User Score
6.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 268 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 35 out of 268

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Mar 5, 2015
    7
    This is not the scariest movie ever but he has is creepy moments.Daniel Radcliffe who is an average actor is surprisingly good in the movie.The movie is entertaining and surprisingly good.
  2. Feb 8, 2015
    7
    It had some pretty scary parts in the middle part of the movie, and I liked the story, setting, and atmosphere of the movie. It feels like a more traditional haunted house movie than most newer ones. I did like this overall, but I guess I was hoping for a little bit more since a lot of the scares fell flat at the end of the movie. Speaking of the ending, I did really like the ending. IIt had some pretty scary parts in the middle part of the movie, and I liked the story, setting, and atmosphere of the movie. It feels like a more traditional haunted house movie than most newer ones. I did like this overall, but I guess I was hoping for a little bit more since a lot of the scares fell flat at the end of the movie. Speaking of the ending, I did really like the ending. I recommend it. Expand
  3. Jan 16, 2015
    8
    Summary: The Woman in Black is an old-fashioned horror film with a well handled suspense. 82/100 [B+]

    The Woman in Black is directed by James Watkins and it's a remake of the eponymous 1989 movie based on the book by Susan Hill. Moving on, the opening scene is strange and creepy, I liked it. Anyway, I have to admit that the first act was kinda slow and a little bit boring. Surprisingly,
    Summary: The Woman in Black is an old-fashioned horror film with a well handled suspense. 82/100 [B+]

    The Woman in Black is directed by James Watkins and it's a remake of the eponymous 1989 movie based on the book by Susan Hill. Moving on, the opening scene is strange and creepy, I liked it. Anyway, I have to admit that the first act was kinda slow and a little bit boring. Surprisingly, the second half is more violent, intense and suspenseful. Also, I liked the performances, Daniel Radcliffe performs a single dad called Arthur Kipps and another standout performances were from Ciarán Hinds and Janet McTeer. I also loved the old-fashioned style of the film, it has a splendid selection of period furniture and costume design.

    The Woman in Black boasts an impressive level of terror, the atmosphere of the film is frightening and most of the scares were unpredictable. Also, the sound effects were terrific and so well done. It has no gore, but instead of that, it delivers so many effective scares, I almost died! There was enough originality on its surprises. Even though I have to admit that this horror movie is more of the same crap, I mean: the loud noises, things moving by itself and creepy shadows; still scary as hell! Yeah, it doesn't offer something new to the horror genre, but still terrifying. Also, the stunning camera work increases the dread at times.

    I'm glad that Watkins decided to use practical effects instead of cheap CGI. The Woman in Black is a movie that does not look crappy or cheaply done. In spite of its modest budget, the production was splendid. Moving on, as I said above the film counts with a very creepy sound design, the loud noises are constant but they came at the right times and efficiently. I saw this film in the morning and it scared the crap out of me, my point here is that it doesn't matter if you see it during the day or at night, it will scare the hell out of you. Watkins proves that he is a talented director and I just hope to know more about him soon. What a horror flick!

    On the upside: the ending was strangely awesome, the house is creepy as hell (the rooms and empty hallways add some spookiness to the film), it has excellent performances and the production design was great. On the downside: a few jump-scares were unnecessary and the first 30 minutes are boring as hell. So, in conclusion, I recommend it for horror fans and non-horror fans. Woman in Black is an audience pleaser and the perfect film to watch with some friends at night. Although it doesn't offer something fresh or new to the genre, it keeps the tension for most of the time and there's a very scary sequence at the first 50 minutes. [B+]
    Expand
  4. Jan 7, 2015
    1
    “The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death” is terrible. Absolutely terrible. I cannot believe that I spent 98 minutes of my life and that the majority of people in that screen had paid money, money that they had most likely WORKED AN HOUR FOR considering how most were round about my age on such ABSOLUTE RUBBISH. Something that has the bollocks to call itself a film. The guys who made that film“The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death” is terrible. Absolutely terrible. I cannot believe that I spent 98 minutes of my life and that the majority of people in that screen had paid money, money that they had most likely WORKED AN HOUR FOR considering how most were round about my age on such ABSOLUTE RUBBISH. Something that has the bollocks to call itself a film. The guys who made that film must have been laughing since its release on New Year’s Day as much as Michael Bay did when Transformers: Age of Extinction was the highest-grossing film of 2014. Anyway… What really lets the film down is. NO **** ANYWAY THIS FILM IS SO BAD. The cast is terrible and so is the plot. Man. *sigh*.

