IMDb रेटिंग
4.8/10
30 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ें40 years after the first haunting at Eel Marsh House, a group of children evacuated from WWII London arrives, awakening the house's darkest inhabitant.40 years after the first haunting at Eel Marsh House, a group of children evacuated from WWII London arrives, awakening the house's darkest inhabitant.40 years after the first haunting at Eel Marsh House, a group of children evacuated from WWII London arrives, awakening the house's darkest inhabitant.
- पुरस्कार
- 2 जीत और कुल 2 नामांकन
Millie Pidgeon
- Joyce
- (as Amelia Pidgeon)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
I wanted to like this movie. I loved the 2012 movie with Daniel Radcliffe. I like the premise, using Eel Marsh House as a refuge during the WWII Blitz. However, it was not to be.
Everything in this movie felt cheap and artificial, from the way too loud sound track, the too dark scenery and the multiple "boo" scares that were used instead of actual creepiness and tension building.
The actors were flat and stale, delivering lines that felt like they came from the tablet of an eighth grader. I never once felt anything or cared for any of them.
TWiB herself was much less menacing than in the first movie, when she was even seen at all.
Changing the venue from Eel Marsh to an airstrip midway didn't help things either. The atmosphere of the house is what makes TWiB so creepy. An airstrip with lots of explosions isn't creepy at all.
The ending scene of the movie was so cheap and anticlimactic compared to the end of the 2012 movie, where we're treated to TWiB breaking the fourth wall and glaring directly at the viewers.
This movie could have been good, should have been good. They rushed through it and did it in the cheapest way possible and it shows.
Everything in this movie felt cheap and artificial, from the way too loud sound track, the too dark scenery and the multiple "boo" scares that were used instead of actual creepiness and tension building.
The actors were flat and stale, delivering lines that felt like they came from the tablet of an eighth grader. I never once felt anything or cared for any of them.
TWiB herself was much less menacing than in the first movie, when she was even seen at all.
Changing the venue from Eel Marsh to an airstrip midway didn't help things either. The atmosphere of the house is what makes TWiB so creepy. An airstrip with lots of explosions isn't creepy at all.
The ending scene of the movie was so cheap and anticlimactic compared to the end of the 2012 movie, where we're treated to TWiB breaking the fourth wall and glaring directly at the viewers.
This movie could have been good, should have been good. They rushed through it and did it in the cheapest way possible and it shows.
It's 1941. Eve Parkins is escorting some children to the Eel Marsh House escaping from the blitz in London. She meets RAF pilot Harry Burnstow on the train who is stationed nearby. Jean Hogg is the mistress at the home for kids. Strange things occur and a child is found dead outside.
This is a horror without much scares or tension. It has the moodiness but there is too much dark in the scenes. The adults aren't that compelling. The reveal of Burnstow's job is interesting. This movie may be better off if the kids are the protagonists. This could be scary from the children's point of view.
This is a horror without much scares or tension. It has the moodiness but there is too much dark in the scenes. The adults aren't that compelling. The reveal of Burnstow's job is interesting. This movie may be better off if the kids are the protagonists. This could be scary from the children's point of view.
First off; I enjoyed the first movie even though most people found it to be pretty terrible. And to be fair a lot of the criticisms were valid for it, but there was still something there.
But this sequel is sadly just an utter mess. There's just nothing there, the acting is beyond subpar, there is nothing scary in this because every jump scare is so obvious it's not even funny. To the actors defense, the plot is not only corny to the max it's told in such a way it's just laughable! This director had no idea what he was doing, I would not be surprised if he literally phoned it in.
This is not a film you should watch.
But this sequel is sadly just an utter mess. There's just nothing there, the acting is beyond subpar, there is nothing scary in this because every jump scare is so obvious it's not even funny. To the actors defense, the plot is not only corny to the max it's told in such a way it's just laughable! This director had no idea what he was doing, I would not be surprised if he literally phoned it in.
This is not a film you should watch.
The clumsily titled "The Woman in Black 2: The Angel of Death" is a Hammer horror sequel to the very effective 2012 horror vehicle for Daniel Radcliffe, which itself was based on the jump-fest of a London stage show.
Set 40 years after the original, the spooky Eel Marsh House is the destination for a headmistress (Helen McCrory – Malfoy from Harry Potter), her spoonful-of-sugar-style teacher Eve (Phoebe Fox) and a class of WW2 evacuees from the London blitz.
One child in particular (Tom, played well by young Jude Wright) has been struck mute by being recently orphaned and becomes the focal point for the supernatural activity. Eve strikes up a relationship with a handsome and square-jawed young airman (Jeremy Irvine from "War Horse") on the train, who proves to be a useful asset when the going starts to get tough.
Let's start with the good. One of the most important people on a movie like this is not the lead actor or the director or the make-up artist, but the editor – and Mark Eckersley deserves a call out for effectively delivering some very good jump scares. And Phoebe Fox and Helen McCrory are both very good in their roles: Phoebe Fox, in a feature lead debut, is a personable and very attractive actress that should be given something better to work on.
There are also some high production values in terms of the atmospheric sets, locations and the cinematography, no less then you would expect from the UK film industry.
