The Woman in Black
| release date | February 3 2012 |
| studio | CBS Films |
| director | James Watkins |
| writer | Susan Hill, Jane Goldman |
| starring | Daniel Radcliffe, Ciarán Hinds, Janet McTeer, Liz White, Alisa Khazanova, Tim McMullan, Roger Allam, Daniel Cerqueira, Shaun Dooley, Mary Stockley, Cathy Sara, David Burke, Victor McGuire, Lucy May Barker |
| rating | PG13 |
| site | thewomaninblack-movie.com |
| trailer 1 | Trailer #1 |
2 Comments
I do agree with Mr. Miska.
Don’t listen to mr disgusting this movie delivered The goods I’d see this over PA2 or 3 any day. Beautifuly shot and great use of sounds
Beautiful cinematography. Predictable scares, good acting, weak storie, and to much Radcliffe. He’s a great actor, but the camera was on him, every single shot.
just got back from seeing this and i LOVED it, it wasn’t as shitmypantsscary as i thought it was gonna be, but the “scares” isn’t what gets you, the tension is really the focus of the film and my god is the tension amazing! one of the best ghost films in a long time in my book!
I liked it a lot but didn’t love it. As far as a horror film goes its a little hollow (lots of jump scares) but it is really, REALLY creepy. Kind of like The Ring or the first PA but not at that elite level in terms of a horror flick that sits with you.
What I did love about this movies is that its Hammer back in foggy, old ENG. Huge fan of all the old Cushing and Lee movies so this kind of had that same feel. At times you could almost feel that mist coming through the screeen.
A nice trip on the Wayback Machine to the Hammer of the early sixties. . Atmospheric and well acted, with a few decent scares to get the kiddies jumping, this Ring-rehash won’t blow anyone away, but it’s entertaining. And Daniel Radcliffe aquits himself nicely, proving there is life after Harry Potter.
This was a very good movie. I really liked it bit the ending was very lame. They could have made the movie a lot longer if they didn’t put the ending the way they did.
The Woman in Black was an excellent ghost story from one of the best horror studios ever (Hammer). The scares were really great, and the film had a really creepy feel.
This movie didn’t disappoint me in the least. The acting was brilliant, the location worked for its purpose, the story behind the scares made the movie really personal, and the scares were pretty decent as well. For those of you who read the BD review, I think he was just focusing on the scares because behind the scares is a beautiful movie that honestly about brought me to tears a couple times. Not to mention the ending after Arthur and his family walk away made the movie unforgettable, at least in my opinion. I have absolutely no complaints for this film and will gladly see it again.
Ok the scares throughout this movie were definitely cheap, but they were fun. They made me jump and I sort of miss those kind of scares. Now if the storyline was good this movie would have had it all. But unfortunately the story fell really flat for me. The motive of “the woman in black” made sense and all but it was just so boring. The ending is pretty stupid too. I just wanted there to be something… more. Some kind of twist, something unexpected. But there wasn’t. The cinematography was amazing and those creepy dolls were awesome, but in the end it was just a boring story with nothing new. With all the good reviews I really thought this would have been better. Oh well at least Dan Radcliffe was in it!
This movie is the definition of fun. Not a masterpiece by any means… but a well-made, old-fashioned scare fest. See it with a good crowd and you’ll all be hootin and hollerin.
Mr. Disgusting praised PA3, but criticizes this? This was MILES better than that abomination of a film! At least the scares in this were done by the ghost and not humans. Also, that movie had way more “cheap scares” than this did, but I digress. The suspense was killer in this film. The atmosphere was intense. Every time he went to that house, I was on the edge of my seat. The glances into the dark or the small glimpses of her at the side of the screen made this film so creepy. Knowing she is always there watching him rarely gives you any breathing room. The crowd I was watching this with made this movie even more exciting to watch. This film reminds me of good old haunted house movies that I love. Sure, there were some jump scares that were there just to jolt the audience like the birds or the creepy dolls, but that didn’t keep me from enjoying it. The ending was actually pretty good. It offered 3 things that not most horror films do all at once and I enjoyed it. It ended on a happy, sad, and creepy note all at once. It was a real solid horror film. I loved it.
