This movie is based on the book of the same name written by Susan Hill that was released in 1983. The book has some gravitas as a play was written based on the book which is still to this date running on London's West End and is the second longest running play on the West End after The Mousetrap.
The main interest in this film of course is Daniel Radcliffe who is in his first straight role since finishing Harry Potter although as many people know Daniel Radcliffe has done other work other than Harry Potter, 2007s theatre production of Equus being an example of an outside success for Radcliffe (Radcliffe actually being nominated for a major theatre award for his role). Although people from the Potter generation seeing this film for Radcliffe can expect a very different movie.
Daniel Radcliffe however is as much the movies major draw as he is the movies major flaw. The character Radcliffe plays here, Arthur Kipps, is a young solicitor who lives with his 4 year old son whose wife has recently died and therein lies the problem. Age wise Radcliffe could just about pull this off, being 23 it is possible for a man of his age to be in this situation. Unlikely but possible. We as an audience however just having seen this man play a character of 18 are being asked a lot in suddenly being expected to consider a 4 year old child and a recently died wife for him. Radcliffe still simply looks too young for the role. If able to see past this however into the movie itself, the movie has a lot to be recommended.
In an era dominated by such horror films as Paranormal Activity and the recently ended Saw series it takes a great deal to shock an audience of today. What this film concentrates on is the paranormal side of horror, a risky venture as this will always carry comparisons with the aforementioned series by Orem Peli, but to its credit it largely carries it off.
Beginning with a scene with 3 children seemingly under psychological control who end up dying (i will not spoil how), a bold start, it wastes little time in setting the scene. We then follow Kipps as he takes up a last chance legal case, settling the estate of a lady who recently died, as we are told he is struggling financially and has this one last opportunity to prove himself before being fired.
The case leads Kipps to the estate in question, Eel Marsh House where the owner Alice Drablow lived with her adopted son Nathaniel and husband and her sister Jennet Humfrye. We soon learn that Nathaniel died while young being drowned at the nearby beach and was actually Jennet's son. Jennet hated her sister Alice for adopting Nathaniel and not allowing her to raise her own son.
As soon as Kipps arrives at the estate he is haunted by the 'woman in black' and the activity gets steadily worse as the film progresses leading to a quite surprising twist at the end. The horror and scares in this film are very effective and capture a real sense of terror, being genuinely frightening and holding their own against the scares of its current peers. A lot of viewers may actually prefer this film to Paranormal Activity as it has a proper, and quality, story; Radcliffe also, despite the above mentioned problems plays the role well enough showing promise that he may yet escape the curse of most child actors who eventually seem to fade away or get too typecast
Radcliffes next role however, much more so than this one, may yet decide the path his career will take from here on but does act as a good bridge as in its own right it is a reasonable horror movie putting the legendary Hammer back on track.
Verdict:***--
No comments:
Post a Comment