The Woman in Black

Although an old fashioned horror film, The Woman in Black is still considered to be one of the scariest movies of all time. Based on the thriller fiction novel with the same title by Susan Hill, it is a tale of a young lawyer named Arthur (Adrian Rawlins), who sets out to the small town of Crythin to seek the estate of a widow who just passed away. He journeys along to the widow's remote house despite the talk of the town, and to his discovery, he learns about its frightening history through strange encounters of the woman in black.

Without explicit use of violence and blood like modern horror movies, this film is cleverly composed to give the audience a frightening experience. The film's simplicity and subtle effects adds to its unique storyline, thus redefining the genre of horror films.

Particularly, the woman in black, played by Pauline Moran, leaves such a strong impression that's haunting, even after the movie's conclusion. Although she is not frequently shown throughout the movie, her character is able to instil fear with just her daunting appearance alone. The woman in black brings a hint of mystery as the movie makes us question her true motives.

This is not a typical ghost story, but yet even better. With a shocking twist and a brilliant combination of terror, mystery and suspense, it will surely be one for the thrill.

Several horror fanatics active on this website, as well as more acclaimed film critics all over the world, are often referring to "The Woman in Black" as the best and most atmospheric made-for-TV horror/thriller ever accomplished. Well, guess what, they are quite right! Herbert Wise's film, based on the stunning novel by Susan Hill and turned into a screenplay by the phenomenal Nigel Kneale (who also created the original "The Quatermass Experiment"), is an incredibly slow-brooding but hyper-unsettling tale that crawls underneath your skin and haunts your memories forever. The strongest assets of "Woman in Black", apart from the flawless script, are undoubtedly the tour-de-force performance of lead actor Adrian Rawlins, the carefully elected filming locations & set-pieces and the continuously ominous ambiance with only a few (but highly effective) fright-moments. Herbert Wise particularly differentiates his film from the rest with two specific qualities that aren't frequently featuring in the horror genre, namely patience and eye for detail. The patience that Wise demonstrates in building up the tension is praiseworthy, to say the least, and the details can be illustrated via a few examples, like the spooky mansion only being accessible during low tide or the poetic beauty of mysterious woman meandering amidst tombstones. What the film doesn't feature, however, is graphic violence or gory make-up effects, but like only the case in the very best horror movies, you're not missing these. More recently, in 2012, James Watkins ("Eden Lake") directed a cinematic version starring Daniel Radcliffe ("Harry Potter" all grown up) as the tormented solicitor. The large-budgeted interpretation of Hill's novel is also adequate, but for experiencing the most authentic ghost-vibes, I advise to seek out this version as well.

Genuinely original in that it denies us the closure we expect to be delivered like the tide; a Tales of the Unexpected meets Hammer House but with the makeup budget spent on a mistery generator.

I've only seen this movie once in my life and have never forgotten it. I was thirteen years old and a teacher showed it in class on Halloween. I had to leave the classroom and have never, ever, forgotten the Woman in Black's face.

The big climax scene is beyond frightening, as can be expected, but I found the earlier scenes to be just as terrifying. The general tone of the film leaves you unsettled, even when nothing particularly scary is occurring. It is very, very subtle, but no other film has ever had quite such an effect on me.

If you think ghosts are scarier than slasher movies, I would definitely recommend this movie. Unless you hate being scared. In that case, don't ever watch this.

I first watched the 2012 Remake and gave that a 4/10. It was competently-made but had no real atmosphere, no standout moments, forgettable plot...and Daniel Radcliffe was miscast.

Now got round to the ITV original. Got it on Bluray. Despite claims of "high-definition" it doesn't look much different to standard DVD-quality. But this wasn't a high-end cinema production, it was a budget TV movie. I gather the previous official media release was a very poor VHS-transfer to DVD. According to other reviews the Bluray represents a significant improvement over what was available before.

I recommend the original 4:3 Format as with Widescreen you get quite a bit chopped off the top & bottom of the image. This isn't what the makers intended. Widescreen for a second viewing, certainly. But first-timers should go for the original format. You'll have to accept title-cards every 25min but that's no biggie.

On to the film itself: it's good! The most praise I have is for the faithful reproduction of 1920's England, including fascinating devices like a vintage audio recorder, and manually winding up the electricity. Very well done in that regard, the producers did their homework!

Acting is also of high quality: the sense of fear Arthur goes through is palpable. The plot develops nicely, and isn't predictable. There is one outstanding spine-tingling scene...and because of that scene I can't recommend this to kids. Otherwise the film is relatively tame, tho' the sense of creeping dread is done well. I'm not a fan of the ending, your mileage may vary.

Overall tho' it does what many modern horror movies don't: it builds up tension, has intelligent dialogue and gives us memorable scenes.

Recommended if you appreciate older ghost movies like The Changeling, The Innocents, The Haunting....not-recommended if you prefer more blockbuster horror-movie techniques like CGI, jump scares and shakeycam action.