CBS Films | Release Date: February 3, 2012
6.4
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 302 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
172
Mixed:
93
Negative:
37
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
5
Knicksfan7Feb 20, 2012
The woman in black was an ok movie overall. Daniel Radcliffe did a very good job for his first movie since Harry Potter, but he didn't have very much to work with here. I liked the cinematography and the setting of the film, but the plot wasThe woman in black was an ok movie overall. Daniel Radcliffe did a very good job for his first movie since Harry Potter, but he didn't have very much to work with here. I liked the cinematography and the setting of the film, but the plot was just mediocre. It had its jumps and a few chilling moments, but overall The Woman in black was just decent. Good performance and a great start to a "new" career for Daniel Radcliffe. 4.5/10 Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
5
NedRyerson1Jun 9, 2012
The Woman in Black is one of those horror movies that surprises you, but not in the typical scary way. What I mean is that this film brings back the classic terror, which is reflected in three basic things: endless suspense (the music alertThe Woman in Black is one of those horror movies that surprises you, but not in the typical scary way. What I mean is that this film brings back the classic terror, which is reflected in three basic things: endless suspense (the music alert bad situation; the change between light and dark atmospheres; the long distance shot throw halls, corridors, into or out of the house; and of course closed doors that locks mystery), then we have the tremendous feeling of isolation (the sense of being trap goes beyond the screen) and finally, the game person versus entity / monster, about this the important thing is that does not matter who wins, the clue is only hear strange things and see part or shadows of this entity, until the end of the movie when the suspense transform into pure horror which that you scream and jump out of your sit.
This movie plays with your mind and induces you the need of solving the puzzle, and although the whole idea and the music are very acceptable; the direction, screenplay and performances (Radcliffe definitely could do it better) are very poor and makes this picture very predictable in some fragments.
Collapse
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
GBowlesJan 5, 2013
While The Woman in Black is able to scare and keep the audience feeling tense throughout it achieves this through the use of common cheap horror techniques. Jump scares, POV shots, shallow depth-of-field e.t.c. The plot also fails to satisfy,While The Woman in Black is able to scare and keep the audience feeling tense throughout it achieves this through the use of common cheap horror techniques. Jump scares, POV shots, shallow depth-of-field e.t.c. The plot also fails to satisfy, the scares seem pointless and tell us nothing more than: the village is haunted. At times it feels like a mystery movie with elements of horror poured on to appeal to a larger demographic. It probably would have been better off as a mystery drama because the scenes that weren't centered around pointless scares were much more compelling. The Woman in Black will appeal to people simply looking for a scary movie but will be slightly underwhelming for others. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
heyitsmegrif4Apr 12, 2012
The Woman in Black brings enough scares to be a good quality movie. Yet, Daniel Radcliffe really wasn't the best choice for this film and it suffers from an ending that makes most of the movie quite pointless. I give this film 65%.
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
6
TVJerryFeb 10, 2012
Daniel Radcliffe plays a London solicitor who's sent to a creepy village to wrap up an estate, but that's just an excuse for an old-fashioned haunted house expedition. Nothing's original about the approach: lots of wandering dark hallsDaniel Radcliffe plays a London solicitor who's sent to a creepy village to wrap up an estate, but that's just an excuse for an old-fashioned haunted house expedition. Nothing's original about the approach: lots of wandering dark halls accompanied by ominous music and punctuated by sudden, loud noises. There are one or two genuinely shocking surprises, but they don't provide enough tension to sustain the dull parts. Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
4
Olidegu2012Feb 6, 2012
