Don't watch it late at night if you have to go home alone.

Rating: 8/10 (16 June 2012)

It is not a good idea to watch the 10pm screening of The Woman in Black and then drive home alone through dark, mysterious lanes to an old house that creaks and groans in the night.
There has been a great deal written about Daniel Radcliffe's first film since Harry Potter graduated and much of it for entirely the wrong reasons. He's an actor and he plays different roles. Career (and life, perhaps) defining as it was, that episode has ended and he's embarked upon the next seventy years of his life. Some reviewers have been overly critical of his performance but, having watched it with a dozen other viewers who were equally unnerved, that, too, is unfair criticism. It's a bit like condemning Beckham for not scoring when he set up all five goals.
Certainly, it isn't an award-winning performance and he looks too young, despite light stubble, to play a lawyer, but it is a convincing turn, albeit one that occasionally needs more oomph. At times he seems afraid to really immerse himself in the character of Arthur Kipps, but it is a vast improvement on his early over-acting as the wizard boy.
It isn't the only criticism of a film that is certain to boost the resurgence of Hammer. There are one or two cheesy moments we could do with out, not least of all Jane Goldman's unnecessary rewriting of the end sequence, which novelist Susan Hill left with an air of hopelessness. And the scream that we hear at various times through the film feels like a generic sound effect last heard from the mouths of the ringwraiths in The Lord of The Rings trilogy. But when the film is seen as a whole, these really are very small quibbles and the overall production quality renders these almost insignificant.
The sets and locations are superb, from the dark, cobwebby Eel Marsh House and its overgrown cemetery to the thick, devouring swamp by the causeway. Though the film is largely shot in muted hues of blue and grey it feels rich and magnificent upon the screen and throughout the film I was torn between thoughts of how stunning it could be and stifled calls of "What the hell are you doing there?" Radcliffe brings a desperate sensitivity to the screen as a bereaved husband whose son tellingly draws him with a frown and there are times where he looks quite the hero. He won't look back at this as his best performance ever but it is solid and a definite step in the right direction. Ciarán Hinds predictably gives another supporting character depth and life and it is always a pleasure, although too infrequent, to see Janet McTeer on the big screen. She has very few scenes as Mrs Daily but is flawless in her performance as the unhinged woman that is, at times, almost as disturbing as the titular character, and in the hands of a less capable actress Mrs Daily could easily be little more than a freak.
The Woman in Black is loosely termed a horror film, although it is more of a chiller, but is it scary? If you like your frights gory and blood-splattered, then no. But if your fears are of the unknown and the barely seen you won't be disappointed. There are moments towards the end when we see too much of the ghostly woman but the fleeting glimpses and the hints of terror are enough to really put the willies up you. The small audience jumped in unison to frequently for comfort and more than a few were very vocal in their fright.
The fingers of fear scratched my spine with their fingernails and I left the cinema with a damp shirt and a desire for company and light conversation before bed. I managed neither and have just realized I promised to see it with another friend next week. Fool! Another film review from The Squiss. For more reviews from The Squiss subscribe to my blog at www.thesquiss.co.uk