The Woman in Black

Movie review by Sandie Angulo Chen, Common Sense Media
The Woman in Black Poster Image

Common Sense says

age 14+

Macabre ghost story is slow but creepy enough for teens.

PG-13 2012 95 minutes

Parents say

age 13+

Based on 24 reviews

Kids say

age 13+

Based on 161 reviews

Did we miss something on diversity?

Research shows a connection between kids' healthy self-esteem and positive portrayals in media. That's why we've added a new "Diverse Representations" section to our reviews that will be rolling out on an ongoing basis. You can help us help kids by suggesting a diversity update.

A Lot or a Little?

The parents' guide to what's in this movie.

Community Reviews

age 15+

Not brilliant - Use judgement before watching this film.

I will be honest, I hate watching horror so this would be the last thing I would watch. However, I saw the stage play by Stephen Mallatratt years ago and re-watched this film again to remind me of this story. Whilst at first you may think it is scary, it is a fine film with some fine acting mainly lead by Radcliffe as Arthur Kipps. Surprisingly this is produced by Hammer Horror films so it does have some gory moments (including a kid who coughs up blood and one who later sets herself on fire because of the control the Woman in Black has over her). However it isn't all too gory. Indeed, the majority of the scares are based inside the house and the use of jumpscares and the macabre house design keeps you on the edge of your seat. I will say even though I did find it scary, at times the jumpscares were a tad predictable and it made me groan after my initial shock of what I just watched. Overall, I will say this is an alright horror if you want a typical haunted house story. Whatever you do, please consider what scares your kids. Of course, this isn't the scariest film ever made (For me, the Conjuring was scarier than this) but it does has some very disturbing and scary moments which could terrify some younger kids. So use your judgement and consider if this is the right film for them.
age 15+

Old fashioned spooker delivering on its perilous period promise.

The Woman in Black is directed by James Watkins and adapted to screenplay by Jane Goldman from Susan Hill's novel of the same name. It stars Daniel Radcliffe, Ciarán Hinds and Janet McTeer. Music is scored by Marco Beltrami and cinematography by Tim Maurice-Jones. Plot has Radcliffe as young London solicitor Arthur Kipps, who is sent to the North East village of Crythin Gifford to clear up the affairs of deceased woman Mrs. Drablow. When he arrives he finds that the memory of Drablow, and her remote house of Eel Marsh, holds the village in a grip of fear, particularly those who have children..... It's fitting that that bastion of British horror, Hammer Studios, should be behind this delightful period ghost story. For this positively oozes old fashioned values, harking back to all those wonderful spookers set around a creepy village that featured an even creepier castle or mansion at its core. More presently, the film has kindred links to the likes of The Orphanage, The Others and The Changeling, while the vengeful spirit acting out of Eel Marsh House is pumped by J-Horror like blood and Darkness Falls' Wraith bitch nastiness. So clearly The Woman in Black is not a fresh arrival to the horror splinter where the ghost story resides. However, great period ghost story films are in short supply, and Watkins' film most assuredly is a great entry in the sub-genre. Propelling it forward is Watkins' (Eden Lake) excellent sense of mood and crafting of palpable unease. Quite often the better ghost story films are better because they operate on a what you don't see is what scares you more level, Watkins has managed to keep that aspect of his film whilst also giving us enough of the truly terrifying spirit to jolt us in our seats; often showing her to us and not to Radcliffe's Kipps! When the shocks come, and there are many and they are bona fide underwear soiling, they act as merciful releases from the built up dread, but then when Watkins doesn't deliver a shock, we are left waiting uneasily, darting our eyes all over the expansive frame, searching fruitlessly for a glimpse of something troubling. Did that wind up toy move? Is that a pallid face we just glimpsed in the shadows? That damn rocking chair is the scariest there has ever been! And on it goes.... A film such as this is only as good as the production design and setting for the story. Thankfully Watkins and his team have nailed it there as well. Eel Marsh House exteriors are Cotterstock Hall in Northamptionshire, perfectly foreboding, while the beautiful village of Halton Gill in the Yorkshire Dales gets a Hammer Horror make over to become Crythin Gifford. But it's with the interior of the house where the makers excel, an utterly unforgiving and upsetting place, brilliantly under lit by Tim Maurice-Jones for maximum scary effect. On the acting front the film rests solely on the shoulders of Radcliffe, and he comes up trumps. Initially its awkward accepting him as the father of a young boy, and once he gets to Crythin Gifford he is dwarfed by all the other adults who live there, but once the Victorian setting envelopes him the awkwardness evaporates and the characterisation becomes more realistic and easy to sympathise with. The character is changed from the book, meaning Radcliffe has to carry inner torment as well as exuding an outer coat of trepidation blended with stoic fear. It should be noted that for much of the picture he is acting on his own, reacting to the house and the overgrown gardens and marshes, in short he is terrific and it augers well for his adult acting career. In support Hinds and McTeer are pillars of professionalism, with McTeer's Mrs. Daily a creepy character in her own right, but it's also another neat meditation on grief that sits alongside Arthur Kipps'. The ending is also changed from that in the novel, and it's already proving to be divisive. How you react to it, and it is up for a two-fold interpretation, may dampen your overall enjoyment of the picture? Personally I have no issue with it, I was still sunk in the cinema chair breathing heavily at that point! The certification and the presence of Radcliffe ensures that a teenage audience will flock to see it, many of whom will not get the "horror" film that they are after. Hopefully the word will get out that this really is only a film for those who love a good boo jump ghost story of old, that's its target audience, and that's the people whose reviews you should trust. 10/10

This title has:

Great messages
Great role models
Too much violence
Too much drinking/drugs/smoking

Movie Details

Our Editors Recommend

  • Inception Poster Image

    Inception

    Intense, complex, brilliant sci-fi thriller; violent scenes.

    age 14+
  • The Others Poster Image

    The Others

    Good but creepy; may be too intense for some.

    age 14+
  • The Sixth Sense Poster Image

    The Sixth Sense

    Great, but sometimes scarier than R-rated horror.

    age 14+
  • Unbreakable Poster Image

    Unbreakable

    Creepy drama/mystery has some violence, language.

    age 13+

Themes & Topics

Browse titles with similar subject matter.

  • Cartoon picture of a book
    Book Characters
    See all
  • Cartoon picture of a ghost and vampire
    Monsters, Ghosts, and Vampires
    See all

Common Sense Media's unbiased ratings are created by expert reviewers and aren't influenced by the product's creators or by any of our funders, affiliates, or partners.

See how we rate