Well, this being my wildcard of the weekend, I decided to see it anyways and was not impressed though my expectations were already in the thoughts of well, you're taking Harry Potter and thrusting that actor into a horror movie role.Well, this being my wildcard of the weekend, I decided to see it anyways and was not impressed though my expectations were already in the thoughts of well, you're taking Harry Potter and thrusting that actor into a horror movie role. Radcliffe's acting was not bad, actually it was decent, however it was the boring script and thrills and spooks around every corner that you could see a mile away that really bring this movie down in my opinion. The movie itself, not the acting was the disappointment to me and though as some reviewers have said that this is the end of Radcliffe's career, let's be honest here. Every actor needs to take chances and this was just one chance that turned into a bad one for the young actor. He will rebound (it is not like he needs the money) just not with this movie. Expand
5 of 8 users found this helpful53
All this user's reviews
5
ImUnavailableFeb 14, 2012
A sometimes eerie movie with some good scares that is brought down by a thin plot, mediocre acting and a clunky script. The movie relies heavily on the fast image/ loud noise method of scaring an audience and while it can be effective, itA sometimes eerie movie with some good scares that is brought down by a thin plot, mediocre acting and a clunky script. The movie relies heavily on the fast image/ loud noise method of scaring an audience and while it can be effective, it feels cheap. Characters are all pretty bland and uninteresting, with the movie instead putting the emphasis on the scares. The movie creates a nicely haunting atmosphere at some points and will probably appeal to most fans of the genre. Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
4
ABNMPFeb 4, 2012
Adds nothing new to the genre. Actually slept for the first 30 minutes? Good for the PG-13 family experience, but even my kids were disappointed. I would save my money and wait for a release on Dvd or Netflix.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
4
violetheartFeb 13, 2012
I was told before seeing this movie by my friends that it was the most frightening movie in the universe. Worse than Saw II. Filled with twists and turns that left you gasping for breath and culminating in an ending so tragic that the averageI was told before seeing this movie by my friends that it was the most frightening movie in the universe. Worse than Saw II. Filled with twists and turns that left you gasping for breath and culminating in an ending so tragic that the average moviegoer would end up wanting to jump in front of a train. I entered the theatre doing breathing exercises to prepare myself for the terrifying moments to come. Yes, this film has received a LOT of hype in the "oh-my-God-it's-so-scary" department. All I can say is- what a rip off. There is absolutely no genuine horror in this movie. The "scary moments" are nothing more than clichéd groans of music which grow ever louder as Harry Potter runs frantically around a haunted house until something jumps out at him. Oops. Did I just say Harry Potter?That's the other thing. It's extremely difficult for me to forget that throughout my life Daniel Radcliffe has always been a boy wizard fighting to save the world from Voldemort's evil clutches. But, actually, I was impressed. Radcliffe, although only needing to use about two of his expressions in this movie (scared, freaked out, scared, etc.) did a good job. Sometimes I even looked at him for at least a couple of seconds without thinking "Why don't you try Expelliarmus on that ghost?" So the four points I gave this movie are solely dedicated to Radcliffe's acting. I felt that all other parts of the film were uncreative and predictable, and frankly, a waste of time. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
rydermusicMar 3, 2013
Daniel Radcliffe's performance is decent, though the movie is not very scary. The Woman in Black is nothing more than a repetitive plot with a good vibe.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
subhadip1524Feb 18, 2012
If u expected lot from this movie u will get lot of disappointment from this one.
yeah locations and screenplay are really good and some of the scenes are really plotted perfectly but you will miss the word "scary" thing from this movie.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
yoshikartguyFeb 26, 2012
This movie was okay. It was kind of stale at some parts and the horror part wasn't very scary, like when the Woman in Black screams in the camera. HER FACE LOOKS STUPID lol.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
micahmannFeb 28, 2012
Radcliffe's first theatrical attempt to really separate himself from the HP franchise. Set in the marshlands of 1900's England, a mysterious rash of childrens' deaths comes to light and sees Daniels's character haunted by the truth.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
Thug-NegusJul 9, 2012
This film could have been a good thriller, but it is far too slow and the story does not take the road too, the only positive thing there is tension throughout the film and good times shock
