The Woman in Black (2012)

Sad Professor

There's a tv movie version of this from the '80s that is supposed to be very good but I haven't seen it. Anyway this is the trailer for the upcoming version with Daniel Radcliffe. Looks really really good. It should be out here in February.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arixaTWmIA0

Auvers

saw the original a quite a few years ago and it was top notch for a TV movie

if they capture the essence of the original it will be well worth a watch, Just had a look on youtube and the whole original movie seems to be uploaded there

libra02

Auvers wrote: »

saw the original a quite a few years ago and it was top notch for a TV movie

if they capture the essence of the original it will be well worth a watch, Just had a look on youtube and the whole original movie seems to be uploaded there

Apparently people who have seen test clips of it are giving it very good reviews so far.

I read the book years ago and it was creepy as hell. Of course lent it to someone and never got it back :mad: but orderded a new copy and it arrived today so cannot wait to read it again.

I think someone said this version is a bit different from the book but I do not mind that.

Actually quick bit of trivia the man who played Arthur in the 80's version actually played the role of Harry Potter's ( Daniel Radcliffe) father James in the films.

That is some coincidence.

faceman

The stage version is really creepy, looking forward to seeing what the movie version comes out like.

Gael

Sad Professor wrote: »

There's a tv movie version of this from the '80s that is supposed to be very good but I haven't seen it. Anyway this is the trailer for the upcoming version with Daniel Radcliffe. Looks really really good. It should be out here in February.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arixaTWmIA0

That opening nursery scene with the musical toys scares the bejesus out of me, but I've an intimate knowledge of the novel and the stageplay, so maybe I'm too emotionally involved! I just hope they do it justice.

There are a few different trailers for this film on youtube now, which include a few scenes not in the one posted above by Sad Professor. I saw the trailer being played at Vue last night. Only a little more than a month until it comes out, I'd say.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPYMUnJGURI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSHEYVGaWok

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0_Ao2pg1jw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sTMAS2qlWE

jpm4

Really, really love the TV film version of this.....they'd better not screw it up.

Sad Professor

I saw the trailer for this in the cinema the other day and the audience started laughing when "Harry Potter" appeared on screen. I reckon people may have trouble taking Radcliffe seriously in a film like this, which could really hurt the film's chances.

OldeCinemaSoz

it's great to see the hammer logo back on the silver screen. a company which provided me with many a sleepless night as a kid; sneaking in late night viewings on itv behind the parent's backs...

the original did everything it said on the tin...scared. like i said, if it's hammer, i'm in!

FlashD

I remember the TV series of this being bloody creepy even though it is over 10 years since I saw it, there is one particular scene which scared the living byjaysus out of me I have never forgotten to this day. , Most who have seen it will know it.

This trailer is out a few months now on youtube, i'm hoping for the best but a lot of cliched elements of the modern horror are starting to appear, wind up toys etc etc. I also have a feeling from the trailers that the horror is more in your face where as the TV series was more about setting a mood with limited scares.

Just checked youtube...like another poster says, the original is on there in parts.

LOL...so is that scary scene appropriately titled 'That scene'

Gael

A spooky clip from the new film:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fFdM-VPMaE

p to the e

Well this looks poo inducing. In a good way. Hopefully this will move a few people away from forever linking him with Potter as I've actually warmed to Radcliffe in the past few years.

I noticed one of the trailers uses silence to build tension quite well whereas another trailer uses the "LOUD NOISES" method of scare tactics. Interesting.

Alicat

Even the book creeped me out! Can't wait to see this. I'm torn though, if the TV version was good should I try to get my hands on that first?

Gael

Alicat wrote: »

I'm torn though, if the TV version was good should I try to get my hands on that first?

It's on youtube.

dark crystal

The BBFC have been ordered by the ditributors to make cuts to the film in order to achieve a 12A certificate:

http://www.digitalspy.ie/movies/news/a361267/daniel-radcliffes-the-woman-in-black-cut-by-bbfc-to-make-12a-rating.html


Trying to target the Harry Potter audience perhaps?

WoollyRedHat

**** the distributors, greedy, corrupt *****.

Gael

Six seconds removed? Meh. Violence/gore is not what makes The Woman in Black scary, it's the way that it plays with your mind (the greatest tool of terror possible) through the power of suggestion and showing you as little to scare you as is necessary.

