The Woman In Black (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews



Message


Empire Admin -> The Woman In Black (6/2/2012 4:08:01 AM)

Post your comments on this article




evildave69 -> (6/2/2012 4:08:02 AM)

If I may be first to say so, what a well written review. I have no intention of being condescending, but far too often have I come on here to see readers berating reviewers, whether for their opinion or their way of writing. This was considered and well executed. I'm also glad to see it as a generally positive review. I hoped it would be simply as I don't want to see any of the Potter lot disappearing into nothingness by doing drivel...unfortunately a future I see for a certain Mr. Grint.




Bighousewill -> RE: (10/2/2012 1:17:45 PM)

In reply to evildave69 erm Mr Grint is not in this film but Daniel Radcliff is! but they were both in harry potter. [:D]




tysmuse -> loved it (11/2/2012 10:08:47 PM)

Totally agree with all above (a rarity). Wonderfully creepy.




piginapoke -> RE: loved it (12/2/2012 12:17:26 AM)

Excellent, scary film. 5/5 I'd say. Jane Goldman is a great writer.
The creeping horror of it was very well crafted, the usual shocks here and there but all restrained and even the end didn't succumb to major FX. I initally thought Mr. Radcliffe looked a trifle young but I got the Potter influence out of the way when he started getting spooked in the house.

Lots of tension buildup but spoiled slightly by the drone of the films around us in the multiplex when things went quiet.






guysalisbury -> WHY!!!!!!!!!?????? (12/2/2012 10:56:38 AM)

When I heard that Jane Goldman was writing the script And that james Watkins was directing I got very excited about this. I love scary movies and had heard a few people say that this I very creepy. So why the f*ck has it got a 12a rating? If this film is suitable for a 12 year old and his or her mum, how scary can it be?! I wish the film studios would stop being so money grabbing and tying to accommodate everyone. This is supposed to be a horror / ghost story. So make it bloody 15 or 18 and scare the shit out of me.




piginapoke -> RE: WHY!!!!!!!!!?????? (12/2/2012 11:36:53 AM)

** ONE MILD SPOILER **


quote:

ORIGINAL: guysalisbury

When I heard that Jane Goldman was writing the script And that james Watkins was directing I got very excited about this. I love scary movies and had heard a few people say that this I very creepy. So why the f*ck has it got a 12a rating? If this film is suitable for a 12 year old and his or her mum, how scary can it be?! I wish the film studios would stop being so money grabbing and tying to accommodate everyone. This is supposed to be a horror / ghost story. So make it bloody 15 or 18 and scare the shit out of me.


Well, aside from the obvious need to keep the rating down to maximise sales (especially as a lot would be young and want to see Daniel in a different lead role - I saw a family there with two kids about my son's age (11)), it is a case of less is more with a ghost story, otherwise you're in Ghostbusters territory. The best horror lets the mind do the work, and this one scared the c**p out of me and the rest of the audience in a very effective manner. The higher the rating doesn't necessarily mean a scarier film, not seen it but I guess Final Destination 5 is a string of voyeruristic horrible deaths linked together with a tired script.

WIB kept it tight (even with at one point 20 mins of exploring the house without dialogue, the 1 hr 35 mins didn't drag at all), it had a great location for atmosphere, great lighting, made the most efficient use of the shocks (the window and the hand! jesus!) intelligently restained FX (although I thought the 'rise from the bed' bit was unnecessary) and Daniel did very well to make us forget his Potter days. It was very scary, and my film of the year so far. Prometheus will have to work hard to build up scariness to match this one.





bretty -> creepy (12/2/2012 9:53:11 PM)

Creepy old fashioned style horror film. The very talented Jane Goldman updates the play very well and the setting and cast do the original work and her update justice.




Timon -> RE: creepy (13/2/2012 9:36:28 AM)

Scariest Scottish Widow advert ever.

Very well done film.




Osric -> RE: WHY!!!!!!!!!?????? (13/2/2012 9:58:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: guysalisbury

This is supposed to be a horror / ghost story. So make it bloody 15 or 18 and scare the shit out of me.



