The Woman in Black Reviewed Firstly, hello! Secondly, the film… Although not perfect, The Woman in Black is worth a watch, to say the least, even with the jam-packed, Saturday-night cinema, full of hysterically screaming teenagers and one old, creepy woman who just happened to sit next to me. It delves back a few years before every horror film needed to ‘bring something new to the genre’, so, in a sense, bringing something new to the genre. The plot is, on the whole, predictable, but doesn’t pretend to be anything else. I think the lack of over-the-top Americanisms helped with this element, a lot. It is an honest, pure fright-fest that is looking to progress, not reinvent the genre. Director James Watkins (2008′s Eden Lake) throws us into the story in a ‘no nonsense’ manner, with the simultaneous, spontaneous suicide of three young girls in a haunting attic room, a scene that will surely give chills to any parents in the audience. After briefly explaining the situation of solicitor Arthur Kipps’ (played by a stubbly Daniel Radcliffe, who I kept expecting to whip out a wand) – his wife died in childbirth four years ago; he is still depressed – we are then taken almost immediately to Eel Marsh Manor, the main setting, which Kipps has been assigned by his firm. Instead of the constant increase in scares that most horror films give, this did ease watchers in, however it took an irregular pace from there on, almost as though we are being toyed with. And effective it was, too! Whether there was a lull in scares, lulling me into unexpectancy (before any of you clever cloggs tell me this isn’t a word, I know. It should be, though.) before pulling the jump lever, or a false fright before the real thing, The Woman in Black did a sterling job of keeping my head pinned to the wall behind me, with the scares coming thick and fast. I would say that the film focused more on these than any lasting creepiness, because I didn’t get the usual bedtime jumpiness that normally follows a horror, but I didn’t mind one bit. I shan’t describe any of the “jumps” for fear of spoiling your experience, however certain scenes in the fabulous finale were groundbreaking. Usually I find, in a horror, once the initial split-second of shock is over, the more effective method is to pull whatever ghost or ghoul present from the screen, leaving much to the imagination of the audience. Whilst this is what The Woman in Black does for the most part, certain scenes leave the titular character to advance on the audience for several seconds, causing screams from my fellow cinema-goers (a tad over the top, but still, a feat). Some will disagree, and although possible to consider the character a little ridiculous-looking (you’ll know what I mean when you watch it), by that point you are truly sucked in to the experience. For me, the battle between childlike terror and realistic adult was a quick one, the latter giving in to the former immediately. Camera angles play a large part in the film. Rarely have I seen them so creatively used. Likewise, another of the film’s subtle highs is its intelligence. The choice to rewrite the story from the 1983 book of the same name was a wise one. Firstly because it makes for a better story in film (more jumps, less detail, etc), and secondly because it allows writer Goldman to do her thing. Her development of Sam Daily (Ciaran Hinds) was sublime, a spectacular amount of depth for a lesser character. Goldman hints at things like drinking problems stemming from Sam’s trying to cover up the pain of his son’s death. I’ve seen comments saying that she has ‘kept the essence of the book’, but she has done more than that: she has bettered it. Radcliffe is mediocre. I had no real complaints, but neither do I have any compliments. He just stayed a little plain-faced for my liking, as has been said before of the Potter star. Other actors gave better performances, though, the aforementioned Ciaran Hinds being one of them. CONCLUSION Not without its imperfections, The Woman in Black does what any good horror should do: scares the hell outta ya! Definitely one for the cinema. 7/10