Come To Think of it, Everyone is Wearing Black

                                  

With one of the most gripping and horrifying opening scenes in recent memory, I suppose "The Woman in Black" would earn the distinction of being an 'atmospheric' horror film that relies on mood and starkness to inspire a sense of fear rather than gore and human cruelty.  This is an elegant period film that some have mistakenly set in the Victorian era, but I believe is more correctly placed in the Edwardian era, circa 1910, or thereabouts.  It stars Daniel Radcliffe in his first post-'Harry Potter' outing as Arthur Kipps, a young solicitor (Lawyer) sent to settle the estate of a recently deceased woman.  I was surprised to find that I didn't really think of the boy wizard once while watching the procedings here and for a movie that doesn't require much of its young lead, you'd think that would be easy to do.  My focus instead was on the mounting dread and mystery surrounding the titular woman in black, and when a horror film with a thin story is capable of drawing my attention so deeply, you know it has done something right.

Apparently "The Woman in Black" is a remake of a 1989 TV movie of the same title, itself based on the novel by Susan Hill.  I never saw that one, but this version, just as british, has been directed by James Watkins, whose only previous feature was the exceptional "Eden Lake."  He expertly sets a mood here not only with a grim color palate and lots of mist,  but with a relentless build-up puncuated by cleverly placed jump scares.  Jump scares are the oldest trick in the book for horror features, but Watkins gets around the commonality by putting them precisely where you'd expect, and then ruthlessly placing one or two more right after it.  In the film's most antagonizing sequence, I counted at least three that I did not see coming.

The plot itself is no great shakes.  Arthur Kipps is dispatched by his firm to settle the estate of Ill-Marsh house, a forboding mansion only accesible by timing the tide that washes over the single road to the front door.  Arthur has lost his wife to childbirth, and cares for his young son Joseph (Misha Handley, interestingly enough, Radcliffe's godson).  Arthur's firm has been displeased at his despondent nature and makes clear that this assignment is his last chance.  Leaving behind Joseph with the promise that they will be reunited in three days' time, Arthur takes a train to the village.  At first he finds hostile locals, and a couple none to eager to offer him a room at the local inn.  Perhaps they know something of Ill-Marsh house.  Perhaps they have good reason to fear meddlesome outsiders. 

Arthur finds one friendly local named Daily (Ciaran Hinds), who happens to be the only villager with an automobile.  Daily offers to drive the young solicitor to and from the isolated marsh house on the condition that Arthur join him and his wife for dinner.  This dinner is perhaps one of the most bizarre and eventful dinners in the history of cinema, but perhaps the 'twins' would have been better suited to a comedy.  Turning down their offer for a room, Arthur contends that he'd rather work through the night sorting through endless documents looking for the last will and testament of one Mrs. Drablow (Alisa Khazanova).  What Arthur begins to uncover in the mess of papers is an even messier history involving the Drablow's deceased son, whose body was never recovered from the depths of the muddy marsh.

The rest of the details are your pleasure to discover.  Details involving the identity and motivations of the Woman in Black, the reasons for the hostile villagers and a context for that frightening and mysterious opening scene.  This is all played out in a seething, ghostly atmosphere complete with the sounds of creaking, pounding, rocking, crying children and even a barking dog.  Come to that, Kipps is actually the most silent entity in the film.  Daniel Radcliffe's performance is subdued and understated; a far cry from his Harry Potter role to be sure, but what is there for him to do, really?  He plays Arthur as a grieving man not much given to spiritual mumbo jumbo.  He does not scare easily, and seems to persue each new development with the expectation that he will find a logical explanation.  When things turn out to be more than he bargained for, his thoughts turn to his son and deceased wife.

In an age where people seem to only want to see blood spilling and heads rolling, it is nice to see a horror feature that relies on atmosphere and creaky old houses.  Although, the theatre in which I saw "The Woman in Black" was fairly full, so maybe there is still an audience for this sort of film.  While thin on plot and long passages where nothing is said at all, it is a credit to director James Watkins that this movie serves as many scares as it does.  Danielle Radcliffe also deserves credit for carrying a feature with just grim stares and an occasional wordless jolt.  If anything, it shows that he has roles waiting outside of Hogwarts School.  It'll be interesting to see his career develop.  In any case, "The Woman in Black" is an effective, chilling feature.  The ending provides enough mystery to inspire interpretive conversation.  I think my feeling on it would be similar to Arthur's.  Wherever those train tracks lead, he doesn't much care; he has what he needs and so do we.