Mopey, po-faced rubbish.
Mopey? Look who's watching! Po-Faced? Have you seen yourself recently? Rubbish? Look who's talking! Honestly you're a modern fuck-up who doesn't know anything about the classical movies!
Apr 15 - 11:34 AM
Okay, so I'm not a film critic and known next to nothing about the art of film making, storytelling, cinematography or any of that stuff. I also hate horror films that rely on special effects and are more silly than frightening. Whatever its shortcomings (to an expert like yourself) The Woman in Black was creepy as hell. As a non film expert who appreciates scary films, The Woman in Black is the best I've seen in a long time, if not the best.
Having been a fan of the 1989 TV version for years, I got a bit concerned when the child was pulled from the bog, and didn't think the silly ending was necessary when Harry Potter dies and wanders off into the light, or whatever it is, but that aside, the film did exactly what I hoped it would and more - scared the crap out of me, and left me feeling slightly shell shocked.
As a ghost film fan, this one delivered. As a (supposedly) professional reviewer, your review isn't just unprofessional, it's utter bollocks.
Apr 25 - 03:44 PM
this film scared me! aND THAT'S ALL WE WANT RIGHT?
May 27 - 07:15 PM
What the hell does "po-faced" mean anyway?
May 27 - 09:26 PM
What a lazy excuse of a review.Are you too lazy to actually write a cogent critique? Or did you just not see the film? Maybe you are just one of the sad "hipster" critics who think that all you need is a snarkier than thou comment, and a cloak of bored literati pretense to hide the fact that you just cant write a review.
May 27 - 09:27 PM
I don't know why everyone is getting so upset about this review. The movie was in fact complete and utter rubbish. And for the comments about this review being too short, a five year old could create a deeper plot than this so why waste valuable time writing a lengthy review when you could actually be doing something productive, like writing a review on one of the thousands of great movies out there. This movie was frustrating and poorly thought out. Cheap "scares" and "jumpers" coupled with Daniel Radcliffe's terrible acting and limited range makes this movie completely unwatchable. And Daniel Radcliffe? What an ill-fitting choice for the lead, much too young for the character. This movie is one you set aside for a drunken night with friends where you can freely talk over it without feeling any guilt, or need to go back and watch it again... Also what's wrong with society today? Not everyone is going to like everything you like and vice versa. So when you read something that disagrees with you just ignore it and move on. There's no need to be assholes about it.
Jun 12 - 01:22 PM
I totally agree with your review. 100%.
Jun 27 - 06:09 AM
Yes, I guess they were all a little depressed since Arthur's wife was dead, and all the children of the village were dying.
I hope you normally put more thought into your reviews.
Jun 25 - 03:05 PM
How immature. This isn't even a review, it's an insult. You see comments like this from average viewers, but you're supposed to be a critic.
Aug 25 - 04:04 AM
whoever paid you to write that review clearly got their money's worth.
Sep 29 - 01:56 PM