography even if it borders on being TOO pretty. But the lazy overreliance on narration kills it for me and I'd rank it 9th out of 10, with F1 - The Movie at the bottom.