A time long ago in cinema history known as the 1970’s
witnessed a particularly offering of horror films from the illustrious company
known as Hammer Films. This company
become popular quite quickly given their keen understanding of Gothic horror
and a substantial use of corn syrup blood.
Tragically, as technology advanced it appeared as though the magnificent
company lacked the relevance to continue successfully franchising their films
when competing with films with larger production scales. However, the recent release of the
surprisingly enjoyable The Woman In Black proved a success for the newly
revived company and offers the promise of a good future for Gothic horror. Perhaps it is just the right mix of Daniel
Radcliffe, jumpy scares and rotting children’s toys that makes the film so damn
creepy, but while watching the film I could not help but find myself reminded
of the eerie nature of The Wicker Man, as well as the dreary desperation of
contemporary Asian films. It is not
necessarily a new offering to the genre of horror, but it is certainly
refreshing to see the genre done right, because it is becoming more difficult
to find consistently good horror offerings in the past few years. Essentially, The Woman In Black is your
textbook horror film and as such it is a welcome viewing experience that
respects its absurdity without losing any of its suspenseful elements.
The Woman in Black focuses on Arthur (Daniel Radcliffe) a
wraithlike young man who is coping with the untimely death of his wife after
the birth of their son. He is scraping
by attempting to provide care for his child while also making a name for
himself as an up and coming lawyer.
Despite his best efforts, he is threatened with his job unless he agrees
to take on some clerical work in a desolate village that is a lengthy travel by
train. Upon arrival to the town, Arthur
is dismissed given his foreign nature and clear attachment to technologies and
his clearly urban leanings, attempting to find help from the various townsfolk
with no success, Arthur is eventually befriended by Daily (Ciarin Hinds) the only man in the village who owns a
car. Oblivious to the eerie nature of
the town, Arthur demands a ride to the manor of Eel Marsh, which belonged to
the late Alice Drabow. It is once he
ventures into this house that he realizes the village is not quite as simple as
it initially let on. After viewing a
mysterious woman walking through the cemetery outside the manner, Arthur begins
to ask questions about what actually happened at Eel Marsh. Despite the attempts by the villagers,
including Daily, to extract himself from the situation, Arthur continues to dig
and discovers that Drabow actually lost her own child after it was removed from
her custody given her instable mental state.
If this were not bad enough, Drabow was forced to watch her child die in
the lake in front of her unable to provide assistance as she was locked away in
a cellar. As a result, Drabow’s ghost
takes vengeance on the village causing the town’s children to kill themselves
inexplicably. Arthur, both adamant about
keeping his job and realizing his otherness allows him access to hidden parts
of the village, takes it upon himself to fix the situation. With the help of Daily he discovers the
location of Drabow’s dead child and returns it to her room, hoping that by
reuniting the two the curse will forever end.
However, as Arthur awaits the arrival of his son to the village, the film
cuts to the now empty house as the voice of Drabow yells her refusal to provide
forgiveness, this is followed by Arthur’s son walking onto the tracks of an
oncoming train, only to cause Arthur to dive to his rescue. The film then cuts to the two walking in a
darker version of the train station to discover Arthur’s dead wife, the scene
implies that the family is reunited with the death of Arthur and his son and
the three walk off into the darkness of the tunnel ahead. In the closing image, the camera pans to a
statue of Drabow in the corner as the head moves to make direct eye contact
with viewers, suggesting that her curse is transferred off the screen and into
reality.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c3fd6/c3fd663e0545d5dd3a2362b9a7dc6cc23572b826" alt=""
The Woman in Black is still making its way through theaters
and is incredibly cinematic. Take some
friends with you, as it is certainly an edge of the seat viewing
experience. As for the eventually
release, it is certainly a bluray grab for horror fans.
So a quick addendum after discussing this post with a friend. First, I was incorrect in my dating of Hammer's horror films, they date back to the 50's not the late 60's and 70's. I was unaware of this and plan to look into some of these films in the future to better understand the company. Second, I want to clear up my use of the word schlock. I understand that some may have assumed it meant that it was some how cheap or cheesy due to its heavy use of blood and gore. I did not intend this definition, instead, I simply meant that it was a film that one could pick out the blood and gore as obvious special effects. It is true for many Hammer films, as it is for The Woman in Black, however, this is not a bad thing...it is simply indicative of their styling.
ReplyDelete