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
asthobaskoroApr 1, 2012
While people draw attention to Daniel Radcliffe, pay attention to Jane Goldman's script. Maybe it's not haunted like Asian movies or let's say "Insidious." But it has good script, character and some creepy scene. If you are not jump, maybeWhile people draw attention to Daniel Radcliffe, pay attention to Jane Goldman's script. Maybe it's not haunted like Asian movies or let's say "Insidious." But it has good script, character and some creepy scene. If you are not jump, maybe the problem is you. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
bob13bobMay 31, 2012
scary movies are not usually that great, and on that spectrum this movie not that bad. The scares are effective, has some good scenes, but overall plot is unoriginal without good pacing. Used a lot of creepy shots that are overplayed inscary movies are not usually that great, and on that spectrum this movie not that bad. The scares are effective, has some good scenes, but overall plot is unoriginal without good pacing. Used a lot of creepy shots that are overplayed in scary genre (don't want to spoil). decent supporting cast and I wish they spend more time with developing that plotline. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
RonaldOVOXOFeb 4, 2012
This movie was kinda unique but not the one i was looking for. Even though it had its moments it just wasnt enough for me to like it. I loved radcliff in the harry potter series but she should do other movies before he goes to horror
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
lilbradshawMar 18, 2012
A decent horror film. It uses all the same cliched horror fim formulas, but it stands out. I couldn't get engaged in the story for it was hard to keep track of it. The ending sucks and is lackluster. A movie to watch if your bored.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
SantiagoMAKiiNAJul 7, 2012
The other day I was sitting with a friend of mine discussing the possibility of doing a horror movie together in Hungary. And he says, "Come on, man, horror is for guys with no options. It's a cop out." So, of course, my answer was, "Dude!The other day I was sitting with a friend of mine discussing the possibility of doing a horror movie together in Hungary. And he says, "Come on, man, horror is for guys with no options. It's a cop out." So, of course, my answer was, "Dude! James Bond and Harry Potter are doing it! Horror is legit now!" In deed it is.
It must be no coincidence that Mr. Radcliffe picked a movie about an evil person from the past come back to haunt children...sounds familiar? All jokes aside, this was a thoroughly enjoyable film.
Daniel Radcliffe's acting was quite professional. The script clearly doesn't allow him, or anyone else, to push any dramatic skills too far. But here Mr. Radcliffe executes pace and delivery superbly. A role obviously written for him, this is clearly an actor with a long career ahead and no shortage in skill.
The rest of the cast was rounded up with surgical precision. Not a single character out of place. You could certainly put a play together out of this entourage. I enjoyed being reminded of the simple pleasure of actors turning average dialogue into believable fantasy.
The story was well crafted. I found myself wanting to discover what was going on and trying to put the pieces together on my own. Which you can actually do if you pay attention. Something that I consider a sign of brilliant story telling. Allow your audience to be involved with you.
The cinematography was picture perfect. You can pause the movie almost anywhere and you will find an exhibition-worthy snapshot. As far as the soundtrack goes, this film did something that should be enforced more often in filmmaking: less is more. The music is another character that goes in and out of scene, not something to inundate very frame with. Take note from this very well executed sound track.
Turn the lights out and warm up a hot chocolate. But do grab that mug tight, as this movie will make you jump more than once. Enjoy.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
OfficialMar 8, 2014
Has a slow start filled with jump-scares, but eventually builds up suspense and tension, and releases scares that are relevant and unexpected.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
Se91May 25, 2012
Just a Typical Horror Movie, But it's not Annoying for just One time watch !
Also Nothing New and without any initiative in case of making believable characters !
And also Movie suffers from an ending that makes most of the movie quite
Just a Typical Horror Movie, But it's not Annoying for just One time watch !
Also Nothing New and without any initiative in case of making believable characters !
And also Movie suffers from an ending that makes most of the movie quite pointless & useless !
It's not even Worth Of Taking my time to write about it !
