The Woman in Black (umm...horror?)

     Why hello there! It's been a while, which I apologize for. I was busy with graduation and a social life now that school is no longer in session. Back to film!!! One of the numerous movies that I've viewed since my last entry is The Woman in Black. This movie should have been categorized as a bad psychological horror. I can not even write that much about this because there truly is not much to say. It's difficult to write critiques of horror films anyway, but if they aren't even good you just have nothing to say, so I'll wrap this up quick.

    First of all the plot. Let's just rip that to pieces shall we? Here is the chemical equation of a good plot line for a horror movie (as thought up by me):

• Start of film: Possible puzzling or unexplained death (that usually makes you afraid right off the bat)/ Main character(s) introduction.
• Next: The main character(s) either moves/vacations/visits a new town, or moves back to a hometown where more creepy things happen that the viewer still may not understand.
• Middle: The creepy shit is explained and still occuring or popping out randomly while the main character(s) scramble to figure out how to kill/destroy/subdue/put to rest whatever evil plagues them.
• End of film: You are now expecting 90% of the scary parts and the main character(s) have discovered and set up a way to dispose of whatever scary evil is plaguing them which in most horror films they accomplish (a few will throw you for a loop and kill everyone letting you believe the villian wins).

    This is your standard plot equation, which this movie did not follow. And even though breaking from this equation could end well for some horror films, this one was not one of them. I had no idea why kids were randomly dying, why people were freaking out about the house Daniel Radcliffe's character stayed in, or why anything was actually happening until almost the end of the movie. Even then it's really not explained well by any means. The plot as a whole barely explains the reason for the haunting and (SPOILER ALERT) Daniel Radcliffe and his son (yeah, he plays a dad...I'll get to that in a moment) DIE. And they're shown after death in whatever afterlife they go to. I can deal with main characters dying, but not in the way they did, or for the reason they died. And the whole ghost him and his son scene was pointless and awful. I much rather would have seen them smooshed by the train (terrible I know, but the movie is really THAT bad).

    Let's move on to acting and the roles. I'd love to meet the complete moron that made Harry Potter into a widower with a four year old kid? He's not that much older than I am for crying out loud!!!! The only role I feel that he filled well in that movie was father, and I later discovered the boy playing his son in the film is his real life godson which explains that. In my opinion he didn't fit the part (and not just because he's HP, he just couldn't do it right). None of the actors were spectatular, except maybe the dhildren actors and the crazy woman (Daily's wife). So kudos to you few folks.

    There isn't anything else I can say about this besides the fact that I do NOT recommend seeing it. Maybe if you're looking for a few jumps (but if you really want that go watch one of the Paranormal Activity movies).

During afternoon tea, there’s a shift in the air.
A bone-trembling chill that tells you she’s there.
There are those who believe the whole town is cursed.
But the house in the marsh is by far the worst.
What she wants is unknown, but she always comes back.
The specter of darkness, the Woman in Black.

(Just saying, this wasn't in the movie either...)