The Woman in Black

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%. (05/04/2017)

The Woman in Black is technically very well made. The environment, atmosphere, a shroud of mystery – everything works. But the screenplay doesn’t bring anything new. And the jump scares rely more on sound effects than image and editing inventiveness. Daniel Radcliffe looks too young to be the father he plays, but his performance is flawless. Ciarán Hinds gives the film some dignity. The young Harry Potter fans who haven't yet seen a hundred similar movies will be satisfied. (21/02/2012)

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. (01/03/2012)

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. (09/03/2012)

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. (13/03/2016)