5.5/10
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
mrmonsterJun 6, 2012
The movie was good, but no great. it had a few good scenes and an interesting plot, but lacked scares. The special effects were pretty good, but there was not much else. I personally think it was okay as a rental, but I would not buy it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Subject98May 30, 2012
I went into this movie wanting to like it and came away with mixed feelings. It has great atmosphere to it for most of the movie and I personally thought Daniel Radcliffe did fine as the protagonist even if he did look a little young for theI went into this movie wanting to like it and came away with mixed feelings. It has great atmosphere to it for most of the movie and I personally thought Daniel Radcliffe did fine as the protagonist even if he did look a little young for the part, but the movie was not without a lot of cheap jump scares that made me smack my forehead in embarrassment. I also felt that the ending, while courageous, didn't really connect back to the main plot as well as it could have. It was eerie though, did have a few pretty shocking moments, and I remained entertained throughout so I think it's a decent horror flick. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
BethatronJul 5, 2012
I saw the woman in black with a group of my friends, who are both teenage and female (like me) - and were of course absolutely terrified. And I admit, I jumped a couple of times, practically crippled my cousins arm I was holding on soI saw the woman in black with a group of my friends, who are both teenage and female (like me) - and were of course absolutely terrified. And I admit, I jumped a couple of times, practically crippled my cousins arm I was holding on so tight... But the reason I gave this film a 6 is because, although it was kinda freaky, there wasn't much plot - I knew almost nothing of the main character, making an instant detachment between the viewer and the film, meaning that there simply wasn't that connection that a person should have when watching a movie... Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Sir_CallahanJul 2, 2012
solid acting, very well-constructed creepy atmosphere. Tension builds perfectly, with sudden releases through shocks. However, the tension tends to dissipate when we see the woman in black herself, this could've done with less, leaving moresolid acting, very well-constructed creepy atmosphere. Tension builds perfectly, with sudden releases through shocks. However, the tension tends to dissipate when we see the woman in black herself, this could've done with less, leaving more to the fears of imagination. The movie builds up well, and then ends terribly. The ending is senseless and unnecessary, just trying to make it cliche and leave you with fear. Instead it leaves you frustrated and annoyed that this was how they chose it to end. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
JawsLaxerDramaDec 27, 2012
The Woman in Black does have its share of scares. For the most part, they are all timed so just when you think something is going to happen, it doesn't....until a good 10 seconds later. The atmosphere is plainly depressing, (as the movie wasThe Woman in Black does have its share of scares. For the most part, they are all timed so just when you think something is going to happen, it doesn't....until a good 10 seconds later. The atmosphere is plainly depressing, (as the movie was going for) Also, as it does feature Daniel Radcliffe, the movie doesn't place in the top horror movies ever created. At best, it will startle you; and at its worst, it will bore you. Diagnosis: The scenes that are creepiest are worth seeing (and will make you look twice before walking into a dark room). Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
osuwkumanMay 8, 2013
I watched this movie because it aired on Showtime and I want to see how Daniel Radcliffe performed without his Harry Potter character. I must admit, I like Radcliffe but the movie itself lacked an attention keeping plot. I dozed off in theI watched this movie because it aired on Showtime and I want to see how Daniel Radcliffe performed without his Harry Potter character. I must admit, I like Radcliffe but the movie itself lacked an attention keeping plot. I dozed off in the middle twice and needed to rewind a bit to see what I missed. Sure there were some surprises enough to call this a thriller, but far from my definition of horror. I don't want to spoil the end, so I'm left wondering if I'm supposed to like the Woman in Black for that last deed or hate her more. When I'm left with a stupid question in my head it's not scoring higher than a 5. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
MovieGuysOct 12, 2013
An overdramatic and painfully clichéd ending doesn't help an already overdramatic and painfully clichéd movie. 75% of the film is just Daniel Radcliffe walking through the house slowly and the usual haunted house movie clichés. Not much elseAn overdramatic and painfully clichéd ending doesn't help an already overdramatic and painfully clichéd movie. 75% of the film is just Daniel Radcliffe walking through the house slowly and the usual haunted house movie clichés. Not much else happens. The only positive thing about this movie is the fact that the scenery and the cinematography are beautiful, though. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
aadityamudharApr 18, 2016
While The Woman in Black is able to scare and keep the audience feeling tense throughout it achieves this through the use of common cheap horror techniques. Jump scares, POV shots, shallow depth-of-field e.t.c. The plot also fails to satisfy,While The Woman in Black is able to scare and keep the audience feeling tense throughout it achieves this through the use of common cheap horror techniques. Jump scares, POV shots, shallow depth-of-field e.t.c. The plot also fails to satisfy, the scares seem pointless and tell us nothing more than: the village is haunted. At times it feels like a mystery movie with elements of horror poured on to appeal to a larger demographic. It probably would have been better off as a mystery drama because the scenes that weren't centered around pointless scares were much more compelling. The Woman in Black will appeal to people simply looking for a scary movie but will be slightly underwhelming for others. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews