I probably shouldn’t have watched this movie so late at night, but not for the reasons you’re thinking. I was falling asleep about 30 minutes in. I awoke for the more scary and chilling parts, but this movie really was your typical, “run of the mill” horror
A “dad” on a mission.
movies. It has the traditional elements (haunted house, ghosts and evil hags) you always see in films, but I think it attempts to rise above the others with one simple element. Daniel Radcliffe.
The Woman in Black is the story of Arthur Kipps (Daniel Radcliffe). Somehow a father at 22 (were they trying to pass him off as older with the facial hair?) but playing a 24 year old, I guess it’s not too far off to
The horrors pop up in places you wouldn’t expect…
assume this relationship was possible. A godfather to the son (Misha Handley) he has onscreen? That’s a bit weird… Anyways, Arthur is a lawyer sent to a small town out in the boonies (or British equivalent) in order to settle some business with an abandoned house that was recently vacated (or death-cated, wow, didn’t need to say that…).
While there, Arthur is shunned by the village folk, noticing a
Must… resist… eye…. twitch…
mysterious hint to the air around the town and what they’re trying to hide. With the help of an older gentleman, Mr. Daily (Ciaran Hinds), Arthur attempts to discover what’s wrong with the house and what The Woman in Black truly is. And, I’m telling you, it ain’t all pretty…
They killed Cedric! Wait…
As a whole, the movie isn’t that bad. It has it’s jumps and scares throughout in dark corners and at times you wouldn’t expect. In true haunted house fashion of the 1800’s, there are creepy old dolls (my favorite), squeaking chairs, and ancient vibes that make you feel unsettled because it is a time period so far removed from our own. I like that it chills in the traditional way. Doesn’t mean there aren’t its share of problems.
Daniel Radcliffe was picked, I feel, in order to raise buzz about the film. Plain and simple. It’s a damn shame that movies do this, but I don’t think this movie had anything else going for it anyways. In my opinion, I would’ve picked an older actor to portray a dad, because every fan of Harry Potter that went into this film was anticipating teenager Potter. I did too. And I was
One of the creepier parts of the film…
waiting for his lackluster acting and twitchy left eye to kick in as well… (Watch the HP series, you’ll see it all over every movie.)
The ending was sort of a dud of a twist, or a crappy cop-out. Arthur does what he needs to do. He sympathizes with the Woman in Black and lost his wife, all things that should’ve made him a worthwhile hero in this tale of horror. You were thinking man who conquers true life fairy tale. You get a relentless terror that doesn’t even know when the movie’s actually over. Arthur conveniently finds the clues he needs to solve the puzzle, moving quickly and not allowing any time to ruminate on the conundrum of the film. It’s a straight and away chiller with only a handful of good thrills. You know what’s going to happen
It’s not such a wonderful Wizarding world after all…
before it happens, leaving the plot as crap and the scary moments as the only things holding the film together. I don’t like to judge that harshly, but I have to put my foot down here.
So watch The Woman in Black if you’re not expecting much from a horror movie. If you are a horror fan, I would say steer clear of this one. You only feel disappointed by movie’s end. I give Daniel Radcliffe props for attempting to break the mold, but this wasn’t the movie to start it on. Better luck next time. 4.7 out of 10.
1 Comment | tags: 1800's, 24 year old, abandoned house, ancient vibes, Arthur Kipps, better luck next time, boring to an extent, break the mold, Ciaran Hinds, clues to solve the puzzle, cop out, crappy plot, creepy old dolls, Daniel Radcliffe, dark corners, death of the wife, disappointing, dud of a twist, evil hag, eye twitching, facial hair, father, ghosts, godfather, good try, handful of good thrills, Harry Potter fans, haunted house, hiding a secret, horror movie, HP series, jumps and scares are okay, lackluster acting, lawyer, Misha Handley, Mr Daily, mysterious vibe, picked to create buzz, relentless terror, run of the mill, scary and chilling at parts, shunning, small town, squeaking chairs, steer clear of this one, The Woman in Black, time period, traditional elements, true life fairy tale, typical, unsettling | posted in Movies
I didn’t know much about this movie as me and my family sat down to watch this Robert Redford film of drama. I thought, “Hmmm, James McAvoy? Courtroom drama? Civil War Era? I’m in.” Always having had an interest in the courtroom (I love The Rainmaker.) and becoming a lawyer, fighting for equal representation, this movie piqued my interest once again. And the injustice of another trial was the perfect setting for this film of one of the biggest conspiracies in American history.
