The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death – Movie Review

Share it with your friends Like

Thanks! Share it with your friends!



Chris Stuckmann reviews The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death, starring Phoebe Fox, Jeremy Irvine, Helen McCrory. Directed by Tom Harper.


Asuka Pickett says:

Seriously. Horror filmmakers should look at movies like The Babadook and
Oculus, and/or games like PT. Those don’t have horrible jumpscares.

Timo Jattu says:

Brace yourselves… January is here

Oscar Griffiths says:

I don’t get it with you and the babadook, i rewatched it in hopes i just
went in with the wrong mindset last time, still not fucking scary AND IT
HAD FUCKING FALSE JUMP SCARES IN IT! I don’t like these double standards
you seem to hold Chris.

angus bhattacharya says:

Its funny in the UK January is a fucking great month for us. Last year we
got The Wolf of Wall Street and other good good movies. This year we get
Birdman and Whiplash. My condolences to all in the US stay strong its just
one month of the year.

The Nice Guy says:

TheBabadook might be structurally sound but in my opinion is not scary at
all; compared to sinister that is.

L says:

Under 301 club!!!!

Curtis Louthan says:

Brace yourself stuckmann for the movie “predestination” which comes out
this month. What a fucking piece of incoherent sloppy bizzare shit. I found
myself laughing my ass of in a few moments that were suppose to be
serious!! I can’t wait to see you tear it apart!

Viv Varghese says:

I understand you don’t like some movies especially those that deserve
negative reviews, but you’ve got to stop fucking acting like that all the
time you have a negative review.

ShyGuyWithTheLazyEye says:

I might be pointing out the obvious here but horror movies are shit
nowadays. They need to get taught a lesson in horror that jump scares don’t
make a movie scary. I think all film makers should play P.T. in film school
or whatever. That game almost made me shit my pants. 

Abbas Khan says:

[REC], [REC] 2, Sinister, VHS 1 & 2, The Conjuring and The Babadook were
the only good ones I’ve seen as of late, with the [REC] films on top, love

Jefferson Apgar says:

I need that shirt in my life

LiquidPumpkin says:

I didn’t even expected a sequel of the film….

Ryan Higginbotham says:

I love seeing Chris so…passionate about movies.

GhostyKid says:

The point about jump scares is super important. Often times, I find myself
plugging my ears watching horror movies. And, you know, that might look
like I’m scared. But really, I just don’t want to hear the loud bang sound
that I know is coming. There is a very big difference between being scared
and being startled.

Sajid Abdurrahman says:

“A Fuck-King bird!”

Chris, you never fail to entertain. :)

Hening Wangi says:

i watched this alone and there’s about 5 girls sits by my side. they’re
thing that makes me nervous when i watched it was how load will they scream
because of jumpscares. mannnnnnn and the jumpscares is A LOT!! this sequel
ruined the first movie.
i guess there is a new subgenre now… horror-jumpscares…

cody plant says:

You are right though watching it at home will be impossible.

Josh Thomas says:

It’s a shame a once great horror studio like Hammer can’t individualize
themselves again. This is the same studio that first brought lots of blood
to major theaters in the 1950’s. That’s iconic in the horror genre. I’m not
saying they should remake their old movies like Frankenstein and Dracula
either, they need to find better ideas. I’m sure there are better writes
out there. I love their settings so much and I wouldn’t mind seeing more
movies like Tim Burton’s Sleepy Hollow (a tribute to the classic Hammer
style). That movie matched the classic Hammer film to a perfection.

JWUniverse says:

Great review Chris. I would say I’m not surprised this movie sucked but I’d
be lying.

Chris Stuckmann says:
Darth Sidious says:

I only paid to watch the movie because Jeremy Irvine is in it.

Flora Posteschild says:

Wow, it’s like you’re describing The Woman In Black 1: decent acting,
characters sticking around a haunted house for no reason, lazy, aimless
writing, pointless jump scares, one or two frightening moments. Add to that
ridiculous historical errors that could have been avoided if anyone had
done research or given a damn, and there you have WIB1.



He told me .