It's a 12 because it isn't violent, or gory, and has no swearing in it. None of that stuff means it isn't scary. Go and watch the original Haunting or The Innocents. And then grow up.




piginapoke -> RE: WHY!!!!!!!!!?????? (13/2/2012 1:16:16 PM)

**** MAJOR SPOILER DISCUSSED BELOW ****















So, one thing I'm not too sure about the end is.....

Was she helping him by doing what she did, given his loss and financial situation (despite having his son)?
Despite the 'forgive' reference at the end I think she was, but would be interested to hear other people's views.




Timon -> RE: WHY!!!!!!!!!?????? (13/2/2012 1:18:51 PM)

I don't think so, I think she was just continuing with her vengeance.

What I wanted to know is why you'd continue to live in that village if you had kids. MOVE AWAY!




Hobbitonlass -> RE: WHY!!!!!!!!!?????? (13/2/2012 1:21:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Timon

What I wanted to know is why you'd continue to live in that village if you had kids. MOVE AWAY!

That was my thought!

Great film and lost count of the times that I jumped. Not read the book or seen the play so went in blind (so to speak) and bloody creepy... Pretty impressed with Danial Radcliffe as well, thought he did a decent job.




Super Hans -> RE: The Woman In Black (13/2/2012 1:29:31 PM)

Glad to see good things being said about this film, I've been looking forward to it for a while.  I'll have to try and catch it at the cinema.






Bighousewill -> Scary? Don't be a pussy! (13/2/2012 4:11:57 PM)

These 12A scares don't do it for me and after you see her she isnt scary anymore but as ghost story it alright I suppose three stars. I don't believe in ghosts this film had no effect on me I manned up big time for this film I can sleep in a darkened room no prob. The last time I was given a fright was in the film Insidious when blood red face appeared.




Timon -> RE: Scary? Don't be a pussy! (13/2/2012 5:13:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bighousewill

I don't believe in ghosts this film had no effect on me I manned up big time for this film I can sleep in a darkened room no prob.


Someone's going overboard on letting us know how unscared he was.

Congratulations sir. I'll be sure to pass it on to all the girls at school, so they know how brave you are.




horribleives -> RE: Scary? Don't be a pussy! (13/2/2012 5:18:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Timon


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bighousewill

I don't believe in ghosts this film had no effect on me I manned up big time for this film I can sleep in a darkened room no prob.


Someone's going overboard on letting us know how unscared he was.



And then buggers it up royally by saying the last time he was frightened was at Darth Maul's little brother in Insidious, a film about as scary as Scooby Doo.




OPEN YOUR EYES -> RE: Scary? Don't be a pussy! (13/2/2012 5:37:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives


quote:

ORIGINAL: Timon


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bighousewill

I don't believe in ghosts this film had no effect on me I manned up big time for this film I can sleep in a darkened room no prob.


Someone's going overboard on letting us know how unscared he was.



And then buggers it up royally by saying the last time he was frightened was at Darth Maul's little brother in Insidious, a film about as scary as Scooby Doo.


Hey Scooby Doo is pretty darn scary.
I mean.. a talking dog...[sm=scared04.gif]




JAYDAK1SS -> Enjoyable slow burner (13/2/2012 6:50:49 PM)

Great ghost story, first time I think I have ever agreed with empire star review




st3veebee -> RE: Scary? Don't be a pussy! (14/2/2012 11:22:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives


quote:

ORIGINAL: Timon


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bighousewill

I don't believe in ghosts this film had no effect on me I manned up big time for this film I can sleep in a darkened room no prob.


Someone's going overboard on letting us know how unscared he was.



And then buggers it up royally by saying the last time he was frightened was at Darth Maul's little brother in Insidious, a film about as scary as Scooby Doo.


I got scared and jumped a lot in both.

Both great films!




jemba -> disappointing (14/2/2012 12:05:17 PM)

bit of a snoozefest and really depressing




Sully27 -> (14/2/2012 4:14:14 PM)

I didn't like this movie as much. I thought <a href="http://www.cheaptheatretickets.com/the-woman-in-black/">The Woman in Black play</a> was much better. The whole plot with him digging up the kid was way too over-the-top.




spartacus533 -> (15/2/2012 1:40:33 AM)

Was expecting this to be a snooze-fest due to the 12a rating. Why it isn't a 15 is baffling and I'd be interested to see what was cut out of it to achieve the lower rating. But don't be put off by the child-friendly rating, this isn't a child-friendly film. Radcliffe starts off wooden and eventually evolves into cardboard, but it doesn't sink the film. Expect angry complaints from angry parents over the rating.




JohnChard -> Certification. (15/2/2012 3:12:03 AM)

I saw it last Friday in Dublin and there it was a 15A certificate, which I think is spot on. Why it's a 12 here I have no idea? I thought it was a wonderful old fashioned spooker with period flavours and a damn fine performance from Radcliffe. Looks like I'm going to see it again on Friday in the UK as my Mom is a fan of the book, really looking forward to it again, just hope that the 12 certificate doesn't mean the jolts have been toned down......




Wild about Wilder -> RE: Certification. (15/2/2012 1:06:12 PM)

This all comes down to Spider-Man there was no 12A before that came out & it was thought too strong for a PG & Sony didn't want a 12 cert so low & behold a 12A strangely appeared? [sm=33.gif]
So whereas if we had PG/13 like the US where we'd have seen the film uncut we're left with this though surprisingly Dark Knight wasn't cut & that was far more disturbing torture scenes etc makes you wonder?




Spaldron -> RE: Certification. (15/2/2012 4:06:41 PM)

I saw this the other night and quite enjoyed it really. One or two decent scares, although not as many as I would've liked and I thought Radcliffe did quite well even if I didn't quite buy him as a father. Some good atmospherics reminiscent of The Haunting and The Others let down by a (SPOILERS) slightly schlocky finale with too much use of the title character doing the whole screaming at the camera stuff we'd seen all before. Overall its faults can be forgiven as the first two acts are well done. 3.5/5




Ramone87 -> Decent Chiller!! (15/2/2012 9:23:12 PM)


A spooky and good adaption of the famous short Ghost Story. It all builds up nicely as Arthur Kipps (Radcliffe) investigates affairs regarding a deceased woman in a remote Eel Marsh house.

Acting support from the rest of the cast goes well as Arthur delves deeper into the mysterious goings on in the village of Crythin Gifford. It's residents are haunted by the vengefull woman in black as she terrorises and kills indisciminantly; causing Arthur to face this and his own personal demons in the form of his deceased partner.

The films works really well in it's first and second parts, setting the deadly, chilling tone in some great built up tension as Arthur goes about his work in finding out as much as he can about this deadly spectre. She is caught in sudden glimpses; a vision in a mirror, haunting the grounds outside, peeking into frame or coming up close in some good solid scares. She is force to be reckoned with throughout the movie, as in all good ghost stories.

The only gripe is the ending, sigh, all the wonderful set pieces and solid acting by Radcliffe and cast spoilt by a clumsy and abrupt 'conclusion' if you can call it that.


Anyway, do go see it!!






S. C. Lee -> RE: Decent Chiller!! (16/2/2012 12:15:16 AM)

I love Jane Goldman's writing (usually) but I found Woman in Black to be quite dull, very little dialogue, lots of walking around a house, 12A scares. I jumped once when Radcliff put his hand on the glass and the woman appeared. The ending was clever but the story was fairly weak. Worth a watch, once.

The opposite of you Ramone87 [:D] I liked the ending, the rest was meh.




JohnChard -> The Ending (16/2/2012 2:00:25 AM)

Well it's two fold in meaning and personally I don't mind it either way.

*SPOILERS BELOW*










She's either given Arthur his peace by puting them back together as a family, a thanks for doing what he did to find her son, or she's just one nasty killing beatch who is going to keep on killing! 

The directors commentary will be interesting for it.

Anyway, a wonderful spooker, in the vein of The Orphanage, The Others, The Changeling, and even the much maligned Darkness Falls.







Vadersville -> RE: The Ending (16/2/2012 1:06:11 PM)

SPOILERS FOR THE ENDING!












I don't think The Woman in Black did it as a sort of reward. I genuinelly think that she was just trying to take Arthur's son away from him or even kill him as well. She was heard chanting never forgive just before. But rather than be lost forever like the others shes killed Arthur and his son were rescued by his wife, (a Woman in White) who led them to cross over.




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.03125