Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

Watch Daniel Radcliffe, Freaky Girls, And An Uncool Monkey In This WOMAN IN BLACK Trailer!!

Merrick here...

A friend and I sometimes slip into an admittedly cruel conversation in which we try to guess which HARRY POTTER child star will end up knocking over a convenience store, which one will end up in porn, which will land their own reality show, etc. That same friend believes Rupert Grint might make a fun Doctor on DOCTOR WHO. 

Our imagined fate of Daniel Radcliffe is evidently being kept at bay for a while by the forthcoming re-adaptation of  Susan Hill's THE WOMAN IN BLACK, which was previously bought to screens as a television movie back in 1989.  

Here's a look at the newest iteration of the story.  Some very nice atmosphere here - but something has to be done about that monkey.  That thing can't possibly be OK. 

You can find HD of the same HERE.

INFORMAL POLL:  are the Creepy Little Girls in THE WOMAN IN BLACK trailer more unnerving than the Creepy Little Girls this DREAM HOUSE trailer?

 

 

 

--- follow Merrick on Twitter ! ---

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Aug. 17, 2011, 9:52 a.m. CST

    Well, if it's half as spooky as the stage play

    by Ithrat Cordwallis

    Then I might just pop along, monkey or no monkey.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 9:52 a.m. CST

    Harry Potter and (bwom bwom fadeout) the Woman In Black (SCARYNOISE)

    by drwilliamweir

    A resounding no from this fan of the original. It would appear it's either a bad trailer or that the only thing they got right is the location. And anyone else getting fed up with the current propensity for ALL TRAILERS no matter the genre to hit the same sodding beats? It's time to weed out the lazy trail editors. Name and shame!

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 9:54 a.m. CST

    Sorry

    by Juggernaut125

    <p>I don't watch any trailers with commercials attached to them.</p> <p>That being said, "Dream House" actually looks pretty good. Sort of old-school Shama-lama-lan.</p>

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 9:57 a.m. CST

    Oh, and first

    by Ithrat Cordwallis

    I believe mentioning that is some kind of contractual obligation? As for the Potter kids' final markets, I would bet on Watson becoming a designer, Radcliffe ending up in panto and Grint starring as Snake Plissen in the forthcoming remake of EfNY. Or holding up a WalMart - either/or.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 9:59 a.m. CST

    I'll give it a chance...

    by Darth_Tarantino

    As a fan of the original story I feel compelled to check this out. I thought Radcliffe was excellent in "My Boy Jack" and I'm hoping he's going to show some genuine talent in this. Plus it's a Hammer film so I feel it's my duty as a Hammer films fan to give this a chance.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 10:01 a.m. CST

    Should have been Harry and Hermione

    by FeralAngel

    Not shipping. It's just fact. Best wishes to the entire cast in their future non-Potter careers.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 10:01 a.m. CST

    LOVE the atmosphere and art direction

    by D.Vader

    Glad to see a return to gothic horror.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 10:05 a.m. CST

    And Dream House looks like a good mindfuck movie too

    by D.Vader

    I think I'll be seeing them both- unless some really terrible reviews surface.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 10:06 a.m. CST

    And what a misleading title for this story, Merrick!

    by D.Vader

    I expected one real monkey! Instead I got *multiple* fake monkeys!

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 10:10 a.m. CST

    That looks fantastic.

    by 3774

    But what's with being forced to watch a preview before watching a preview? Give me a break...

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 10:14 a.m. CST

    A very overrated book

    by Simon Butler

    As a lover of all things that go bump in the night, this was a great disappointment. They'll have to tinker greatly with the very short story to make anything of any substance.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 10:27 a.m. CST

    Did the Dreamhouse trailer have to include such a big spoiler???

    by Kikstad

    Can't they make trailers nowadays without giving away such key plotpoints?

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 10:42 a.m. CST

    Glad they didn't use jump-scares.

    by TheWrathOfSean

    I'd rather have sneaky stuff just sneak onto the screen without loud orchestra hits to go along with it.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 10:46 a.m. CST

    Danny is starting to look like Hugh Jackman

    by spidercoz

    Work on that accent and he could have a multi-film future at Marvel.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 10:57 a.m. CST

    EDEN LAKE was outstanding

    by godoffireinhell

    and I have been looking forward to what James Watkins would direct next ever since. Not a fan of the silly effects shot at the very end but everything else looks solid.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 10:57 a.m. CST

    Okay, that creeped me out.

    by impossibledreamers

    Thats the kind of ghost stories I like....

