The Woman in Black Review

The Woman In Black

Starring:

Daniel Radcliffe as Arthur Kipps

Directed by:

James Watkins

(NO SPOILERS)

I can only hope to say that “I know you all have seen this by now”.  Because I would give it a 5/5.  A great adaptation to the original movie (1989).  I was on the edge of my seat the whole time.  The girls behind me were screaming and my friend dropped his popcorn.  It was all played out in the sound.  With loud startling jump scares, be it a bird or the woman herself.

Although very predictable, the ending I did not see coming.  It did not ruin the story, neither did I see an enhancement.  Just made me think “oh, okay.. creepy”.  At the beginning of the movie, because of the characters, and the time period (1900’s), it made me wonder how the director was going to incorporate a woman’s scream.  Because “Harry Potters” AHHH, is no match to a shrilling females blood curdling scream.  The scream was what irked me the most in the end.  Way to over played.  The same scream, over and over, and finally for a long period of time.  Really became redundant and lost its thrill.

Another thing I did not like was humanizing the ghost, putting a not so ghastly image upon something that should be left to our discretion.  She was actually kind of pretty.  In hanging herself, her neck should be broken, or something symbolizing the physicality of her death.

The very beginning started with a woman in a white wedding dress, and I don’t know if I was thinking too contextually, but I thought it would have a clearer connection with the woman in black.  So that was a little disappointing too.

Side note: Adrian Rawlins OR James Potter (Harry’s father) played the original  Arthur Kipps

Watching the original movie by the way will not ruin the new one, or the other way around.

Something I found to be amusing by comparison though, was the original tried to be all high tech with electric lighting, while the new one, tried to go back to candle light. (Just as an example)

ANOTHER thing that irked me was.. Where did the dog go?

Any solutions for those of you who watched it?

All in all, great movie, put it on your list of things to be watched!

Sherlock Holmes Review

I have always taken pride in paying attention to details, although I have grown up in a world of theater I decided to try writing a movie review.

Just to begin I find reviews very biased but I suppose everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

I did not see the first Sherlock Holmes so I will not be comparing it to any other movie.

Warning smalllll spoiler alert!

It was a lot darker then I had thought/hoped it would be.  I mean reading the books, he is a lot more of a witty man and I feel like the script did not capture that side of him– holding only a couple laugh out loud moments.  Neither did I see a lot of the British comedy being used which I had also expected. So overall I’d have to say that Holmes was a disappointment of a character.  But one thing that did go right was that I did really believe Holmes and Watson’s relationship; work partners and family. There were some pretty touching moments between them– almost moving.  I also think Watson’s wife came out of character as a woman of her time as she was revealing the red books codes.  My favourite character had to be Sim, loyal, faithful and trustworthy, almost as a dog now I come to think of it (and I like dogs).  The bad guy character was typical, with the evil grin, high level of intelligence and trusty comrades, although he was a great foil to Sherlock Holmes in that they played their game of chess for the win.

The title of the movie however (The Game of Shadows) I felt did not reflect the story well, it set my expectations in a different direction. The story its self was dragged on a little too long.  Almost a 2 and a half hour movie, I feel there was a lot of fillers and things that were unnecessary to building plot,characters and feeling.  In our days a lot of movies are doing this and I believe it disconnects the audience– I mean, we get the point.  The plot was thin yet unpredictable.  I enjoyed his glancing into the future it reminded me of The Green Hornet.

Side note: One thing I noticed was when the Queen on the Chess board was brought to attention.  I think it would have been more powerful and symbolic if it was the king.  The king is who you aim for, the one you protect, the most important piece, and when you knock over your king you surrender.  Yes, the queen may make all of the moves, but she is also the most easily captured. Also just the DF (Dominant fantasy) Man=power especially back in the 1800’s.

What do you think?

Overall I was not wowed by the movie neither was I bored.  It was a bit slow in the beginning got better around the middle, then worse.  But I did really enjoy the ending.

Is it really ever THE END for Sherlock Holmes?

I give this movie a rating of 6.5/10