The Woman in Black

  • UK The Woman in Black (more)
Trailer 2

Plots(1)

The tale of Arthur Kipps (Daniel Radcliffe), a lawyer who is forced to leave his young son and travel to a remote village to attend to the affairs of the recently deceased owner of Eel Marsh House. Working alone in the old mansion, Kipps begins to uncover the town’s tragic and tortured secrets and his fears escalate when he discovers that local children have been disappearing under mysterious circumstances. When those closest to him become threatened by the vengeful woman in black, Kipps must find a way to break the cycle of terror. (Momentum Pictures)

(more)

Videos (27)

Trailer 2

Reviews (12)

Isherwood 

all reviews of this user

English 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. ()

3DD!3 

all reviews of this user

English Very pleasantly surprised. The beginning is boring gibberish during which snappy lines referencing Potter spring to mind, but the atmosphere thickens, mud starts flying, dead children start appearing... the shocking moments are very, very effective. Danny acts well, the fact is that he isn’t old enough to play the father, but at least he has the balls to shake off that magician’s cape, I’m sure his erstwhile fans will certainly go to see his films in any case. And a superb ending, even if a little predictable. ()

Ads

J*A*S*M 

all reviews of this user

English A simple horror story in the beautiful settings of an English seaside village. I didn’t mind the lack of originality and the simplicity of the plot (Hammer has never made intellectual and sophisticated films), what I did mind, though, is that in such beautiful setting, all the film can do to generate fear is to use cheap jump-scares that follow the template of “show anything” + “raise the volume”. Visually, I enjoyed it very much, both the haunted house and the village, but the fear hardly shows up at all. One look at the woman in black in the more than 20 year-old TV adaptation made me tremble in terror a lot more than all those jump-scares put together. Daniel Radcliffe delivers a decent performance. The climax was disappointing, just like a couple of very unconvincing scenes (the lady with the dogs, the bird in the boarding house). I’m giving it 7/10. I liked The Woman in Black, but unfortunately, with all the aforementioned reservations. I expected something great, but it doesn’t come close to that. ()

Malarkey 

all reviews of this user

English The Woman in Black is a great atmospheric horror film taking place in an absolutely amazing location, with great actors and awesome directing that made sure there was just the right creepy atmosphere that gave me chills for hours after watching it. I immediately forgot about Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter. In this movie I perceived him as a great actor who can play many emotions, including fear. Truth be told, if I were him, 20 minutes in that haunted house would make me go crazy, but he fought it off and pulled it off amazingly. The screenplay is great as well. These ghost horror movies usually don’t get good endings, but in this one everything is very interesting. Hats off. The movie brought me a four-star experience and memories that I just can’t get out of my head. I wish there were more films of this quality. ()

Zíza 

all reviews of this user

English 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. ()

Gallery (83)