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 11:04 a.m. CST

    @kikstad - Dreamhouse spoiler

    by theBigE

    Someone asked one of the stars the same thing in EW - why the spoiler in the trailer? I think it was Craig that said that's not the real twist in the film, you'll find out the trailer twist in the first 3rd of the film, but there is a bigger twist later on.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 11:07 a.m. CST

    little boys and girls are gay, daniccus?

    by theBigE

    You'd like a big scary killer with an axe or something, right? Only Freddy or Jason are scary to you? Little kids are creepy because there is something intrinsically wrong about children being dead - they are supposed to be alive and happy, not haunted or dead. <p> And calling little kids gay and the movie gay outs you as a 13 year old. Grow up son, before you post here again.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 11:10 a.m. CST

    The 1989 version was terrifying..

    by BookhouseBoy

    It's on youtube if anyones interestested (they aren't).

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 11:11 a.m. CST

    Oh, yeah, and the monkeys -

    by ClayMatthews

    - add this character to the list of people with genuine monkey problems like Dorthy from "Wizard of Oz" and Chris from "Family Guy" 'cause I wold go sledgehammer on those creepy fucks in five seconds. The toy monkeys, that is.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 11:13 a.m. CST

    If interested...

    by carlotta_valdes

    ...check out the 1989 made for TV version. Not for those with short attention spans...but if you like gothic horror, it can prove a very unsettling experience. It's also got a top 10 scare that you will never get out of your head. The low production value actually lends itself to the creep. Warning:NOT FOR THE SAW/HOSTEL CROWD

  • But damn, this looks good. The Woman in Black I mean not the Dream House trailer. I just need to see that awesome stage play and I'll be happy. Or haunted.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 11:15 a.m. CST

    That last shot was pretty damned amazing

    by proevad

    Wish they hadn't included it in the trailer.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 11:18 a.m. CST

    Just noticed the actor who plays James Potter

    by proevad

    is in the 89 version of the movie. Fun little twist.

  • If he mixes it up by doing shit like this and an occasional blockbuster, he won't fade into obscurity.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 11:26 a.m. CST

    Rupert Grint as Dr Who

    by eric haislar

    Hmmmmm I could see that.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 11:34 a.m. CST

    Really, provead?

    by D.Vader

    I wonder if that connection had some bearing on Radcliffe getting cast in the remake, or if its just one big coincidence. Very cool.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 11:41 a.m. CST

    DW would finally be Ginger

    by XoanonTORN

    He always wanted to be ginger...

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 11:47 a.m. CST

    Porn

    by zastrow

    Hey, Radcliffe is already halfway toward doing porn as it is with his nude scene on stage.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 11:54 a.m. CST

    Rupert Grint as Dr Who = BOLLOX!

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    The day Harry fuckin Potter stars start being cast as Dr Who is the day I stop watching it. There's been enough shit in the show (like R.T.D.'s crap writing) without making it even more crap.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:04 p.m. CST

    Radcliffe aside, this looks creepily good, and Radcliffe

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    has a pretty level head on his shoulders from every article I've seen.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:05 p.m. CST

    Toy monkeys are always bad news. Name one movie where

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    it's been a good thing. Clowns too. "There's nothing funny about a clown at midnight." Remember Poltergeist.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:09 p.m. CST

    LMAO@grammaton cleric binks

    by Bigdada

    So true! But it does look beautiful.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:13 p.m. CST

    The Magnificent Toy Monkey Ambersons.

    by Nerfee

    Schindler's Toy Monkey List?

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:13 p.m. CST

    Reminds me of the cymbal monkey in Toy Story 3

    by Ribbons

    People tend to give Big Baby the mantle of "creepy toy" in TS3, but for my money, it's that fucking cymbal monkey. Whoever invented those things is an evil genius.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:14 p.m. CST

    d.vader

    by proevad

    They are both playing the same character as well , so it probably put the idea into the filmmaker's head to cast Dan. That's what I would guess. Very cool indeed, either way.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:15 p.m. CST

    The Shining has the creepiest little girls of them all

    by thelordofhell

    These others are just weird little girls compared to Kubrick's film

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:19 p.m. CST

    Toy monkeys when you boil it down are basically an evil version of Yoda.

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    They keep coming, and can't be stopped until the very end.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:20 p.m. CST

    Big Baby went all Return of the Jedi Vader on

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    Emperor Lotso.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:23 p.m. CST

    Another Hugh Jackman Lookalike Post

    by ricstrr

    someone pull up a pic from the prestige and shove it side by side with a grab of Danny here.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:25 p.m. CST

    I thought The Illusionist was good until I saw The Prestige.

