My opinion of The Woman in Black may be a little sullied as when I went to see it the ticket seller held us up trying to tell us we were late for the showing, and how very important it was you see the first 5 minutes and how if there are screening problems I should complain every time because they no longer have a projectionist, and in doing so held us up long enough that we missed the first couple of minutes. Then when I got in there the screening was full of young kids, and I mean looking like they ranged from 5 and up, so there was giggling every 5 minutes. One of the staff kept coming in and telling people to quiet down, turn their phones off, etc. So this wasn’t exactly the best environment for becoming immersed in the film.

So, as far as I can tell, the story begins with Arthur Kipps, played by a much too young Daniel Radcliffe, and his wife in labour. Unfortunately she dies in child birth and then we flash forward 4 years with Arthur still in mourning for his wife and his job in danger. He’s told he must go off to sort out an estate in the north east, so leaving his son with the nanny, planning to have them visit him at the weekend, he heads off on the train to the north east. Upon arriving at the inn he’s booked to stay in he’s told his rooms were never booked and he can’t stay as they’re booked up for the week and he must leave, but the innkeepers wife takes pity and lets him stay in their late children’s room.

The next morning Arthur heads off to see the local solicitor to pick up the paperwork, only to be given a small amount and told to get back off home. But Arthur decides to head off to the house and check out the paperwork there. The house is across a causeway that disappears with the tides and he has to be in and out with them. While going through the paperwork he hears all sorts of noises round the house and while looking out of the window he spots a woman in black on the grounds. Running out to find her he begins hearing women and children screaming in the mist as if a big accident has occurred in the marshlands along the causeway.

And this is the start of all the spooky happenings in the film. And let me say this, I really enjoy horror films and it’s very good to see one that relies on chills and psychological, out of the corner of your eye, type horror rather than totally on loud noises or a lot of gore to give you a scare. And I’ll admit there are a few times during the film that I felt myself on edge and times that set my heart racing. The story is a classic haunted house with local legends surrounding it, so nothing wonderfully original on that score. Talking of score, the music does work well within the film to heighten everything, and while there are a few cheap scares using the music or sound effects it really does well within the confines of a 12A rating to give you the scares, and from what the BBFC have said it wouldn’t be much different in the 15 rated cut.

The only real downside to the film I can say is it’s not as scary as so many people have been saying, though having seen a lot of horror I would say that, I can imagine it’ll work well on the younger members of the audience who haven’t seen a great deal of horror. The other things being that with it being a 12A there are far too many very young children being taken in to see it which does spoil the atmosphere a bit, which brings me to; Daniel Radcliffe. A child shouted out “Where’s his scar gone?” when he appeared on screen, but besides this he does seem too young for the role, a widower with a 4 year old child and a position in a law firm. Don’t get me wrong I can’t fault his acting his reactions are done brilliantly and he does well with what’s there, he just seems young for the role.

On the whole though it’s a film worth seeing if you’re a fan of the genre, hopefully without too many kids about. Though I am curious to see if there are any more scares in the 15 rated cut and if it will be released on DVD.