    I quite enjoyed “The Woman in Black”. It had a decent and proven plot, as seen in the original success of the book with the same name written by Susan Hill, and with the stage play, as well as a decent lead in the form of Daniel Radcliffe in his first role since the “Harry Potter” series. BUT, as I’m sure you’ve already noticed, I THOUGHT THIS FILM WAS TERRIBLE. Such a let-down. The plot of this film is set in 1941 and follows Eve Parkins (played by Phoebe Fox) and her stereotypically stern boss Jean Hogg (played by Helen McCroy) as they are evacuated along with a group of children up north to Eel Marsh House, where the first film was set. Its promising at first but by the end of the film nothings really happened…? Where the plot is somehow possibly a little bit better than terrible is where it introduces the concept that Eve could turn into the Woman in Black or where we see Harry Burnstow (played by Harry Irvine) stopping and having some sort of seizure hallway down the road to Eel Marsh House which is a key plot aspect for about half of the film. I was waiting to know what was wrong with Harry. Was the Woman in Black having his way with him, morphing him into some sort of sidekick? No. Of course not. BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE GOOD. Instead, guess what? HE IS JUST SCARED OF WATER. THAT WAS A KEY PLOT FOR HALF THE FILM! And this is just the first half of the film. THE SECOND HALF IS TERRIBLE TOO. From Eel Marsh House to a fake RAF airfield and then back to Eel Marsh House with a load of RUBBISH in between.

    And guess what, that’s all that seems to be between the cast members ears. RUBBISH. It’s what came out of their mouths too. The performances AS YOU WOULD PROBABLY GUESS are also terrible. Everyone is TERRIBLE. The only person I possibly liked was Harry. And that was only because I had a bit of a man crush on him. I mean he was quite a cool pilot. OH NO I MEAN RUNNER OF A FAKE AIRFIELD WHO IS SCARED OF WATER. There are no characters. I didn’t care about anyone. Man I mean I wanted Eve to ****ing die at the end. Man **** that film.

    The film ultimately relies on jump scares throughout and although I am extremely vulnerable to those there were only about 3 good ones in the entire film and one of them was one of those false ones where this kid with a ****ING SAUCEPAN ON HIS HEAD OR SOMETHING DECIDED TO ****ING SCREAM AT THE CAMERA. There was 1 that made me jump. And guess what? It was one that was entirely unrelated to the plot with a little girl and an old man just holding a finger to their mouths to the camera. You know what the best bit of the film was? The END. Oh, and the bit where one woman screamed out at a bit of wood falling in the background which prompted the whole audience to burst out laughing. I feel sorry for those who were involved with this film. It was just too bad. And man I liked the first film. The reason I’ve given it two stars is because of how the film does well to take make it look like it is 1941. But don’t worry because the cinematography is TERRIBLE. FOR ****S SAKE I COULDN’T READ WHAT ONE OF THE MAIN CHARACTERS (who was mute) WAS WRITING DOWN FOR THE ENTIRE FILM!

    DAMMIT I HAVE JUST REALISED I HAVE BEEN TRICKED INTO WASTING MORE OF MY TIME ON THIS **** FILM.
    Expand
  5. Nov 21, 2014
    7
    The tone is bleak and depressing right from the start. The era is expertly captured and recreated. Even better is that this is a horror movie with genuine scares. There are some lame jump scares, but the atmosphere is king. The way it sets up for the scares by having you stare at some of the most unpleasant looking children's toys is very effective. The plot is solid even if it does commitThe tone is bleak and depressing right from the start. The era is expertly captured and recreated. Even better is that this is a horror movie with genuine scares. There are some lame jump scares, but the atmosphere is king. The way it sets up for the scares by having you stare at some of the most unpleasant looking children's toys is very effective. The plot is solid even if it does commit a way crime too many horror movies do in order to keep things going; making it's characters morons.

