The Woman in Black: Angels of Death

[Neon Ignition]

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/23471/-the-woman-in-black-gets-a-sequel

Hammer Films is starting work on a sequel to the recent Radcliffe starring horror adaptation which will be based on an original story recently completed by Susan Hill, the writer of the original Woman in Black novel. The story follows a couple staying at Eel Marsh House forty years after the events of the original film placing events roughly around the time of World War II.

[Brad]

I quote liked the original. Radcliffe was alright in it actually. Like Keanu Reeves was alright in Dracula.

[rmoxon]

The first wasn't particularly good and had nothing about it to even suggest a sequel would be worth bothering with. This just seems like they are cashing in on the popularity of a somewhat mundane film that was only popular in the first place becuase Harry Potter was in it.

I guess it really doesn't have anything to do with the original but the name though?, so it actually isn't a sequel at all really?

[Neon Ignition]

Pretty much, it'll be the same setting and spirit but beyond that a seperate story from the first one.

[Decider-VT]

I quite liked the first one, although it slipped up a bit by succumbing to the "blasting loud noises at the audience = scary" fallacy that lots of modern horror falls prey to. I'd watch a sequel.

[rmoxon]

Was the first one actualy about anything? This woman in black just kept popping up behind people and the audience were suppose to be scared... or I think they were suppose to be scared anyway. It didnt even try to pretend it was written with any kind of intellegence, it was a ghost story in the simplest form, to the point that it didnt even feel the need to include any kind of twist, or ever atempt to make you think that it might be about anything other than an extreamly annoyed ghost. It then ended on a note that felt rushed and designed to shock the audience, but I didnt really feel it worked becuase by that point I just didnt care.

[Decider-VT]

Well, I'm a fan of that creeping sense of dread and subtlety in certain scenes- when he knows that he should be alone and can see a figure at a window, or an indistinct shape moving in the background while he's falling asleep. I like the fact that it's a very simple ghost story, and has some element of restraint. Twists aren't always necessary or appropriate.

[rmoxon]

I wasn't really saying that it needed a twist specifically, just that the writers didn't even try to give it any kind of identity, it was predictable, unmemorable and had virtually no story.

I disagree that it was subtle, like I said it was always clear that there was a ghost knocking about, doors slamming, she was constantly popping up behind him which I presume was suppose to make the audience jump. It wasn't even particularly well made for what it was. when it was over I just wondered why they had bothered to make it at all because it was such a lifeless and by the numbers piece of fluff.

[Decider-VT]

That's why I said there was subtlety in certain scenes, especially when he first entered the mansion. Her introduction to the film is subtle, where she's either out of sight or hovering at the periphery of the camera's focal range. Having her suddenly appear and screech near the end of the film undermined the scariness of the character really, which almost ruined the final shot.

I don't think it was lifeless- derivative, maybe- and Radcliffe did a fairly respectable job. I haven't watched any of the Harry Potter films since I was forced to watch the first one though, so I wasn't seeing him as anyone other than Arthur Kipps throughout.

[Fader209]

I quote liked the original. Radcliffe was alright in it actually. Like Keanu Reeves was alright in Dracula.

I watched some of it and thought he looked far too young to be the father of that boy. He will always be Harry Potter.

[EvilBoris]

I enjoyed the first one, it was kind of like a haunted house in cinema form. Not scary, but fun.

Kinda ironic Susan Hill wrote the book as an antidote to all the Hollywood horrors that were around in the late 70's. Now her book has been adapted into a blockbuster horror film....franchise.

I find it amusing that the for the title they've resorted to the : in the title

[Garny]

You can find the TV version from the 80's on Youtube. I prefer it to the new film.

[Neon Ignition]

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/24167/synopsis-for-the-woman-in-black-sequel

Hammer has released the synopsis for the upcoming sequel

"The story has Eel Marsh Harsh being seized by the government and converted into a military mental hospital during World War II. The sudden arrival of disturbed soldiers however awakes its darkest inhabitant.

Eve, a beautiful young nurse, is sent to the house to care for the patients but soon realizes she must save them from more than their own demons. Despite Eve’s efforts to stop her, one by one they fall victim."