Hi everyone. So I finally took a break from revising and the overload of uni work and went to see The Woman in Black: Angel of Death with my brother. I have a little mixture of emotions for this sequel so let's get into it straight away.
So The Woman in Black: Angel of Death is a sequel to the popular 2012 film The Woman in Black which starred Daniel Radcliffe. Directed by Tom Harper, this film takes place during the Blitz of World War II and caretakers Eve Parkins and Jean Hogg are taking a group of schoolchildren to the eerie Eel Marsh House which seems to be peculiar and run-down but safe. Of course it isn't long before Eve starts to sense that there is something very wrong about the house and the children begin to disappear. Eventually the house becomes a terrifying place to live in so Eve gets help from an attractive pilot to find out what is happening. Soon it becomes obvious that it isn't a coincidence that Eve has come to live in the house that is inhabited by the Woman in Black.
So obviously the first film was such a hit that they just couldn't resist making another one, running it dry of its money. I must credit The Angel of Death as it is actually little bit more original than I thought following the first one but it does pay homage to the first film a few times if you look carefully. From the beginning, to me the storyline was pretty predictable - I mean, two women taking a group of CHILDREN to the only apparently safe place in London. Of course it's an instant recipe for disaster as the Woman in Black is well known for being hell-bent on taking the lives of children to get revenge for her own loss of her son but obviously the film has to go somewhere for it to work.
I don't know if I'm just growing up or I'm just used to horror movies using the same old tricks over and over again but most scenes fell a little flat for me. The jump scares get repetitive after a while because as usual it's the same old 'noise ... silence ... SCARY MOMENT!' every 10 minutes and I could pretty much gauge what was going to happen almost every single time. It'd be a nice change if they didn't always use dolls, creaky doors or rusty pipes to do the scaring for them. I've seen it over a 100 times in many other scary films.
Mind you, a few moments did get my heart racing so it is still creepy at times definitely. I have to admire the camera work as it slowly creeps around the house which really increases the tension of the scene and leaves you watching through your fingers at times. The ending was, again, too predictable for me and you can tell what is about to happen about five seconds before it even does.
I can't say that I'm too disappointed because I sort of went into the theatre expecting it to be rubbish, just another sequel to make more money and to try to follow the first film's success. But I will say it holds its own as a sequel but most of the time I wasn't really that scared but I'd also say it's worth a watch, especially if you liked the first one.
Thankyou for reading.