Cinema: The Woman In Black
Posted on 14th Feb 12 by Brian Lloyd | 
0
‘…a lavishly directed gothic horror…’
Daniel Radcliffe is in a very tough position. There’s an argument that could be made that he is acting and working today simply because, when he was eleven, he fit the physical description of Harry Potter. He grew into the role, yes, but the reality is is that he was initially put there because he fit the description. No more. That was all that was initially required of him. Therefore, THE WOMAN IN BLACK, being his first role without the protection of a billion-dollar franchise, should showcase how much he has grown as an actor and how he is able to stand on his own two feet. Right?
The story, adapted by Jonathan Ross’ beautiful wife, Jane Goldman, is one of a gothic horror. Arthur Kipps (Daniel Radcliffe) is a struggling widower-lawyer who’s sent to rural Wales to attend to the affairs of Alice Drablow, who has recently died. Upon reaching the village, it’s made perfectly clear that he isn’t welcome that something genuinely chilling is afoot – the children of the village are killing themselves. The plot moves forward at a decent pace and Goldman’s screenplay is good, however the dialogue does sometimes veer off into cliched clunkiness. Thankfully, this isn’t too often and scenes that require no dialogue are given none. The script does highlight how vogue superstition and mysticism was in the 18th century, where the film is set. The set design is very much evocative of Edwardian England and the lighting really does work to give a genuine sense of foreboding throughout the film, particularly during the scenes at night in the house. The house itself is beautifully designed and does really feel like it’s being swallowed up in dust and ivy leaves. James Watkins, who previously directed EDEN LAKE, knows how to slowly build a feeling of dread in the viewer. As well, the idea of nature and landscape adding to the horror is something he’s done well before in his previous work. Where this film deviates from EDEN LAKE is that it isn’t given over to gore and blood violence – here, it’s chills and jumps that are in use.
THE WOMAN IN BLACK is a lavishly directed gothic horror, and James Watkins really is to be commended for his work. There are some genuinely frightening sequences in the film. Where the film falters is with Daniel Radcliffe. As mentioned, he is just coming out of the HARRY POTTER franchise and trying to make a mark for himself. The unfortunate reality is is that Daniel Radcliffe is an English Keanu Reeves. His performance is wooden throughout and his delivery is schlocky at best. It might just be that the horror genre isn’t suited to him, or that period pieces aren’t his forte. He has received favourable reviews as a stage actor – maybe that’ s where his strength lies. He is, after all, only 22 and has a long way to go in terms of developing his skills. But here, it’s the director and screenplay that are really doing the heavy lifting. Ciaran Hinds does deflect some of the attention away from Radcliffe and gives a rounded performance as Sam Daily, a man who has lost a son but isn’t given over to hysterics. It’s unfortunate because Radcliffe does seem like he really is trying his hardest in the film – it just doesn’t translate into it being effective. That being said, the film’s direction is of such a high quality, so tightly and neatly formed, that his lacklustre performance doesn’t detract from it. The film doesn’t serve as a debut performance for Daniel Radcliffe. It’s a fine film, no doubt, but it’s no thanks to him.
DROP-D RATING: 8 / 10
Tags: Cinema, Culture, daniel radcliffe, horror