A classic ghost story that delivers solid chills and spooks and a unnerving sense of dread and tension that will have you clenching your fists and bitting your nails in anticipation of a scare. The house has to be one of the most bone chilling estates in a horror movie to date and it brings back memories of old school haunted house flicks of a long gone era like the original The Haunting from 1963 or from our time The Others and at those less is more, slow burn terror, suspense and atmosphere over gore elements it gets the job done and it’s polished and skillful at creating it. Time sure does fly as Daniel Radcliffe went from a kid in the Harry Potter series to an mature adult in this grittier role and to my surprise he hold his own but at the same time it was a kind of wooden performance but was believable enough. The script was unfortunately less than compelling and they just didn’t bring the classic story to any new level and just didn’t go anywhere compelling it just turned up the scares but nothing too terrifying here if you are a veteran horror enthusiast and it might of stayed a little bit too loyal to the original film yet it still managed to surpass it slightly by its scares. Overall it’s unfortunately not the horror film to beat all horror films this year as I was hoping for and it was a little too tame and old fashioned for its own good but as a remake it was a success to a point and it got the job done at freaking you out and the house and its ghost the woman in black delivered at haunting you and giving you good old time goosebumps which is lacking in most haunted house films these days but still to me The Woman In Black had the potential to be a modern day horror classic but just stayed at its comfort zone and for that I’m slightly disappointed in the film as a whole. Matinee price only.
“The Woman in Black” is solid, horror entertainment. The atmosphere conveyed in this movie, thanks in part to James Watkins’ abilities as a director, warrants a viewing on its own.
The slow-burn and attention to atmosphere are wasted on annoyingly predictable scares and an un-interesting plot. This might have worked better as a one hour television ghost show. Seriously disappointing.
The acting in this movie was Burrito Maximus: everybody had the look of regret from eating crappy Mexican food for breakfast.
But seriously… this remake pales in comparison to the much beloved 1989 BBC made for tv – yes a tv – movie. There is something to be said about having some restraint in aesthetics as this just overloads on the atmosphere and falls much too short on the story.
From the very beginning frame, the movie has a dour sense of itself, only to veer into black comedy with the introduction of one character. The problem with this is the movie stays within the same parameters for its entire running time, the emotions never soaring high from which to drop from. It’s s if everyone is on prozac which makes it hard to care for the characters.
Arthur Kipps, for instance, in a change from the original movie version, is now a widower raising four year old song and still haunted by the death of his wife during labor. While this provides decent material to mine from for the story’s exploration, we get nothing in terms of what their life was life before the tragedy which makes it hard to have empathy for the character.
Furthermore, there’s nothing connecting Arthur’s internal struggle with his outer struggle. In short, the Woman in Black has nothing to do with the “the woman in white” as this ultimately ends up being about a town haunted by the former rather than an individual (still) haunted by the later – something the original movie version had no issue confusing since the wife was very much alive.
The decision for this change seems to be attributed to screenwriter Jane Goodman’s handling of the story and its ending. Eschewing the original’s more powerful, haunting ending, the remake tacks on a bit of a bittersweet moment which fails to reach anywhere near the emotional payoff of The Orphanage – an ending itself that has fans of that film divided as well – because the character’s emotional journey isn’t connected to the external events.
The time spent on implementing this change ultimately comes at the sacrifice of the rest of the story. In the original, the townspeople were hesitant, but not reluctant, the mystery revolving around their fears allowed to organically unfold through the investigation tied to Arthur’s goal – settling the affairs of the estate.
This allowed the back story to be discovered via the audience through Arthur, yet is completely lacking in the new version. There doesn’t appear to be any particular reason for Arthur to be in Eel Marsh other than to have him subjected to ghostly visions and odd-going ons which subsequently subject us, the moviegoers, to cheap scare tactics because there’s nothing psychologically happening to keep our minds afloat.
In the end, we’re left with a film that seems to be too eager to please from a screenwriter who has taken one too many liberties with the source material, resulting in cliches and performances that are more suitable for a living dead movie than a haunted house flick.
If you like haunted house movies or if you scare easily, like me, you will love this movie. I jumped at least 10 times. I don’t understand why people are hating on it, it was great!
ALL JUMP SCARES.
I was covering my ears half the time because of the extremely loud unnecessary screams when the woman would appear.
WHAT WAS THE STORY LINE?