Frederick Aiken (James McAvoy) is a hardened Civil War
Never stop acting, you lovely man you, James McAvoy.
Northerner that has found his place in the martial court of the newly reunited United States of America. Prejudiced like so many against the South, Frederick hesitantly walks through a newly formed Union, as if on eggshells. And then one night it happened.
President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated. John Wilkes Booth (Toby Kebbell) the man who pulled the trigger, escaped on the only bridge opened that night in D.C., and
Some wonderful images from The Conspirator.
was subsequently shot by his pursuers. It was not this man alone though who crafted one of the worst killings of all time. Also implicated were a dozen other men, including one Mrs. Mary Surratt (Robin Wright). It was at her boarding house that those men, with or without her knowledge, plotted a beloved President’s assassination.
In conjunction with Mary Surratt’s case, Aiken must defend a woman who he finds detestable, a Southerner, and do it with all the equality he can muster. With inner turmoil, a D.C. village who outcasts Aiken for his ability to abide by justice for all citizens, and a government attempting to hang a woman out to dry for her boarding house/son’s doing, this film full to the brim with injustice. And like it or not, the ending with frustrate the shizz out of you. And, despite this harrowing fact, I thoroughly enjoyed this film.
Just some of the great cast from the movie. Chillin'.
Why, you may ask? The actors. And surprisingly, a bunch of English actors parading about as Northerners and Southerners of America. It appears as if Robert Redford found their caliber of acting to be far better than that of an equally good American counterpart. But that’s besides the point. Let’s talk about James McAvoy. This wonderful actor really took a role that spoke to me and my own beliefs. He attention and hold to justice was admirable and honorable all in one. Despite the persecution he felt from his contemporaries, he fought fairly for Mary Surratt and her unfair incarceration and foreboding hang date. And Robin Wright herself was a beauty to watch on film. Her prim and proper character fought for her son and daughter and the injustice that was done to her was denied until the end.
Other notable people? Of course there are lots. Kevin Kline played a key, behind the scenes role as
Wonderful scenes happened here.
Edwin Stanton, Secretary of War and initiator of the Mary Surratt trial. He knew his Northern counterparts demanded a scapegoat, some form of justice, and he gave it to them. Tom Wilkinson played the helpless Southern Marlyand lawyer in charge of Mary’s case who had to decline taking it on the grounds of his bias. His noble stature as Reverdy Johnson stood out to me, despite his cowardice. Evan Rachel Wood played a solidly respectable Anna Surratt, the daughter and poorly mistreated girl that Aiken came to respect despite her ability to turn in her brother. And Danny Huston played a fantastic antagonist as Joseph Holt, the prosecuting attorney and lowlife scoundrel.
A film to be remembered.
The list goes on as is expected from a Redford backed film, and I appreciated the attention to detail in costume, characters, and time period. For the love of God, we must talk about the lighting! It was superb. If any detail in a time period without electricity needed paying attention to, it was this. The lighting in this film blew me out of the water. It literally blew my mind how a film could still function with minimal lighting and dust floating through the air, and make it seem so so so so so authentic. It was superb and caught all of my attention, as if the trial was taking place just right in front of me. The town felt like a suburb of D.C., and all actors carried resemblances of their Civil War characters. If any period piece film about the Civil War need be watched other than Glory (that most important #1), it should be this one. 9.5 out of 10.
1 Comment | tags: 19th Century, actual, American history, Anna Surratt, assassination, attention to detail, authentic, boarding house, Civil War Era, conspiracy, courtroom drama, D.C., Danny Huston, drama, Edwin Stanton, English actors, equal representation issue, Evan Rachel Wood, Frederick Aiken, Glory, good lot of actors, government, hanging, honor, injustice, James McAvoy, John Wilkes Booth, Joseph Holt, Kevin Kline, lawyer film, lighting, Mary Surratt, Maryland, minimal lighting, no electricity, Northerners, own beliefs, persecution, plotting, prejudice, President Abraham Lincoln, prim and proper, prosecutor, Reverdy Johnson, Robert Redford, Robin Wright, scapegoat, Secretary of War, Southerners, The Conspirator, The Rainmaker, time period, Toby Kebbell, Tom Wilkinson, trials, Union, USA | posted in Movies