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    Jackman and Bale blew that out of the water.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:26 p.m. CST

    Hugh Jackman Prestige Pic Link

    by ricstrr

    Judge for ye self http://zuljenah.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/the_prestige_hugh1.jpg

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:30 p.m. CST

    I don't even have to hit the link. Clear as day they're twins

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    and I mean that in a good way.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:31 p.m. CST

    trollspotting i think you made the right decision

    by smudgewhat

    she just woulda got fat anyway

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:32 p.m. CST

    DANIEL HAMMEL

    by AzulTool

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:33 p.m. CST

    I mean, HAMIL....FUCK!

    by AzulTool

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 12:56 p.m. CST

    Gotta give it some credit for staying classy

    by subtlety

    I suppose it shows how low our standards are, but seeing a horror trailer which resists the obvious "boo!" scare with a loud noise feels like the height of restrait these days. WOMAN IN BLACK looks like a nicely elegant low-key simple ghost story. DREAM HOUSE by contrast looks like a convoluted mess, and man, the trailer has to give away at least half the story, right?

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 1:03 p.m. CST

    Old "ghost appears behind protaganist" Gag

    by Jack Desmondi

    The monkey WAS creepy and effective, but ever since that "Grudge"movie, the shock cut of a ghost appearing suddently behind the hero/heroine/victim has gotten really damn old.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 1:26 p.m. CST

    Gotta admit, I kinda like that...

    by Sardonic

    I think Radcliffe was literally horrific as Harry Potter, but I'm not yet convinced that was entirely his fault...though it may very well be.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 1:34 p.m. CST

    That Monkey is MOST certainly OK

    by bhu987us

    and nothing has to be done about it. It's soothing and adorable!

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 2:02 p.m. CST

    Wasn't there a Halloween Simpsons called...

    by jimmy_009

    .."Bad Dream House" or something. I can't help think of that and what a terrible title "Dream House" is. Also, please come up with new cliches. Children staring at walls? Seriously? More of that?...

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 2:40 p.m. CST

    Not my genre of movie

    by Snookeroo

    but damn, these look good. Think I'll see them both. Thanks for the heads up.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 2:41 p.m. CST

    It looks like a Hammer movie if Hammer was still going today, in 2011

    by Margot Tenenbaum

    which is, of course, an absurd idea. I nominate Radcliff/Watson for a Dr. Jekyll & Sister Hyde remake.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 2:43 p.m. CST

    Seriously guys! Watch the 1989 version of Woman In Black!

    by drwilliamweir

    It'll shit you up fo' real.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 2:46 p.m. CST

    bookhouseboy/carlotta

    by IWasInJuniorHighDickhead

    right with you. It's been about the scariest film i've ever seen. Low budget, but it just works. I'm sure there are plenty of people who'll sniff at my opinion here, but for me it's true. I'm almost certain it was just a happy accident; the fact that it was filmed for ITV (as I found out recently) suggests it must have been a fluke.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 2:49 p.m. CST

    as for the 'top ten scare'

    by IWasInJuniorHighDickhead

    I still can't watch that bit. I look away.<P> As for 'scary children, may I suggest 'Turn of the Screw.<P> As for clowns, may I suggest the absolutely- insane-and-unlike anything-i've-seen-before The Last Circus..

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 2:54 p.m. CST

    All grown up

    by bill

    Radcliffe was ~10 years old when he started the Potter franchise and he's carried 8 major movies on his shoulders; acting alongside Richard Harris, Alan Rickman, Brendon Gleason, Michael Gambon, Kenneth Brannagh, et al. The guy basically got a working education with some of the best actors in the business, and he's still just a kid, but with more experience than most young actors have when starting out. I reckon he's going to be around for a while, and I'm looking forward to see him mature now he's breaking away from the Potter mold (and maybe using it to play off. See him in Extras, that was classic). He looks like he has quite an intense screen presence in this trailer, which looks creepy enough for me, and looks more Poe than the Poe film that's coming out with Poe in it.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 3:08 p.m. CST

    Which Potter kid'll go down?

    by UltimaRex

    None of them. They are all too well managed for that. Emma Watson almost WANTS to go off the rails but someone's making damn sure she doesn't.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 3:11 p.m. CST

    grammaton, I liked the monkey in

    by jawaburger

    Euro Trip. The one that Xena busted out in the S & M shop.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 3:19 p.m. CST

    Radcliffe looked like a young Hugh Jackman...

    by Mistahtibbs

    ...in some of those shots. Both movies ratchet up the creep factor, but Dream House looks like a serious MF. Hope they pull it off. MT

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 3:21 p.m. CST

    HAMMER Returns!!!

    by batfunk

    @margot_tenenbaum, this IS a Hammer film! Not sure why their logo isn't on the US trailer. This Should be massive.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 3:23 p.m. CST

    Merrick – Why no mention of Hammer here?

    by batfunk

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 3:39 p.m. CST

    the next scary kid movie should be like Final Destination

    by antonphd

    there wouldn't be any death force trying to kill teenagers. instead, it would just be kids playing with each other and doing the kids of stupid shit that almost gets them seriously injured or killed. and that would be the whole movie. it would scare the fuck out of everyone.

