The Woman in Black

James Watkins completely flipped the script when he went from aggressive teenagers to a classic art nouveau ghost story. Yet he definitely reached the heights of his reputation set by his first film because it washes over the viewer with such vigor that I wondered where the hell the man had been all these years when everyone was crying about the genre's decline. It's quite a cool thing to scare audiences so predictably yet with the kind of cheekiness and implacability in which little children die, and the mystery unravels rapidly. Meanwhile, the film maintains deliberate British detachment and slight distance. It's only kept from perfection by the miscast Radcliffe who - nothing against his performance - just hasn't grown up enough for such a role yet. Otherwise, I give a deep bow to the director. 4 ½. (03/08/2012)

A film folk haunting novel that perfectly exploits the conventions of Gothic horror and the Victorian aesthetics of ghost stories (the author of the book, Susan Hill, is an expert on them). Watkins chose the ultimate digital look, which is sometimes gorgeous (color contrasts and delicate work with light in neat interiors), and sometimes very artificial and implausible (especially the modified exteriors). The atmosphere is nice, and blaming it for its predictability is nonsense - the film is a de facto stylistic exercise with clear rules that need to be followed. The inclination to have cheap jump scares bothered me a bit, but those long walks with a candle darkened house are dense. In addition, Radcliffe acting like a lost frightened puppy can believed without difficulty. Pleasantly old-fashioned, from the veil to the ankle boots. (02/02/2013)

An honest old-fashioned horror film with an atmosphere as thick as the fog that envelops everything and haunts everyone in it. No grossness, just suspense, not so many scares that its excessive, and lots and lots of impressive scenes - the one with the carriage pulling is clearly the best. Perhaps only Daniel Radcliffe seemed too young for the lead role - if his son were a few years younger, it would have been more natural and believable. (03/13/2016)

I hadn't seen such an impressive and mysterious horror in a long time since Amenábar's film The Others, and I have to say that this one really pleased me. It's actually nothing groundbreaking, but it's pleasant to see someone successfully returning to the foundations of the genre. The film doesn't experiment and sticks to proven filmmaking techniques, Watkins' direction is reliable and precise even in the details. The director knows when to use a jump scare and when to let the camera capture impressive images of gloomy nature and interiors marked by human malice. I didn't have a problem with anything about the film and nothing got in the way or stood out or annoyed me. Even the ending, which may have disappointed some viewers, fits into the thinking of the late Victorian era and similarly toned literary stories. When you think about it, everyone ends up where they belong. Overall impression: 90%. (04/04/2017)

It had an oppressive atmosphere at times, the right tones, the breathless quality horror movies ought to create, but unfortunately it always sort of dissolved into the unknown, so you had no idea if you were really scared or just telling yourself you were scared. It really irritated me that dear Arthur didn't ask any questions – they send him home, strange things happen, but then he doesn't even think to ask why, what, how, when? It had a mystery to it, but to my infinite disappointment it remained unsolved. I haven't read the book, but the whole movie seemed like this, not completely thought out. Harry – er, I mean, Arthur – gave sort of a good performance, but it didn’t strike me as any kind of tour de force. Even so, I feel like he squeezed what he could out of it; after all, in my opinion he’s just not that great an actor... But back to the film itself, and its ending, which didn't work: first they swam in the mud, then got a pat on the back from a train; it seemed pretty self-serving, especially the diving in the mud – was that just so they could cram another screaming scene into the film? If the mystery had been unraveled more and if I had known whether I was actually scared or just fooling myself... I would have given it a higher rating. (07/25/2012)