Armando dela Cruz says:

In all fairness, this is the most “Hammer Films” among the studio’s recent
entries. I feel there is the intention to touch on the subject of war in a
rather antiquated, German expressionist way (e.g. the death by barbed wire,
by a gas mask, and by drowning). Ed Gonzales (from Slant Magazine) even
compared the hole in the ceiling to a boil on a skin. There’s a nagging
sense of meddling in production, though, and taking that this is housed
under a studio that perhaps tries too hard to re-surge into consciousness
as they had many years ago. With that said, I hope Hammer Films carry on
with films like “Let Me In” in mind. With those, they have far better

yu stu says:

When that bird hit the window I shat my pants.

TomsEpicChan says:

I really enjoyed the first film, the second one does not seem very good
though. I love your reviews too Chris but I disagree with the fact that the
children going to the Eel Marsh House was a silly idea, I mean, I think it
is a different and creative way not to have the horror flick in present
time as most do nowadays. I also feel like that comment about lazy writing
was based purely on the fact that the film did not look good. But I am of
course yet to see the film and I am sure you are right with everything you
stated, it was just a minor problem I have noticed various reviewers have
stated when really I personally disagree. Sorry if this is coming across as
rude after all I rarely disagree with you. Anyways, keep up the good work
Chris and I look forward as a movie fanatic too to your other film reviews.

cody plant says:

This movie was great :), err well thats my opinion.

Spar10Leonidas says:

I’m pretty sure that you can’t make a good horror sequel to a horror movie.
Even if you tried. This is because whatever you do with the first one is
virtually impossible to replicate without giving the audience the feeling
of “been there, done that.” And like I said, that’s assuming that you
actually put the effort into it (the opposite of what the guys who made
this movie did). I have yet to see a good example of a horror movie
sequel. Feel free to point one or two out, but I’m going to go out on a
limb and assume that even if there are any, those examples are probably the
exception, not the rule.

Carol Jemmott says:

OMG your awesome. Your whole room is lined with what looks like Manga,
Anime posters, “Hey Arnold” toy, looks like a… Zelda doll, and Dragon
Ball Z Goku action figure, Awesome!!!!

Suleman Saleem says:

Hey Chris, or any other subscriber, in my theater it’s listed that Taken 3
will release on January 9th. And you say that January is the dumping ground
of shitty films. So will Taken 3 be bad considering it’s releasing in

Prentice Sherrod says:

This movie was filled with cliche’s.. I was very frustrated watching this
in the theater.. And the worst part were those God… damn… False scares

Molly Wilks says:

The first film wasn’t even scary, there were a few jump scares that wern’t
bad but it was sooooooo dissapointing. So WHY make a second one !!!

TheLAGaming99 says:

Well it’s a good thing i guess, you have now a candidate for Worst Films of
2015, yay… i suppose…

Universe Arcana says:

The lead actress is pretty good in this movie. She was the only character I
really cared about lol

SnickersDoodle5 says:

God Dammit. I was actually hoping this sequel would be good. I wonder what
they’re going to come up with in October. And the infamous next January.

Vlarin/Maddian's no.1 fan girl xxx says:

technically the woman in black and the woman in black 2 aren’t horror
movies, it’s a ghost story it’s about a ghost who wants revenge, i
personally loved it i only saw it the other day, but i like the whole story
as for the jumpscares,. It’s supposed to be like that, since the first one
is basically the same but i still love the story and how always seeing
someone happy makes her want revenge. Which is what happened in the first
movie. also the story was written by the author of the first book and first
film, I also like the fact that the main actress went through exactly what
jennet went through in a way. Which was why jennet was trying to take the
little boy who lost his parents away from the teacher because she is trying
to be a mother to him.

Also for me I actually did care about the characters especially the pilot,
the little boy and the other teacher, the main actress, but that’s just my
opinion of what i thought of it.

Jared Scott says:

Here is my review for the movie, and I wrote this before I saw this review.