So let me get this straight…the woman’s sister had custody of her child, he is killed in an ACCIDENT, and the woman decides to seek revenge by taking the entire town’s children even years after the sister died? Imagine having to deal with that logic throughout the entire movie and try to ignore multiple things that don’t make sense.
The only thing that saved this movie from being completely horrible was that it was with a decent budget and had a good actor that was able to keep the story going despite its flaws. I would wait until this movie comes out for free.
yeah I thought this movies was pretty decent Mr. Radcliff does a good job with what he is given
(which isn’t much) and all in all not bad….but not good either. I feel there is a lot of wasted potential story wise. They should have went hard R and just made this thing a macabre masterpiece. maybe keeping the good jump scares along the way and just pump the over all creepyness up to 12. An finally the issue of the average movie goer. For some reason these people want another paranormal activity and decided to sit there and scream at anything ugggg so frustrating. so movie soild c+. audience F——
Thoroughly enjoyable. GREAT old fashioned ghost story. Very eerie and Daniel Radcliffe does a great job, nice to see him in something other than Harry Potter. Really liked this movie!
What to say about The Woman in Black? Well, starting with the visuals, the film had a “classic” Hammer look to it. Sound was great in my theater. The story while not the best, could’ve used a little bit more fleshing out either by having Arthur’s story done in one chunk rather than spliced flashbacks, or by having Jennet’s story and “legend” more thoroughly explained from the beginning.
To not give to much of the plot away, imagine elements of The Ring(American), The Grudge, and any haunted house movie of the last seven years, but all set in the late 1890s.
While most of the scares are jump scares, any seasoned horror moviegoer should be able to spot them. As far as people saying that the ending was frustrating, just listen to Jennet seemingly explain it. Although there is still a bit left to be inferred, it does come off as a decent ending.
I was going to originally give this a 6 but boosted it up to an 8 simply on the grounds on my voluptuous, but yet easily to scare date constantly jumping in my hands…I mean arms, arms is what I meant.
Effectively mirrors the eerie mood of the book, but tweaked the narrative enough to keep it interesting for someone who may have previously read the book, like me. Lots of jump scares, but genuinely creepy as well. Radcliffe did a great job. Look forward to seeing more of him.
This is a great return to form for the hammer films, it manages to maintain a constant sense of dread throughout and has some very effective creepy scenes. There is the odd cheap jump scare but its no where near enough to detract from the film. Mr D has well and truly lost his touch if he thinks this one isnt for horror fans, one of the best ghost films in years.
This was a fun old fashioned traditional ghost story haunted house movie that delivered the goods throughout. This movie looked beautiful and the cinematography throughout is worth the price of an admission ticket alone. Daniel Radcliffe is great in the lead role and I thought he gave a great performance that shows his ability to be other characters other than Harry Potter. The supporting cast does a fantastic job as well. The movie has some great chilling moments and a bunch of jump scares which is acceptable considering it is a haunted house movie and we want things to pop out at us. This movie does not break any new ground with the horror genre but it provides you with non stop thrills throughout and thats all I wanted. Definitely go out and support this movie. I had a great time.
Very well-made film that takes you back to the days when horror was about creating an atmosphere that got the audience engaged in. The Woman In Black is not the scariest film I’ve seen, but it does the job and is a welcomed treat for those who are tired of the garbage that pass for “horror” these days. This movie also proves that a horror film doesn’t have to be rated R in order to be scary and nor does it have lack on the chills if it isn’t. Go see it.
The Woman In Black turned out to me a very mediocre movie, which could have been so much better. I felt Daniel Radcliff was poorly cast as he still looked only about 18, and was supposed to be playing a father and a lawyer… He also is beyond tight-cast from the Harry Potter role. I felt this movie was a copy of many haunted house films, such as The Others, elements of Insidious was there and Darkness Falls.
The general plot wasnâe(TM)t bad (but it wasnâe(TM)t great either), there seemed to be something missing the whole time. I sadly was not scared by the cheap get a jump out of the audience tactics they used. The film is also left rather underdone at the end.
I agree that the set decorations and scenery were good, however there was not much in terms of scary things. The woman in black turned out to look rather silly up close as well when she went for Radcliff.
Overall this film I felt was a missed opportunity. It could have been scarier and easily had a better plot. See it if you can
6 out of 10.
