My expectations must have been too high
-
Snake_Oil — 17 years ago(December 05, 2008 08:45 AM)
Again, I'm another disappointed viewer. I liked the movie, but was let down due to the hight praise it's received online and in the genre press. Of course, if it hadn't been for that hype, I probably wouldn't have sought the movie out. A good flick that doesn't live up to its reputation. Maybe I'll revisit it in a couple of months as some have suggested, and see what I think then.
On another point, I expected the screams and the accident that Arthur repeatedly hears in the sea mist to be a foreshadowing of a fatal accident that would occur to his wife and children who would unexpectedly show up at the manor of course, that's not what happened, and I was glad to see that I hadn't quite figured out the course the movie was taking. -
choctawdogmusher — 17 years ago(January 15, 2009 04:31 PM)
I think that the after-effect was much scarier than the movie. I wasn't very impressed while watching it, but I felt a little jumpy afterwards. That night I saw a shadow that looked like the woman, and I almost peed my pants.
Kristen & the Fuzzy Huskies Team
http://www.freewebs.com/kristenssleddogs -
perorewen — 17 years ago(January 20, 2009 08:17 AM)
That actually happened to me as well. I saw it first time when I was a child, and I was scared witless for a week after. The night after I'd seen it I was afraid to go to sleep, and most of the night I kept staring towards the window afraid the woman might come through it. In the years to follow I forgot completely about "the scene", I mean I had no recollection at all of it, except from the tin soldier (which was scary enough). The other scenes, however: her appearing at the church, at the moors, the child hidden in the locked room and the drowning horse, kept clinging to my mind and the very though of them terrified me.
At one occation (when I was a kid) I was even sure the woman was in the kitchen. I got so scared that I run up to a friend of mine to seek comfort, which only succeeded in giving her an equal fright.
They blew up Congress!!! HAHAHA!
-
dangerous_ideaz — 17 years ago(February 23, 2009 02:00 PM)
SPOILERS
I'd been wanting to see this movie for a while now, but having finally seen it, I don't really understand what the fuss is about. I guess my expectations were too high. Although the famous bed scene was unexpected and a bit scary, 2 seconds into it, I couldn't help but think how ridiculous the actor looked. I half expected to see her eyes pop out of her head. The ending was really disappointing as well.
I agree. I tracked WiB down recently after seeing how the people on this board praised it. But I think it moves too slowly and follows some of the horror conventions a bit too closely. I've seen all of the classic haunted house movies, and this does not compare to The Haunting or The Innocents. (I suspect the best image in the moviethe woman on the lakewas taken from The Innocents.)
I thought the woman's make-up when she appeared on the moor was more cadaverous than when she showed up in the bedroom, which detracted from those close-ups.
I also think the film should have ended with the main character losing one child. It's more horrific if a parent has to live with that tragedy than if the whole family dies together.
This might be an entertaining TV movie, but it does not compare to the classics made for the theater. See the original Haunting instead. -
PurpleNiobe — 14 years ago(August 22, 2011 12:00 AM)
I am of course excited about the remake, and I didn't even know about this version until someone mentioned the gentleman playing Arthur in this version played Daniel Radcliff's father in Harry Potter.
I did not come to this IMDb page and no one that I knew had seen this version. SO I found it on YouTube and watched with pretty low "How could can an 80's horror film be?" kind of a mindset.
Overall, I highly enjoyed it and was pretty creeped out. Is it the "scariest movie ever"? No, but I don't think it needs to be. It's just a character driven, very eerie, unsettling and atmospheric ghost story free of blood and gore so I appreciated it.
I'm glad I didn't know about "The Scene". I wouldn't have jumped as much as I did if I had!
When the hurly-burly's done. When the battle's lost and won. -
-
sKePtOmAnIaC — 14 years ago(January 02, 2012 02:00 AM)
This was quite a let down for me as well. After seeing the high ratings and positive reviews, I decided to see it. It was decent at best, not good or great by any stretch of imagination. I like atmosphere and psychological thrillers over blood and gore, but this movie was quite dragging and slow. The woman in black wasn't scary at all.
-
catbookss — 11 years ago(November 30, 2014 08:30 AM)
This was quite a let down for me as well. After seeing the high ratings and positive reviews, I decided to see it. It was decent at best, not good or great by any stretch of imagination. I like atmosphere and psychological thrillers over blood and gore, but this movie was quite dragging and slow. The woman in black wasn't scary at all.
This was my experience as well, although I'd read no reviews and knew nothing about The Scene. I saw it last night.
Warning, spoilers coming up next!
I loved the beginning, showing the main character at work and his employer telling him to go take care of the effects of their client. He did a good job of acting throughout, I thought. Loved the tender and lovely scenes between he and his wife and children, and later with the older couple and their dog.
The scene in the village with the little gypsy girl was excellent. Why was he the only one who came to help her? Why were the villagers so peculiar about it, particularly the man in the pub he spoke with later? They did a good job of making you think there had to be more to it than the villagers thinking of gypsies as some kind of human vermin. It was a good set-up.
I also liked that the children were able to see the woman in black, but no one else except the main character.
The Eel Marsh House setting was spectacular! I loved all the scenes that were shot there and to me it was the scariest parts of the movie. Having him momentarily lost in the mist, not knowing for certain which direction the house was in, an unseen carriage heading towards him, that was very effective. The interior set was also excellent. Loved the recording device scenes, the electricity generator running down, and he was very convincing in the child's room.
But, I didn't find the woman in black to be at all scary. Too much make-up, once we finally saw her face up close. I almost laughed when I saw and heard her appear over his bed, and all I could think when she appeared standing in the lake was I wouldn't have wanted to be that actor, standing on a tiny platform while they filmed it.
I also didn't find the premise convincing, that a woman who'd given up her child (and the child had died along with her) would have become so enraged that she'd want to kill other children after she'd died, so that was a disappointment.
But I did like the other aspects of it I mentioned, so I am glad I saw it. -
winterOfMyDiscontent — 14 years ago(March 11, 2012 09:06 PM)
A total waste of time for me. I found the movie essentially dull and forgettable. I wonder why it has caused such a positive effect on people, though. I don't know, I wasn't expecting incredible special effects, I was hoping to meet a suffocating atmosphere, a very dark story background instead, I found the script to be very shallow.
I'm sorry, I didn't even find it spooky. I found the scene in the bedroom before the fever quite unsuccessful causing me only to chuckle.
"My name is Alice, and I remember everything"