Gael

Gael wrote: »

Six seconds removed? Meh. Violence/gore is not what makes The Woman in Black scary, it's the way that it plays with your mind (the greatest tool of terror possible) through the power of suggestion and showing you as little to scare you as is necessary.

Along the lines of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwT4WbwrjlE

Handsome Bob

Read an article today with Radcliffe saying that he's gonna avoid franchises and "anything crap". Couldn't help but think he was taking a shot at the Potter films and saying "I'm not a crap actor, the Potter films just made me look ****!"

When you're trying to make it off of a franchise that you were synonymous with, the worst thing you can do is have a chip on your shoulder, and I fear Mr. Radcliffe has such a chip.

Don't dump on the thing that made you what you are.

OldeCinemaSoz

Don't worry...it'll all be reinstated for
a 4 for 22 in 6 months time at YOUR LOCAL STORE...



Seriously though, all this bull is just a
marketing ploy. It's all wild and wolly and
plays people along.

Extra extended scenes on the dvd will include...

5 seconds of WTF gore "oh, i didn't even see it there!"...

5 minutes of extraneous dialogue... "i'm nearly asleep, yawn!"

Sad Professor

I doubt that was a dig at the Potter films. He probably thinks of them as being on a higher level than all the other fantasy films he's been offered. But obviously if he has any hopes of being a serious actor he's going to try and distance himself from that franchise. He faces an uphill battle in convincing audiences to think of him anything other than Harry Potter. I don't hold out much hope of him succeeding.

Give him a few years I'd say. I am looking forward to this. It's a creepy stage play, so I hope they don't f*ck it up

WoollyRedHat

Handsome Bob wrote: »

Read an article today with Radcliffe saying that he's gonna avoid franchises and "anything crap". Couldn't help but think he was taking a shot at the Potter films and saying "I'm not a crap actor, the Potter films just made me look ****!"

When you're trying to make it off of a franchise that you were synonymous with, the worst thing you can do is have a chip on your shoulder, and I fear Mr. Radcliffe has such a chip.

Don't dump on the thing that made you what you are.

The way I would read into that from what you have posted above, is that simply does not want to get involved in another franchise, which will tie him down to another recurring character and that he wants to branch out and prove his worth outside Harry Potter. Don't see him having a go at HP at all, but rather as wanting to be able to be identified by more than just the guy who played Harry Potter by avoiding another popular franchise character and anything crap.... which is o.k really.

jpm4

Sad Professor wrote: »

I doubt that was a dig at the Potter films. He probably thinks of them as being on a higher level than all the other fantasy films he's been offered. But obviously if he has any hopes of being a serious actor he's going to try and distance himself from that franchise. He faces an uphill battle in convincing audiences to think of him anything other than Harry Potter. I don't hold out much hope of him succeeding.

I wouldn't have held out much hope for Elijah Wood being anything other than a hobbit for the rest of his career either, but he seemed to shake the role off fairly well. Radcliffe deserves a chance.

Sad Professor

Yeah, but Wood had a career prior to LOTR, plus he was only a hobbit for 3 films released over a 3 year period. Where as Radcliffe was a child actor who has spent the last 10 years playing the same character.

Gael

Radcliffe reading (reciting?) from the novel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BEtJ8XBfoo

mcmacness

Really wanna see this, my friends are pussys when it comes to scary films though!

pixelburp

Ah now, to be fair to the guy: his "anything crap" comment wouldn't have been about all things Hogworts - he's not that dim as to insult the franchise that made him - instead, it would be more likely he was referring to the undoubted dozens of Z-list scripts that landed on his agent's desk the moment the Potter series ended. I can only imagine the number of Potter-clones & generally garbage scripts he has to sift through to find a job worth chasing.

Gael

Very positive review here: http://www.moviescopemag.com/reviews/theatrical/the-woman-in-black-film-review/

OldeCinemaSoz

OT i know and i digress...

but the most fabulous trailer for a horror film
was for PHANTASM...

a real gem of a film if you haven't seen it.

