A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.
The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful
The Movie Diorama
First time I watched this, I fell asleep. Thought to purchase it to give it another go and guess what? I fell asleep. There is something about this dull monotonous horror sequel that just puts me in a state of fatigue. I have no idea why. England is in the midst of a war, and a group of children take shelter at Eel Marsh House where the ghostly titular "Woman In Black" resides. This sequel means well. It's clear that the production values, eerie atmosphere and decent direction from Harper amount to what should've been a mildly scary horror film. But alas here we are, the first weekend of 2015 and the curse for atrocious horror films continues. The acting was wasted. You obtain the star quality of Irvine and McCrory and do nothing with them, all the attention is on Fox who unfortunately suffers from "Scared but Stupid Syndrome". Y'know what I mean. Going down to a creepy dark basement shouting "hello, is there anyone there?" whilst looking unfazed by the whole situation or actively pursuing a malicious spectral entity instead of actually putting her foot down and persuading her colleague to leave. It's predictably clichéd. Littered with jump scares that aren't inventively used, just the typical pop up of a speeding crow or mysterious hand accompanied with a loud piercing noise. The "Woman In Black" herself seemed more youthful since her last outing, she was hardly frightening at all. The environment and the items within it aren't put to use at all, unlike its predecessor which utilised horrifically ancient toys to enhance the horror. There's just no memorability to it and unfortunately the same story is recycled. The lack of tension within the narrative has transformed what should've been a horror into a dramatic war flick (whilst still lacking any real drama). Something happens at the end but I couldn't tell you because I can never get to it without snoozing. I did rewind it back the next morning though, so don't worry...it's still boring. "Angel of Death"? More like "Angel of Narcolepsy".
The Woman in Black Angel of Death: Movie Review.The Woman in Black: Angel of Death is an okay type of fair horror movie with some creepy and scary elements. The movie has dark atmospheric tone and vibe and is visually stylish and sharp, but lacks the creepiness of the first part The Woman in Black film, still the movie has some visually dark and creepy sequences. The film lacks intensity and intriguing elements in it story because there is not much story. Main lead characters are dull and boring. The film lacks character development and there is very less feel of tension and scares. The story feels empty and undeveloped. The horror aspect of the movie seems hollow at certain points and has no deep or real impact. All over, its just a below average not so good horror film.(Please Note: That This Review represent only my professional point of view and my personal honest opinion about the film, and does not represent others. Thank You).
Hammer used to stand for Horror, so what the hell went wrong here?Firstly, where was The Woman In Black? The only time you see her is when you look at the advertising poster. As for Angel Of Death!... well there wasn't much to speak of at all. After watching this I was amazed it didn't get a PG certification, especially because there was nothing overtly frightening or horrifying about the story or the picture. The closest we came to an eerie atmosphere was when young Edward was trapped in the constantly locked, however always open, room where the spirit of The Woman resided, all we got then was a few moving toys and a dark shadow.I think the director, Tom Harper, was trying to build atmosphere and get the minds of the audience to "fill in the blanks", therefore immersing themselves into the story and film more. It didn't work.In fact, I'd probably recommend this film to all insomniacs as the banality within should put them to sleep quite fast.Did the studio pay its light bill? Because everything that was shot in darkness was so poor in visibility that if I even turned on an incidental light source the picture on the screen was near unwatchable!This is a travesty in Horror filmmaking, from the story (which is basic, lacking in substance, and holds no surprises) to the direction (which lacks style, atmosphere, and power).The only good thing about the whole movie is the acting though it's impossible to save this film.
Question- what do you get if you dress head to toe in black, only come out at night and stay in the shadows?Answer- absolutely nothing! If you can imagine yourself trying to appreciate a black painting with the lights off then that's pretty close to trying to enjoy this movie. Set in WWII London during the blitz, several children are rounded up and relocated to Eel House far out in the English countryside of Crythin Gifford. This movie is a very unremarkable and watered down ghost story that's even more derivative than its predecessor. With its many clichés, you can basically be watching any other ghost movie written in the last 20 years. Not long after they all move into the house, weird noises, strange messages and toys that move by themselves are among the first indicators that you're watching a recycled script unfold. One child has been rendered mute due to the trauma of having both his parents killed during the bombing of London, so he becomes the target of some teasing from 2 other boys. For some reason the spirit of the house gets revenge on one of the boys by making him leave the house during the middle of the night only to end up dead on the moors, wrapped in barbed wire. There's no real rhyme or reason as to why this happened other than we seem to have a vengeful spirit with a conscience on our hands. We learn at some point that other bus loads of children had been sent to the same location but have all been killed by the woman in black. There's some bizarre flashback/dream sequence where the teacher accompanying the children gave birth when she was really young and at that time, if you weren't married or well to do, babies were forcibly removed from unmarried mothers and placed in foster care. Somehow the house spirit knows this and sets about making the woman feel guilty about "abandoning" her baby despite her desperate search for him using the "vast" resources available in the 1930's. So now we have an opinionated vengeful spirit with a conscience and morals. I started losing interest at some point as I was wondering when this was supposed to start getting scary and making some kind of sense. The kids and co decide to leave after a second child dies and they end up at a dummy airfield complete with fake planes designed to confuse enemy bombers from destroying real targets. The woman in black follows them there, she decides to show her face for an attempt at some random scares and fails dismally. There's an epilogue where the young teacher has now adopted the student who had lost his parents and they are now living in an apartment back in London. The woman in black appears, (this is the ONLY time you get a half decent look at her), she destroys a photo on the mantle and the movie ends. I didn't really get this at all and the convoluted back story just gets in the way of the material. The excessive use of shadow, during the middle of the night made it almost impossible to work out what the hell was going on. The feeble attempts at building atmosphere are outweighed by the predictable jump scenes that rely on silence followed by the sudden high pitched screechy music. There's nothing new in this that hasn't been seen before and simply calling it boring is actually doing it a favour. Don't waste your time watching this, go and hang a black coat somewhere in the room, turn all the lights off, pretend it's a ghost and you've just re-created this entire movie for free.
Similar Movies to The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death