    It's another horror movie where the town is warns the outsider to leave, but never gives him a reason as to why. When all they do is act unfriendly and drop some of the most vague hints of all time it's not hard to see why they can't get rid of Radcliffe's "Arthur Kipps." However what is unexplainable is why his character sticks around the obviously haunted house for so long.

    Every time he hears some unnatural noise or catches a glimpse of a ghoulish specter, despite knowing that it's the work from forces of the beyond, he goes and investigates anyway. It ends up working great for us on one end, because there really are some great scares. However it means that the whole scenario sacrifices intelligence and believability in order to actually exist. It's a sad flaw.

    However where "The Woman in Black" succeeds, it succeeds well, and that's in being a genuinely good horror movie. Very rarely are you going to find scares this good. So while it stumbles in intelligence it delivers fear. Considering it's a horror movie that makes it mostly a win. My total score for the movie is a 7.5/10.
    Expand
  6. Aug 23, 2014
    9
    " I believe the most rational mind can play tricks in the dark." - Daily

    A great horror movie.A mystery house in a strange world. I jumped at every scene.
  7. Mar 20, 2014
    3
    walking, walking and walking. Is all the main character does. He hear a noise in one room and walks, this becomes boring! sure it was scary the first time they did it. But overtime, its a bore.
  8. Mar 8, 2014
    6
    Has a slow start filled with jump-scares, but eventually builds up suspense and tension, and releases scares that are relevant and unexpected.
  9. Feb 25, 2014
    10
    I like this movie most horror movies have an unnecessary amount of swearing but not this one. I showed a trailer to my friend and he said it look to scary for a PG-13 movie
  10. Dec 8, 2013
    8
    Yes, some of the scares are as predictable as they come. And it's still a little strange to see Daniel Radcliffe playing father to a four year old boy, although at 22 it's definitely possible that he could be the child's dad. But director James Watkins and screenwriter Jane Goldman (adapting Susan Hill's novel) have done a terrific job in creating the spooky atmosphere needed to envelopeYes, some of the scares are as predictable as they come. And it's still a little strange to see Daniel Radcliffe playing father to a four year old boy, although at 22 it's definitely possible that he could be the child's dad. But director James Watkins and screenwriter Jane Goldman (adapting Susan Hill's novel) have done a terrific job in creating the spooky atmosphere needed to envelope audiences in this old-fashioned world full of superstitious villagers and ghostly happenings. Things that go bump in the night can harm you in The Woman in Black, and the fact children are the ghost's victims ups the tension and heightens the scares. Expand
  11. Nov 21, 2013
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. One of the best so far in this genre as per me. The location is perfect the characters are perfect, sound effects are outstanding.Making the story circle around the village without taking your viewers to a land of boredom is a tough job,and I guess the director did a good job by keeping the audience thinking.There are some scenes where you get goose bumps and trust me no one ever sees those coming.It is everything that a horror movie should have.I was a bit disappointed with the way the movie ends.The climax could have been a bit better. Expand
  12. Oct 20, 2013
    8
    This is going to be one of the best horrors you have ever seen, I loved how many scares there are in the movie that you see coming, and yet they work every single time because of how terrifying they are. The atmosphere and story are brilliant. Bravo.
  13. Oct 12, 2013
    4
    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 else happens. The only positive thing about this movie is the fact that the scenery and the cinematography are beautiful, though.
  14. Oct 1, 2013
    8
    Was very enjoyable, very scary and is a horror movie you do not want to miss out on. I felt the movie could have been a little bit longer, but other than that this was a very enjoyable movie.
  15. Aug 14, 2013
    8
    The Woman in Black is an extremely creepy horror movie. It gets plus points for not being grotesque or overly violent. It loses points for being a blatant rip-off of The Haunting. And post-Potter Daniel Radcliffe is good in this too.
  16. May 8, 2013
    5
    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 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 myI 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
  17. Mar 17, 2013
    7
    I'm really glad that Daniel Radcliffe found something else other than Harry Potter to star in. His performance in this movie was stellar. Other than the performances being good, it was terrifying! The night you watch it you won't be able to go to sleep for days. If the writers take the time to make a second one, it better be decent.
  18. Mar 3, 2013
    6
    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.
  19. Feb 3, 2013
    1
    A movie so dull, that the 1st hour of this film is nothing more than scene, after scene, after scene, of cheap setup sequences designed to make you jump. The movie is also seriously painful to look at.
  20. Jan 31, 2013
    9
