The Woman In Black 2: Angel of Death Review

Let me start off by saying that The Woman In Black 2 is a very important horror film for me personally as a reviewer. It's the first of its kind to successfully act as a counter argument towards my proclaimed theory that horror films are seemingly automatically great if they focus more on atmosphere, suspense, psychological terror, and "necessary jump scares". And although I still do believe in that principle to some degree, this unexpected sequel completely challenges that idea considering how much it underperformed even with those attributes included.

Taking it in at a surface level perspective, this The Woman In Black 2 has everything a great "ghost story" horror entry should have in its tool box. The dark and brooding atmosphere, the effective foggy and shadowy color palette, a decent enough supernatural tale at its center, and a recurring sense of psychological terror used throughout. So, even with all of these elements being taken into consideration, why did I come out of this feeling rather underwhelmed and practically bored overall? Admittedly, this was a bit of a dilemma for me thinking about the whole thing once it was over. Usually, whenever I'm reviewing or movie or series, I can easily point out the areas that glaringly didn't work for me, yet this time around I felt a bit stumped by the experience. 

Why didn't this work? It had all of the essential ingredients, didn't it? I just couldn't quite put my finger on it...until I started to take notice of something. During my watch, my attention was starting to lean towards catching the familiar notes that the filmmakers were attempting to hit in order to carry on the legacy of the first film instead of getting engulfed in the viewing experience myself. Usually, if I'm ever watching a movie, and the production related components catches my attention significantly more than anything else, that tells me that the movie itself is lacking in its immersive engagement factor for me. What this also tells me is that perhaps, potentially speaking, there really wasn't much of anything else that could've been done with the actual material itself outside of its cinematic potential. 

The first film did a great job (although by no means a perfect film) at giving you just enough to keep your attention on the titular "monster" in all of its limited allure. What this sequel does is continue down the same path of suspense and tension in an effective surface level fashion without giving a legitimate reason to tag along. It's lacking that crucial component that encourages the audience to pay attention and follow the progression of what's taking place beyond just gazing upon moving images on a screen. This leads us to possibly the main downfall of The Woman In Black 2...its characters.

When you take a step back and look at this sequel at first glance, it's rather easy to say that there's really nothing glaringly wrong with the characters as they all serve their roles in your typical haunted house flick. You have your stern nanny archetype as well as your gentle and caring young protagonist (the innocent, heartfelt victim that the audience automatically latches onto). Best of all are the children who, in my opinion, actually did a serviceable job which is nice to see in this genre. I guess I should give credit where credit is due on that front as child actors/characters can sometimes make or break a movie's enjoyment factor. In this case, having children in a horror story naturally creates more tension and a sense of panic since no one in their right mind would want to see a kid in danger. So, it has that going for it as well.

As a matter of fact, this movie actually takes a few bold steps in preying specifically on that type of viewer-driven panic which is kinda admirable. However, much like everything else, I felt like I was seeing the effort of the attempt verses actually being terrified myself. The problem with these characters is that after they experience something that should be downright traumatizing, they hardly react to the experience in a manner that would be relatable or, dare I say, realistic. One of the golden rules for horror (or any genre for that matter) is that, if the filmmaker wants the audience to feel immersed and connected to what's happening, characters onscreen should emote to the situations that they're in. This of course plays on the very natural reaction that we have as human beings watching someone else experience a very powerful emotion towards something in front of our eyes. We feel inclined to share in that moment ourselves or have a reaction of our own.

That sense of captivation is lacking here as no one ever seems "truly terrified" in regards to what they're seeing (with the exception of a couple of scenes). Our central protagonist frequently sees the "woman in black" throughout this creepy house, yet instead of showing genuine fear and panic, she constantly chases after her or yells at her. Yes, not every woman in a horror film should run away from the "monster" and eventually trip over a branch or something that was conveniently placed. However, keep in mind that this film has nothing going for it except for the atmosphere and...well...a supposed-to-be scary woman in black. It's like watching a Nightmare on Elm Street sequel where every victim that Freddy attempts to kill just curses him out and wakes up unscathed. You've essentially removed any reason for the viewers to be afraid of what they're seeing at that point since the characters themselves aren't showing much fear.

That being said, the most impactful moments of the film comes with the children at this home where the ghostly woman shows up. I'm surprised that they didn't utilize the children more in showing how terrifying it actually would be to encounter this evil entity in a creepy and unknown environment. Instead, we're only given about three children that gets deeply affected in horrible ways. Perhaps this sequel, come to think of it now, would've benefited from being shot through the perspective of the children. Not only would you experience the nightmarish experiences from a child's point of view which is likely infinitely more intense, but also that genuine panic of seeing an innocent child being thrown into danger and not being able to help them. I feel like they missed a great opportunity there at feeding on our natural fears and protective instincts as an audience.

As for the ghost itself, if you've seen any modern day supernatural horror film, then you've practically seen just enough to know what a CGI ghost looks like. It's sad to witness how 90% of the paranormal horror films in the past decade or so basically uses the same CGI stretched out faces, black eyes, or awfully generated shadowy figures to portray "creepy ghosts". It's a shame that the creativity has ended there for most releases, but it does encourage other filmmakers to work around this issue such as here where they specifically use the environment more than the actual ghost itself thankfully. But again, keep in mind that I can only point out the good efforts that I saw, but I honestly couldn't consider it as being effective for me personally. Speaking of which, this is a horror film after all, so was I ever scared? Honestly, I found myself mostly sailing through this pretty relaxed.

However, there is one particularly effective scene that stood out to me (although very minor and brief). There's a moment where one of the girls decide to question Edward (the main child character) about obtaining the picture that he drew after one of the the kids took it from him and died afterwards. What happens after the girl leaves is legitimately creepy as we simply see Edward staring up at the ceiling and watching a decrepit and zombie-like hand slither up a hole into the ceiling. Although not exactly frightening, what makes it effective is the emptiness of any bombastic and generic jump scare audio cue being inserted. The only sound that can be heard is the sound of the hand slipping pass the withered out shards of wood while disappearing into the darkness. This invokes a genuine sense of fear especially due to the fact that this hole is located right above the children's room. 

Unfortunately, those short few seconds of brilliance is the only time that I felt truly compelled to see what happens next only to realize that what follows is the same underwhelming feeling that the overall film gives off. In the end, The Woman In Black 2 is an obviously effort-filled haunted house flick that attempts to do something great in utilizing what it succeeded with in the past. Sadly, there's just hardly enough being offered here that can be considered as emotionally impactful as a viewing experience. I think it would be beneficial to look at this as an important lesson for filmmakers to understand that given the production tools needed to make a great horror film does not guarantee success if the efforts become highly noticeable throughout the viewing.

Remember that the magic of cinema is in its immersion factor where the audience isn't constantly thinking about the man behind the curtains (or production team in this case). I do hope that this sequel was the last time that we'll be seeing of this franchise. The whole thing just feels unnecessary at this point and should've ended with the first. Some films are simply meant to be a "one off" (especially in this genre) and The Woman In Black is a shining example of that.

Rating: 5/10