Gael

Another *very* positive review here (potential spoiler alert): http://whatculture.com/film/the-woman-in-black-review-spooky-suspenseful-shockathon.php

Radcliffe's peformance seems to be the only element of the film that the reviewer faults, but comparing him to Keanu Reeves in Dracula seems plain unfair to me, even without having seen the film.

Here's another one that also praises the film, but finds no fault with Radcliffe's performance, and seems to think that he has successfully left the HP character behind him:

http://www.heyuguys.co.uk/2012/01/25/the-woman-in-black-review/

Both reviews give the film at least four out of five.

Gael

The opening scene of the film is now on youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCR4tfQBd6w

OldeCinemaSoz

Gael wrote: »

The opening scene of the film is now on youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCR4tfQBd6w

How nice! It all looks like an onset visit
from FANGORIA...

:rolleyes:

And we all know where that is now...
on Liffey Quay...in the FP shop periodalicals and very,
very over priced....

delbertgrady

I saw it last night. I don't think I've ever been at a film where the audience jumped so much, and then followed it up with that sort of nervous laughter, indicating, "Oh, I feel so foolish...". Radcliffe is a decent central presence, and is onscreen almost constantly. Inevitably, some people will bemoan the "cheap" scares and say it's all been done before, but you could level that criticism at anything in the genre. It's very well shot and the score is suitably minimalist. I liked it a lot.

delbertgrady

No, it's a bit more respectful than that. Okay, there are the obligatory soundtrack bursts, and yes, there are jumpy incidents which could have cynics sneering, but there are several exceptional scares which only a horror pedant would dismiss.

mcmacness

Has anyone read the book? Was going to buy a copy the other day but it looked very short, like the film would have contained so much more, which is unusual for a book to film adaptation.

FlashD

mcmacness wrote: »

Has anyone read the book? Was going to buy a copy the other day but it looked very short, like the film would have contained so much more, which is unusual for a book to film adaptation.

Book to film adaption? I didn't know there was a book unless it was released to coincide with the film.

It originally start out as a play as far as I can tell.

Looking forward to this now based on the above reviews, haven't seen a decent horror in a while.

Gael

FlashD wrote: »

It originally start out as a play as far as I can tell.

It started as a 1983 novel written by Susan Hill. A friend of her's called Stephen Mallatratt (now deceased) read the novel and thought that it'd make a great stage play and he adapted it for the stage with her permission.

It originally debuted in Scarborough and then moved on to London, where it has been running continously on the West End since 1989. A TV movie was also made of it by ITV in 1989. Copies of this on VHS/DVD have been hard to come by, but you can currently watch the whole thing on youtube.

The film is out today in Ireland. It'll be interesting to see how it compares to the TV movie at least. Comparing it to the stageplay is probably unfair, since they are two different media.

403 Forbidden

Gael wrote: »

It started as a 1983 novel written by Susan Hill. A friend of her's called Stephen Mallatratt (now deceased) read the novel and thought that it'd make a great stage play and he adapted it for the stage with her permission.

It originally debuted in Scarborough and then moved on to London, where it has been running continously on the West End since 1989. A TV movie was also made of it by ITV in 1989. Copies of this on VHS/DVD have been hard to come by, but you can currently watch the whole thing on youtube.

The film is out today in Ireland. It'll be interesting to see how it compares to the TV movie at least. Comparing it to the stageplay is probably unfair, since they are two different media.

Is in the cinema any where today ?

Looks like its out everywhere tomorrow

mcmacness

Knew I saw a book! I was supposed to be going to see it with someone but they dont want to go now, all my friends are too afraid because of the trailer! Hope I get to see it before video release!

Gael

flowrider04 wrote: »

Is in the cinema any where today ?

Looks like its out everywhere tomorrow

It came out in the US last Friday, but won't be out in Ireland and the UK until tomorrow (Friday 10th).

humanji

Saw this today. It's really good. Lot of cheap jump scares, but a lot of really great suspense moments. Not mad about the ending, but it all worked out well. It's strange seeing Harry Potter all grown up.

libra02

Saw this yesterday and have to say I really enjoyed it.

Having read the book years ago I was excited to hear it was being made into a film especially by Hammer. Even though the film does vary from the book on certain points this is in no way a disadvantage, instead it is all the better for cinematic purposes.