Unfortunately, these positives are poorly served by a whole heap of negatives. The story is a jumbled mess, linking back to elements of the first story that I (at least) can't remember the details of and only referencing in passing the spooky core of the Woman in Black premise (that when someone sees her a child dies). The effective jump scares are added rather at random, which perhaps is what makes them even jumpier. However, apart from one scene where Eve returns to the house alone, there is little in terms of a build-up of tension that made the Radcliffe version so effective.
All in all, rather a damp squib, and the trailer is actually a lot better than the film. It's not that bad that if you see the Woman in Black a part of your soul dies but there are better films to occupy you at the moment.
(If you enjoyed this review please see my other reviews at bob-the-movie-man.com and register your email to receive them automatically. Thanks.)
Set 40 years after the original, the spooky Eel Marsh House is the destination for a headmistress (Helen McCrory – Malfoy from Harry Potter), her spoonful-of-sugar-style teacher Eve (Phoebe Fox) and a class of WW2 evacuees from the London blitz.
One child in particular (Tom, played well by young Jude Wright) has been struck mute by being recently orphaned and becomes the focal point for the supernatural activity. Eve strikes up a relationship with a handsome and square-jawed young airman (Jeremy Irvine from "War Horse") on the train, who proves to be a useful asset when the going starts to get tough.
Let's start with the good. One of the most important people on a movie like this is not the lead actor or the director or the make-up artist, but the editor – and Mark Eckersley deserves a call out for effectively delivering some very good jump scares. And Phoebe Fox and Helen McCrory are both very good in their roles: Phoebe Fox, in a feature lead debut, is a personable and very attractive actress that should be given something better to work on.
There are also some high production values in terms of the atmospheric sets, locations and the cinematography, no less then you would expect from the UK film industry.
Unfortunately, these positives are poorly served by a whole heap of negatives. The story is a jumbled mess, linking back to elements of the first story that I (at least) can't remember the details of and only referencing in passing the spooky core of the Woman in Black premise (that when someone sees her a child dies). The effective jump scares are added rather at random, which perhaps is what makes them even jumpier. However, apart from one scene where Eve returns to the house alone, there is little in terms of a build-up of tension that made the Radcliffe version so effective.
All in all, rather a damp squib, and the trailer is actually a lot better than the film. It's not that bad that if you see the Woman in Black a part of your soul dies but there are better films to occupy you at the moment.
(If you enjoyed this review please see my other reviews at bob-the-movie-man.com and register your email to receive them automatically. Thanks.)
I wasn't overly impressed with the first WOMAN IN BLACK film, starring Daniel Radcliffe, which I thought was okay but a bit lacklustre in comparison to the excellent but little-known 1980s adaptation. However, the first film looks like a masterwork in comparison to this cheap sequel.
The first thing that becomes apparent about THE WOMAN IN BLACK 2: ANGEL OF DEATH is that it's so blooming dark. Every scene seemingly takes place in near pitch blackness, which makes 90% of what's going on really difficult to make out. I suspect that the poor lighting was due to hide deficiencies of budget and the like - poor sets for example - but it makes for a frustrating viewing experience.
Otherwise, the plot is a rehash of the first film's, except with different characters and a larger cast. The backdrop is WW2 but doesn't really play an important role in the proceedings, and the lead, Phoebe Fox, is saddled with a very dull character. Helen McCrory is a little better, but the 'horror' content is limited to repetitive jump scares and there's little to nothing in the way of genuine atmosphere or real plotting. Instead, this WOMAN IN BLACK feels like stumbling down a flight of stairs in the dark; there's the odd jolt or two, but you'll regret it afterwards.
The first thing that becomes apparent about THE WOMAN IN BLACK 2: ANGEL OF DEATH is that it's so blooming dark. Every scene seemingly takes place in near pitch blackness, which makes 90% of what's going on really difficult to make out. I suspect that the poor lighting was due to hide deficiencies of budget and the like - poor sets for example - but it makes for a frustrating viewing experience.
Otherwise, the plot is a rehash of the first film's, except with different characters and a larger cast. The backdrop is WW2 but doesn't really play an important role in the proceedings, and the lead, Phoebe Fox, is saddled with a very dull character. Helen McCrory is a little better, but the 'horror' content is limited to repetitive jump scares and there's little to nothing in the way of genuine atmosphere or real plotting. Instead, this WOMAN IN BLACK feels like stumbling down a flight of stairs in the dark; there's the odd jolt or two, but you'll regret it afterwards.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThe original concept was that Eel Marsh House had been requisitioned as a hospital for mentally ill soldiers but this was dropped.
- गूफ़In the blackout in the cellar, why don't they switch on the pilot's torch whilst trying to light the candles?
- भाव
Hermit Jacob: Died on Sunday, seen on Monday.
- कनेक्शनFollows The Woman in Black (2012)
- साउंडट्रैकJennet Humfrye Nursery Rhyme
Composed by Jack Arnold
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- The Woman in Black 2
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- King's Cross Station, King's Cross, लंदन, इंग्लैंड, यूनाइटेड किंगडम(exterior scenes)
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $1,50,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $2,65,01,323
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $1,50,27,415
- 4 जन॰ 2015
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $4,88,54,305
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 38 मि(98 min)
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.35 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें