out of contextnahI always thought her appearance in the marshes was way scarier

When viewed out of context, the bed scene can seem rather lame and funny, but let me tell you, when I saw this film as a kid, it made me literally jump up and scream in terror. The entire scene lulled me into a false sense of security, because I thought it was actually going to be a rather touching moment, where he bonds with the ghost of Nathaniel, and then.BAM!. you just don't see it coming.

This message has been deleted.

My husband and I watched it on Christmas Eve 1989 in bed and it most certainly shocked us both rigid AND provoked our Jack Russell into a rage-filled glare and stamp at what he saw on the screen.
You might call us both idiots but I was impressed by my dog's sense of protection against the threat HE felt !

Just watched it for the first time. To me, no, the bed scene wasn't scary. As someone else said, she looked like a Halloween witch. Makeup was overdone (I thought the same in the graveyard scene, when you finally see her face), you see her for too long as others mentioned, and the sound she made, eh.
But I was scared when he was first left alone in the house, with Spider the dog, including the nursery scene.

Why is the make-up 'unconvincing'?
It's just a woman's face.
They overdid it with the maroon shadowing around her eyes.
.. the scenes at Eel Marsh House and on the causeway remain creepily effective but elsewhere it's rather drawn-out and not entirely convincing, especially when the story returns to London and Rawlins isn't really a strong enough actor to hold centre-stage and fully elicit audience sympathy.
I still love Spider, though
Oh yes, I agree on all counts. The first scene on the causeway, when he'd gone out to meet the trap and the mist surrounded him so quickly, that was scary. I enjoyed all the scenes at Eel Marsh House, and I loved Spider. I was relieved he'd only ran away home, and not lured out onto the marsh to certain death.

No, it didn't really
I am not easily scared but I thought the play would be really creepy rather than frightening. The main problem for me was the young lead who was trying too hard and therefore my suspension of disbelief crashed.
However, it was well produced and many members of the audience screamed and there was a lot of nervous giggling. I do find I prefer a good film or TV play to a stage production. Probably down to just my personal preference.

This message has been deleted.

is the bed scene really that terrifying?
Hell yes! I did not know anything about this when I saw it on first broadcast. I don't frighten easily at all but this has stayed with me for 23 years! Haven't seen it again since, but would like to.
Saw the stage play tonight and could not remember the story - the theatre could not recreate that terror for me. Look forward to seeing the movie version - but would love to see this again.
The funny thing is - it's Miss Lemon from Poirot! She is a bit scary anyway!

Why is the make-up 'unconvincing'?
It's just a woman's face.
People do talk nonsense about older television, similarly one of the reviews on this page describes it as being a 'cheap TV-movie' when in fact it was a classy production by 1989 ITV standards and I've read similar comments regarding the (actually very expensive) Jeremy Brett Sherlock Holmes series from youngsters coming at it from the POV of the BBC's
Sherlock

• the style of television may have changed over the last couple of decades but that doesn't mean everything made before 2000 was cut-rate, it's just different to what modern audiences are used to.
  As for 'that scene'; I was a 13 year-old already familiar with horror fiction/movies when this was first broadcast and it made me jump at the time largely because I didn't know it was coming and the film lulls you into a false sense of security with it's earlier purely atmospheric non-confrontational scares. Having said that, watched 23 years later I'm not sure the production holds up entirely - the scenes at Eel Marsh House and on the causeway remain creepily effective but elsewhere it's rather drawn-out and not entirely convincing, especially when the story returns to London and Rawlins isn't really a strong enough actor to hold centre-stage and fully elicit audience sympathy.
  I still love Spider, though

im, 26. didnt know anything about it before watching. having headphones, deeply involved with story and atmosphere.
that scene was scary as hell. and i saw the makeup was unconvincing and all that, but the build up, the sound she makes and her fierce intensity in her face, and his reaction all in combination scared me.
excellent executed scene.

4004'56''N 8633'47''W
I shoot when I see the whites of the eyes.

This message has been deleted.

It's so boring. She looks like a normal woman and not scary at all. They should have kept her in the shadows, that's much more haunting.
The talking kid was silly too.

NOOOOOOOOOOO. It made me think I was watching a comedy rather than a horror movie.
"My name is Alice, and I remember everything"

The reason I feel this scene fails is because it is too long. If we had been given only a second or two of seeing her, then it would have been much more effective. I would have edited it differently.

It was for me the first time I saw it as I knew nothing about it. Not so much second time around.still a great film

I haven't seen the remake. Is it in there?
This scene really scared me. But it's not as scary as the one where he's watching her stare at him over the field and then advance slowly, step by step, toward the house. THAT scared me no end.
"Fear not for the future; weep not for the past." Percy Bysshe Shelley

Well,.YES!
I've seen a lot of horror movies and I love the "creepy" ones - without much blood, cutting throats, torturing and stuff. It's boring and it can make you sick.
BUT, this scene made me cover my eyes for the first time in my life! When I was a child, my granny used to do that for me :))
(I must see it again though :D)

I remember it being a lot scarier when i was a kid, heh
But, the nursery scene was the most chilling, as was the bit when she appears behind him in the graveyard at the house.

As I said in another thread. This scene terrified me when I saw it as a kid. But seeing it recently, it didn't seem like such a big deal. I had remembered her face looking a lot older and ghastly looking, but it looked relatively normal. I also had remembered the woman letting out an ear splitting scream , but it was little more then a subdued shriek. I guess it's just one of those things where certain key scenes of a movie are not at all what you remembered, several years later.

I watched this film the other day at night with earphones on knowing nothing about it..it was brilliant, they dont make em like this anymore.. I gotta admit that scene was pretty unnerving..

This message has been deleted.

Watched the woman in black yesterday first time and didnt know anything about the movie. Pretty laid back haunted atmosphere through the film but then that bed scene came and damn it scared me. i screamed like a little girl. Someone said here that it was little too long and I agree. By the way when Kidd helds Tooveys dog in the pub they look like Tintin and Milo.

This message has been deleted.