    Hammer Horror returns in full force in the 2012 film adaptation of THE WOMAN IN BLACK, starring Daniel Radcliffe. A lowly young lawyer is sent to prepare the sale of a grand old estate, the Eel Marsh House, but unbeknownst to him, the house carries with it an ominous curse that has been plaguing the children of the small town for years. After settling in, Arthur begins experiencingHammer Horror returns in full force in the 2012 film adaptation of THE WOMAN IN BLACK, starring Daniel Radcliffe. A lowly young lawyer is sent to prepare the sale of a grand old estate, the Eel Marsh House, but unbeknownst to him, the house carries with it an ominous curse that has been plaguing the children of the small town for years. After settling in, Arthur begins experiencing horrific visions as the ghosts of the past return to haunt him! THE WOMAN IN BLACK is an excellent revival of the Gothic tradition that echoes the works of Jack Clayton and Alejandro Amenábar in their retellings of the classic novella, The Turn of the Screw. A constant sense of dread befalls the viewer as we are drowned in mists and shadows. Director James Watkins takes a timely approach to storytelling of his own which pays off entirely, and allows for many long, drawn out sequences to incrementally heighten the tension and suspense as we await the final shock in the end. THE WOMAN IN BLACK also focuses heavily on eerie effects which can be achieved in frame rather than destroying the fantasy through computerized scares. Daniel Radcliffe is amply equipped for the role as the grieving lawyer Arthur Kipps, and plays perfectly in to the Edwardian setting. One can only hope that this will continue to spark more ghostly haunts in the terrifying tradition of the Hammer House of Horror. Expand
  21. Jan 23, 2013
    8
    A really underrated and under appreciated film. Very scary. What makes The Woman in Black great is the camerawork and direction, building up a large amount of suspense that makes you jump at the slightest things. This movie should have been nominated for best film editing, too.
  22. Jan 17, 2013
    10
    Holy F*********n **** this movie is the scariest movie I have ever seen. The Women in Black literally blends into her mansion, very well. She becomes the shadows, and lives in the shadows, and the only reason she will come out is to kill children. now don't get me wrong, this is an amazing movie, it's just. Well If you are somewhere around 13 years old or younger, you will still get scaredHoly F*********n **** this movie is the scariest movie I have ever seen. The Women in Black literally blends into her mansion, very well. She becomes the shadows, and lives in the shadows, and the only reason she will come out is to kill children. now don't get me wrong, this is an amazing movie, it's just. Well If you are somewhere around 13 years old or younger, you will still get scared out of your mind. Expand
  23. Jan 10, 2013
    8
    I thought this movie was pretty freaky. In my opinion, Radcliffe should have waited a little longer to be in another movie because throughout the whole thing, there was that little nagging voice 'I'm Harry Potter' in the back of my head! I was officially scared when this movie was over and I wouldn't really recommend watching it alone at night if you're as big of a weenie with scary moviesI thought this movie was pretty freaky. In my opinion, Radcliffe should have waited a little longer to be in another movie because throughout the whole thing, there was that little nagging voice 'I'm Harry Potter' in the back of my head! I was officially scared when this movie was over and I wouldn't really recommend watching it alone at night if you're as big of a weenie with scary movies as I am! Expand
  24. Jan 5, 2013
    6
    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 horrorWhile 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
  25. Dec 27, 2012
    6
    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 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; andThe 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
  26. Oct 22, 2012
    9
    This is the best horror film ive seen in a while. while its not a full horror movie it has a great storyline that keeps you wondering the environments are very creepy and they did everything right this movie is half suspense half horror since most of the horror is psychological there are some parts in the movie when the antagonist will pop out of no where and scare the bejesus out of youThis is the best horror film ive seen in a while. while its not a full horror movie it has a great storyline that keeps you wondering the environments are very creepy and they did everything right this movie is half suspense half horror since most of the horror is psychological there are some parts in the movie when the antagonist will pop out of no where and scare the bejesus out of you if you are into horror/ suspense movies with awesome storylines this is for you Expand
  27. Oct 8, 2012
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Scary,thrilling and a decent classic horror movie with good acting.
    when the trailer was out i was so excited to watch this plus Daniel Radcliffe was playing Arthur.
    He really did a great job.He played his character with seriousness and maturity.
    other than that,The woman in black didn't missed any chance to make us jump from our seats .
    it was so chilling experience to watch it my room and when i was home alone.
    some scenes gave me a heart attack.
    The climax where she give a look at us is damn scary.

    What movie misses is the justification with Susan Hill's novel.
    the weak script and dull characterisation.if this film got these things right .it would have been one of the best horror movies ever made.
    but,it doesn't disappoint you,you ask to be scared and you get what you asked for.
    At least,its better than that teen horror genre.
    a triumph of classic supernatural horror genre.
    Expand
  28. Oct 4, 2012
    9
    The Woman in Black is a well-done and actually frightening adaptation that is filled with constant jump scares and great performances. The only thing I didn't like about the film was that many scenes from the novel were cut out of the film and it was really different from the book, but as a film being loosly based on the novel, it is great. TWIB is not as good as the novel but it is stillThe Woman in Black is a well-done and actually frightening adaptation that is filled with constant jump scares and great performances. The only thing I didn't like about the film was that many scenes from the novel were cut out of the film and it was really different from the book, but as a film being loosly based on the novel, it is great. TWIB is not as good as the novel but it is still pretty good...and frightening. Expand
  29. Sep 10, 2012
    2
    A painfully bad movie and a total chore to watch. The 1st hour of this film is nothing more than scene, after scene, after scene, of cheaply setup sequences designed to make you jump which fail miserably - "oh there's something else he's seen out the corner of his eye (again) which when he looks closer isn't actually there but instead there's something normal which is designed to make youA painfully bad movie and a total chore to watch. The 1st hour of this film is nothing more than scene, after scene, after scene, of cheaply setup sequences designed to make you jump which fail miserably - "oh there's something else he's seen out the corner of his eye (again) which when he looks closer isn't actually there but instead there's something normal which is designed to make you jump.....again". There's no real mystery, no real suspense, and it's astounding that a film with no real content to speak of can actually make it this far through the production process, and to DVD, without anyone pointing out that there's naff-all substance to it. The last 30 min picks up the pace at least, nothing much grabs you but at least the sequence of crap events are over with quicker. And the ending, well, the less said about that the better. The fact that Harry Potter is in it is inconsequential really, he's a non-entity and a bigger personality may have carried the film more, but that doesn't stop the film itself from being an unsave-able piece of pap. Expand
  30. Aug 12, 2012
    8
    A horror film that really puts fear that keeps you glued to the chair throughout the film. I was really surprised by this movie and the ending will not be those who will remain in history as "The Sixth Sense" or "The Others", but is by no means trivial.
Metascore
62

Generally favorable reviews - based on 40 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 23 out of 40
  2. Negative: 0 out of 40
  1. Reviewed by: Kevin Harley
    Jan 9, 2015
    80
    Even now we know he’ll thrive post-Hogwarts, Radcliffe impresses as Arthur Kipps, the solicitor, widower and father with an invested interest in the afterlife.
  2. Reviewed by: Rex Reed
    Feb 8, 2012
    50
    Boring and sedentary, not to mention only occasionally coherent, this creaking-door mystery is not much of a vehicle to display young Mr. Radcliffe's range and charm.
  3. Reviewed by: Olly Richards
    Feb 6, 2012
    80
    Check behind the doors. Switch on all the lights. You won't be sleeping soundly for a while.