Terrific, atmospheric, classic gothic horror. Reminiscient of haunted house movies from the ’70s. And it’s nice to see that Daniel Radcliffe has some actual acting chops. The only part I wasn’t so thrilled with was the end, which was just kind of odd, but I’m guessing it may be true to the book.
8.5/10
definitely a good ghost film as we haven’t had the greatest in these past years, radcliff surprisingly did a good role in my opinion..but the house was the star of the movie hands down, they did a great job with the creepy atmosphere in the house, and throughout the movie for the most part, favorite part of the movie is not too far into the beginning when he first visits the house as he is going through it, you see the woman in black standing in the background! definitely a instant suspense vibe for the movie
There’s a fascinating scene in “The Woman in Black” where an eye scans a condensed room through a peephole in the door that conceals all that lies within it. The camera, mimicking the eye, moves from place-to-place; perhaps hoping to see or find something worth writing home about. After a few considerably well-spent seconds of searching; a shadow appears from out of the corner of the eye. The camera chases the source of this apparition; and it appears almost instantly in the form of a screaming little girl with ghostly, pale skin.
The eye belongs to Arthur (Daniel Radcliffe); father, family man, widower (wife died in childbirth), and solicitor. He’s plagued by sad, haunting visions of his wife as he knew her when she breathed and prospered; and his emotional unbalance often gets in the way of the life that’s ahead of him. Regardless, the film opens on him as he is leaving for his next job; renovating the estate of a woman named Alice Drablow, whose house is located nearby a large marsh.
Arthur spends his nights at a local inn; in a particularly ominous little room with three windows. The locals of the area are genuinely unwelcoming, although a few show signs of hospitality. Just two of them include the kindly landowner Sam Daily (Ciaran Hinds) and his wife Elizabeth (Janet McTeer). They too have suffered a great loss; they’ve lost their son to a terrible drowning incident. Elizabeth doesn’t appear to have fully recovered from the trauma; and sometimes, she believes that the soul of her child speaks through her from beyond the grave – possesses her, if you will, and communicates through written message.
As if this weren’t strange enough, just wait until you get a look at the house that Arthur has to visit each day and eventually tidy up a bit. “The Woman in Black” is a refreshingly old-fashion haunted house horror flick in which the house is the stuff that nightmares are made of; literally. The house itself renders the film deserving of some solid points; while what goes on while Arthur and company are within it is enough to combine with the visual look of the building to create a successful whole.
I won’t spoil what happens; although there are still a few details that I feel you must know when you go in. The title refers to a creepy old woman dressed in all black who is often seen lingering around the premises. She’s obviously got a complex and disturbing link to this house; and who knows, she might even be Alice Drablow, the owner. Perhaps she can explain the creepy triple-child suicide scene that effectively opens the film. Perhaps…I’m done. This woman in black; she’s a complicated lady.
Hammer Films Productions has been experienced some sort of revival as of recent; with films like “Let Me In”, “Wake Wood”, and of course, “The Woman in Black” being released under the legendary production company’s name. I’d say that they’re making damn good progress as far as this revival goes (save for “The Resident”; which was rather unfortunate). I’d sure be pleased if I hired somebody to do a job like this, only to have them emerge as proud and successful as director James Watkins (Eden Lake) seems to be. “The Woman in Black” is a respectably old-fashioned horror show; it’s creepy, it’s shocking, and it doesn’t give in to the blood-crazed fan-base that the horror genre has acquired over the years. It’s virtually without blood and gore; instead making way for a handful of creepy, and even artistic images with a Gothic horror twist. And as far as the whole Gothic feel goes, this film is unusually successful; and it doesn’t sacrifice scares for visual spectacle.
“The Woman in Black” can either be appreciated for what it is – a well-made, well-acted, creepy haunted house thrill-ride – or it can be reviled by those who label it as being “too slow” or “annoyingly dependent on cheap jump scares”. Indeed, it is slow, and it does have jump scares, but it’s thoroughly engaging because it makes both of these things fun to watch unfold. These “jump scares” are never annoying; in fact, I’d say they’re pretty enjoyable, for the most part. Yes, the consistency in the jump scares is a noticeable flaw – and “The Woman in Black” isn’t exactly a terrifying film – but it’s still an impressive and plenty scary one, riddled with plenty of nostalgic yearning and atmosphere born from pure, bewitching style.
Mr. Digusting’s review of this is actually quite fair. It is a very polarizing film. On the one hand, if you are a fan of the old-school gothic style horror Hammer Studios is known for delivering, you will love this. This movie could very well have been made back in their heyday and you wouldn’t know the difference. The plot is thin and the acting is wooden. The pacing is slow and methodical. The camera and sound work superb. This is a Hammer picture all the way.
On the other hand, if you are a fan of modern horror, which seems to want to rely on dizzuing cuts, “found footage” gimmicks or realistic torture and killing, this isn’t for you. This is your father’s horror movie.
Personally, a found it to be a breath of fresh air. Not perfect by any stretch of the imagination but an enjoyable change of pace from the usual crap they are trying to pass off as “horror” these days.
And therein lies the metaphor. Bloody Disgusting has grown so big so quickly they now hype the crap out of every glossy Twilight wannabe and found footage CGI fest under the sun. There’s no sense of the history of horror left in this place. No respect for what’s come before.
I am an adult and I enjoyed the hell out of this movie. Judging by the average user review score here, apparently a lot of fans agree with me. Now back to your regularly scheduled programming…
I usually don’t like to see movies in the theaters, but I was curious to see if Daniel Radcliffe could act as anything other than an angsty teen wizard. Turns out, he can. While the movie wasn’t spectacular and the characters were all idiots (seriously, just MOVE, people), it was fun, with great shots and an interesting plot. Most importantly, it was scary. Any movie that makes you nervous to be in the dark gets a thumbs up.
Interesting old fashion ghost story, with great scenery and atmosphere. The characters were believable and it held my interest.This is a pg rated movie, so there isn’t any real gore or brutal violence. This movie is not likely to scare veterans of horror movies, but there is enough to raise the hairs on your arms.
I really liked this movie because it had a pretty unique story line, it was interesting, and actually made me jump quite a few times which is rare.
The Woman in Black is a good movie with a strong story. The only thing that let me down were some of the scares just didn’t deliver as they should’ve. None the less it’s still a good movie with good actors & if you haven’t seen it then you should definately check it out.
For optimal viewing experience, avoid the theates at least those full of kids and teenagers. The movie is quite good, even Daniel Radcliffe delivers and the scares are surprisingly effective and the scenery is fantastic. For me it was partially ruined because of the mumbling of the kids, but at least not enough to make me hate the movie.
I was really disappointed with this movie. There’s suspense and then there is just a movie paced so slow it becomes boring. The scares do not help matters either. They were anything but scary.
Could have been way better than what it was. Turns out to be a boring ghost movie. I will say though it does get pretty good towards the end which is why I’m giving it a six. Wait for it on DVD.
Looks pretty – dark and moody. But a bit of a snore.
The Woman In Black is a great ghost story based on Susan Hill’s novel. This is a great ghost story and it is one of the best Horror films of 2012 so far. When I watched this film I was like Holy crap this is a magic hat trick Horror film so far. I seriously enjoyed the movie when I was watching it and it is a great film so far. What’s great about The Woman In Black is that the film has a really intriguing and well paced plot and there’s nothing boring at all with this movie and it is really nice the plot maybe simple but it has a good pace on every climax of the movie so far. The setting in the movie is what I personally enjoyed in the movie so far. I like the way the house looks like in the movie and it really fits well in the movie so far the isolation of the house is incredible and I personally enjoy the setting of the movie and the atmosphere of the film is incredible and I like the way the atmosphere was used in this film so far and the whole movie is seriously atmospheric from start to finish and the atmosphere really was great for the film and it fits well for the setting of the isolated house so far. From the outside and inside of the house it really looks atmospheric from the outside the house seriously looks creepy and atmospheric as well and it makes you feel that your not alone in the cinema when your watching this movie while on the inside it’s the same to the outside but with the dolls and toys it makes the film even more atmospheric than the outside and the tension rises as the movie goes on. While the setting is great in the film the movie is also full of incredible jolts, thrills and scares that will make you feel scared from start to finish and the way the scares were used in the film makes you feel that your hallucinating and you don’t know if it’s real or not and the scares are like hallucinations in this film and it really makes the movie even better as well. The acting in the film is great our young Harry Potter star Daniel Radcliffe did a good job with his performance as the main protagonist Arthur Kipps and the other actor Claran Hinds who plays Arthur’s friend did a good job with his performance in the movie as well. Director James Watkins(director of Eden Lake)did a good job with his directing on this movie so far and he seriously did an amazing job with his directing on this movie and since he was good in scaring the audience with the brutal graphic violence of Eden Lake he did a good job with scaring the audiences with lots of hallucinatory scares in The Woman In Black and I’m proud of his work so far with the movie. Overall The Woman In Black gets a 10/10. Great work Mr. Watkins you did a good with your directing on this movie so far.
Good ghost story & Daniel Radcliffe did a really good job !
What pissed me off about this movie was it’s lack of plot. Sure, it has some great gothic elements and scenery, but the history behind the Woman in Black (who nobody seems to reference as that name in the ENTIRE movie) isn’t very compelling and extremely bland.
I was really excited to see this film and I am glad I did. However, there are a few things I did not like about this film. First, I wasn’t fond of the story line or the “message” of this movie. The reason is because personally I felt like the point of the film was a woman had her son taken away from her by her sister, which I understand would be devastating for any woman/mother. But she was so bitter that she took the life of those who had children? People in the town who she didn’t even know? That made me more angry then entertained. Second, I felt that the film was dragging on and on, like they didn’t know what to put in certain areas so they just made other scenes longer. Now, before y’all think I am a negative Nancy, there were things I loved about the film. Daniel Radcliffe did a wonderful job and I was incredibly impressed by his performance. The feeling of the film was awesome and the scares were placed well. Even my boyfriend was jumping and getting chills, which is a big deal because he never seems bothered by horror movies. Obviously there are better horror films to see but then again, there are far worse ones as well! Overall, I was pleased with this film and I am glad that I went and saw it in theaters, it added to the experience.
My goodness, this has TOTALLY creeped the crap outta me:
“The Woman In Black”, the Hammer-produced adaptation of Susan Hill’s novel of the same name, is a frightening and visually stuning creepfest that perfectly satisfied my ‘horror needs’. James Watkins, director of “Eden Lake” and writer of “The Descent 2″, fully proves that he is currently one of the most promising talents in horror.
Like I said, it is scary… REALLY scary. I shit you not! Me and my pals were complete wrecks after the movie. The grim opening scene (3 girls casually jumping out of a window) perfectly sets the tone for the first half which is chilling, a bit unsettling and breathtakingly atmospheric – and the uber-amazing second half is packed to the brim with heart-stopping jump scares, stunningly suspenseful scenes and frightening images. Hell, I never thought that rocking chairs and tin toys can be sooo fuckin’ scary!
The characters are all well-written and interesting and the actors all deliver superb performances, especially a surprisingly excellent Daniel Radcliffe who carries the movie very, very well and truly shines as tormented but courageous young solicitor.
With a well-developed script, Watkins’ flawless direction, Marco Beltrami’s subtle score, a shitload of eerie locations (the marshlands, interior and exterior of the Victorian “Eel Marsh House”) and some awesome camera work, “The Woman In Black” is a perfect example of an awesome contemporary European horror film and fully proves that the genre is more alive than ever and far from being dead.
http://www.horrormoviediary.net
Only scares are jump scares.Even those don’t work well. There is absolutely zero tension and you feel nothing towards any character. The only feeling after watching this movie is disappointment.
this was a crap movie it was too predictable and come on you could clearly see the rope that was carrying the woman in black what the hell story had potential but was poorly executed the ending was contrived and assumed a definite stupidity of the viewer
If you’re looking for some genuine scares, The Woman in Black delivers them few and far between. It has a cool atmosphere, the acting is up to par, and there’s a few chills, but that’s about it. The story is severely lacking, the pacing is way off, and the ending is very unsatisfying. It’s alright. Not the worst, not the best. It’s just fairly average.
Amazing movie; great storyline, acting, and scares.
I loved the opening scene, has good scares, and the mood of “old film” it’s awesome. The ending it’s horrible although.
A fun, extremely creepy horror film. Good actors, Good story but it could have been better. Maybe they will make it a little more intense in the sequel. Worth a watch but doesn’t even compare to films like Insidious and Amityville Horror.
Comment