The Woman in Black 2 is a film by Tom Harper and as well as a sequel to
Woman in Black directed by James Watkins. This movie opens up on a young
woman by the name of Eve Parkins, a school teacher with a relatable past to
Mrs. Drablow (the woman in black) and is trying to get some children from
London to safety by taking them to an abandoned mansion by a marsh known as
the Ell Marsh House. The house is very broken down, but to the school
board, habitable and apparently all they have got. While on the train
there, Eve meets the charming, Harry Burnstow, who’s destination is quite
close to Eve’s. During their first night, Eve has a dream about her
troubling past. She is noticing strange things happening inside the house.
One boy in particular, Edwards, won’t speak to anybody but draws and writes
to express his feelings due to the death of his parents that happened two
days before. In one circumstance, his comes in contact with the woman in
black, whom (offscreen) tells him things, specifically about Eve, but she
never knows until he writes it out to her. Now that the evil of the house
is revealed to her, she must overcome it by making up for her past, and to
save her remaining students, and, Edwards.
This movie was was overall shallow, and had very cheap and over used
tactics to scare its audience. I did not see any build up to a scare. They
were all shock scares, and when I say all, I mean all of them. Some of them
were even from the first woman in black, such as the rocking chair and the
woman in black hanging herself, but the same scares might have meaning to
them, because the woman in black might use the same tactics to scare all of
her victims, like Mr. Kipps. The scares were just so predictable though
still. The characters were all cliche and blank, especially Mr. Prince
Charming Harry. Now to talk about the small amount of good things. First is
the sets. Everything looked incredibly accurate the house was down to the
chipped paint and cobwebs. Second was that the main character was super
pretty. Now this may seem unimportant but having an attractive character is
very important in order for the audience to root for them, and she was very
pretty. And last is that no matter how cliche or predictable the scares
might be, they were still scary.
Overall I will give this movie a 4.5/10. I don’t think it’s a movie to
think too deeply about, frankly, no horror movie is like that. I don’t
think it is a good sequel to the first but it is a good movie to show those
that are scared easy or don’t care about stories.

Francos Tacos says:

Do a Tusk movie review please! Interested in what u thought of it. And if u
made a vid reviewing it already and I missed by mistake an apology in

Joseph Pahl says:

Chris, you got it 100% correct when pointing out the superfluous number of
jump scares. And that face you made, where you are slightly turning your
head away from the action happening on the screen because you KNOW that
another false jump scare was coming soon. I was incredibly tense watching
this movie, but not in the good way like I would be watching someone that
was formulated better.

pyote5 says:

Exactly, Your spot on about horror movies. I’ll go heck out that video you
mentioned. Woman in Black 2 felt just like “a horror movie” to me and I
agree with everything you said. Some of the elements of good horror I think
are atmosphere, likable characters with beievable motivations and of course
it should be as terrifying, although how terrifying depends on your
preference, a bit like how some people dont like going on the most intense
roller coasters.

I thought the lead and the young boy was likable enough but exploring a
dark house, following spooky noises?. It’s a movie full of lazy horror
tropes. False jump scares everywhere, at least there weren’t any bathroom
mirror scenes.

It’s not the worst horror movie I’ve seen but its also nothing special. I
think it manages to create an eerie atmosphere pretty good and the
characters were likable enough which is very important in horror I think.
Nothing seems to ruin horror more for me than a character I just don’t like
or care about. 

Dean Jones says:

I saw this in the UK today (Wales to be precise) and I intend to watch as
many movies as possible this year. When I do a Top 10 Worst of 2015, this
will be in there. This has one of the most cliché ridden scripts I’ve seen
a while (creepy child? Check. Contrived reason to return to original
location? Check.) ,after the first few “scares”, I knew exactly what was
going to happen. The romance sub-plot was pointless and I was bored. The
only things going for it were the performances and the production design
(except for the poor lighting). Great review Chris, keep up the good work!

Solomon Beckles says:


3rd Gunman says:

{Insert Creepy Throat Cancer x100 worse than Christian Bale Bad Batman
Voice here}

Jack Bool says:

Yeah, but c’mon Stuckmann… You thought Oculus was a good horror film 

Pat Woldt says:

The best version of The Woman In Black was the original 1989 UK
movie…deliciously scary…cheers from Oz :) You can watch the full movie
on You Tube…but watch it in the dark….

Cynical Xeno says:

Babaduk was a horror movie I thought it was a comedy.

Angealeah fowler says:

I Disagree with him on a lot of things this movie was amazing scary and it
had incredible acting so yeah!!!!! 

blumusdu says:

Why are you still going to horror films.. Seriously, how many times do you
need to be disappointed.

Vince Loe says:

The Babadook is not a horror movie The Babadook is not a horror movie, The
Babadook is not a horror movie The Babadook is not a horror movie, The
Babadook is not a horror movie….
is it a GREAT movie, yes, It is, Is it better than shit like Woman in
Black 2? yes it is. is it a Psychological Drama, YES IT IS…
Stop calling Babadook a horror movie, it isn’t 

Write a comment