It has all the elements of a good gotic horror film, without none of the usual blood and gore loved by todays horror films. Instead it is real atmospheric with plenty of shiver and chills down your spine moments. I certainly jumped a few times and so did veryone else in the cinema.

The acting was great and I think Daniel Radcliffe's performance was very good. Harry Potter never once entered my mind during the film and it was a wise and good choice of role for his first major film outside of the HP franchise. Good to seee Ciaran Hinds in it to as Sam Daly and it was great.

The set's, location etc were great and really added to the atmosphere - those toys were just to creepy and awful. It was shot beautifully too.

So I would def reccommend a trip to the cinema to see it.

Mindkiller

mcmacness wrote: »

Has anyone read the book? Was going to buy a copy the other day but it looked very short, like the film would have contained so much more, which is unusual for a book to film adaptation.

It's not that unusual. A lot of book to film adaptations are actually adaptations from novellas. Shawshank Redemption was one. Benjamin Button another. Heart of Darkness is only 90 pages or so but it served as the thematic inspiration for Apocalypse Now, which is 3hrs+ last I checked.

ChewChew

mcmacness wrote: »

Has anyone read the book? Was going to buy a copy the other day but it looked very short, like the film would have contained so much more, which is unusual for a book to film adaptation.

The book is really good! I defrinitely recommend you read that too!!

mcmacness wrote: »

Knew I saw a book! I was supposed to be going to see it with someone but they dont want to go now, all my friends are too afraid because of the trailer! Hope I get to see it before video release!

I saw it on Friday night. It's really good! It's not exactly a horror movie, imo, but it is very eery and atmospheric. There are plenty of jumpy scenes and scenes where I wanted to Shake the main character and tell him not to go near the House... or dont open the door.. lol. Things like that.

All in all, the book and movie are fantastic and I would highly recommend them

mcmacness

I saw it Friday night too! I thought it was so scary! After the film I had like no makeup left on my face after rubbing it all off blocking my eyes. My friend actually full on screamed at one stage

paulosham

I saw it on friday and thought it was cliche filled ****e. Decent performances from all involved though. I thought the casting was very good too with some unusual looking faces that helped set the tone. Overall disappointment though.

mike65

I'm very happy that this has taken off so well, not for the film but for Hammer. I doubt anyone involved with its re-birth would have foreseen their first "prestige" release doing so well even with "harry potter" in the lead (which could have alienated as many as it attracted) should mean they are set fair for a few years (The Curse Woman In Black, The Woman In Black Strikes Back, Rites of the Woman In Black and so on )

Irish Aris

I don't know or care if this has been done before or if the scare is cheap (or whatever).
I really enjoyed it although at moments it scared me big time. Very dark and atmospheric. Daniel Radcliffe was OK, but IMO this is mostly about the story and the characters/actors fitting into it.
Highly recommended.

candy-gal1

went to see this on saturday night, scared me silly!!! :eek:
i havent actually shrieked at a horror movie ever tbh, plus it had the play on your mind afterwards thing too, great to see good scary films coming back now, instead of the usual goretastic rubbish imho

Skinfull

candy-gal1 wrote: »

went to see this on saturday night, scared me silly!!! :eek:
i havent actually shrieked at a horror movie ever tbh, plus it had the play on your mind afterwards thing too, great to see good scary films coming back now, instead of the usual goretastic rubbish imho

LOL you lie! I saw you jump AND shriek at the Raptor scene in Jurassic park! Good times!

I saw this last night and really enjoyed it. Very atmospheric and dark but filled with clichés but feck it, clichés are clichés because they work! Jumped more than a few times and watched some of it through my fingers.
On a side note I thought Radcliffe was terrible. Very stiff and wooden and had no chemistry with anyone he interacted with. I dunno if that was on purpose, to isolate him or what but it was distracting and removed me form the movie. Any scene he shared with the kid was cringey. More so when you see on IMDB that he is his actual godson. Someone needs to teach him how to hug a child.

emeraldstar

Skinfull wrote: »

On a side note I thought Radcliffe was terrible. Very stiff and wooden and had no chemistry with anyone he interacted with. I dunno if that was on purpose, to isolate him or what

I think it's just him as an actor, TBH. I always thought him terrible in Harry Potter. Very emotionless and forced.

Still can't wait to see this though; going tomorrow.