  • how the fuck is that even in the realm of reality to say something like that? maybe he wasn't what you imagined, but for fuck's sake have you SEEN some of the other kid movies from fantasy books that have been released over the last decade?

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 3:44 p.m. CST

    wait... whoa... Danial Radcliffe could make a great wolverine

    by antonphd

    he'd have to buff up, but he's short enough and he's got the box office clout to make the wolverine movies a worldwide success. whoa. that would be so weird. Harry Potter playing Wolverine. hahaha! it's so fucking crazy it might actually work!

  • and did not really get better with age. His acting was stiff, forced, and generally unconvincing when it came to any real displays of emotion. He had moments, but they were few and far between. Whether this was due to the script, the director, or the actor (or a combination of all three), I cannot say, as I have never seen him in anything else. And comparing him to "kids from other fantasy books" is totally irrelevant. Paul W.S. Anderson isn't a good director just because Uwe Boll is a worse one.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 4:21 p.m. CST

    Daniel Radcliffe was quite good in DH1 and DH2.

    by Mel

    Anyone who says otherwise is a douche and just has a vendetta against the HP films. How about this....anyone who disagrees you list every shit moment he had and I'll list every good moment. I bet I win, easily.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 4:27 p.m. CST

    This Harry Potter film looks terrible!

    by SifoDyasJr

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 5 p.m. CST

    I have no vendetta against the HP films

    by Sardonic

    I've been reading the books since I they came out, same as the movies. All the movies were entertaining, ranging from good to great. But that doesn't mean Radcliffe was all that good in them. I know it's difficult for some people to comprehend, but it actually IS possible to like something while still being able to stand aside and criticize certain parts of it that weren't as great as they could have been. Like Daniel Radcliffe's acting. There's also this weird thing called an opinion. Some people have them.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 5:35 p.m. CST

    Creepy, rhyming exposition kids = FAIL.

    by DocPazuzu

    Sorry, but it's true. Serene-looking girls who stand around or walk slowly in formation is a terrible gimmick which needs to be retired ASAP. When was it ever scary? <p> Also, the original TV movie didn't have any lame-ass, "spooky" kids in it. It was quite unsettling and creepy without them. And yes, it does have one of the greatest oops-I-crapped-my-pants moments ever. It does need to be viewed in context, though. Do yourselves a favor and watch the entire 1989 movie. <p> As for the remake, it's a handsome-looking production, but if the dopey kids are anything to go by, then Avid-farts, jump-scares and a shitty CGI-heavy finale can't be far behind.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 5:40 p.m. CST

    People on this site bash TDK.

    by UltimaRex

    So no, sardonic doesn't surprise me.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 5:40 p.m. CST

    Setting Question

    by furnari5

    Is the house in the movie the same one that was used in "The Others" with Nicole Kidman?

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 6:24 p.m. CST

    The script for the 1989 version is by Nigel Kneale

    by palimpsest

    That's why it's scary.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 6:34 p.m. CST

    I'll take creepy kids, monkeys, and empty houses forever

    by HapaPapa72

    But please for God's sake enough with the thudding BOOM everytime something supposedly scary happens. But these look pretty good... the Dream House one seems like a mashup of Amityville, Shutter Island, and The Others...

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 6:36 p.m. CST

    Saw the play in Austin...

    by JShanW

    ...a few years back at The State Theatre. Buddy of mine was the Radcliffe character. Looks pretty good in tone and feel...I don't even see Harry Potter in there. Fingers crossed, it'll be good.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 7:08 p.m. CST

    This trailer gets a lot of things right

    by RexBanner

    Atmosphere, mystery, tension... No overbearing narration from the moviephone guy and not so much as a single line of dialogue from Radcliffe or pop up scare. And I am all the more intrigued for it. Hopefully they dont take the typical approach to ghost movie advertising in the months ahead, because this hits all the right notes.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 7:48 p.m. CST

    Looks OK, maybe interesting.

    by Orbots Commander

    Seems like Daniel Radcliffe, post Potter, has some smart people advising him.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 7:55 p.m. CST

    He's trying his best to get out of that Potter limelight

    by Terrence

    I'm sure the dude appreciates all the fans and royalties he'll be getting for life via the series, but if Hollywood only views him as Harry Potter, he'll be fucked up. Hence is trying his hardest to do more adult stuff as often as possible.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 8:17 p.m. CST

    Radcliffe as Wolvie? Hilarious

    by Nabster

    That would be some funny shit, I tell you.

  • So much better than Let Me In and The Resident. Tim Spall and Aidan Gillen are superb in it.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 9 p.m. CST

    I hear ya iwasinjuniorhighdickhead...

    by carlotta_valdes

    ...there's just something about the leisure pacing of the story leading up to that moment in 'WIB' that makes it's impact even more powerful. It's like the feeling of slowly, carefully walking down a flight of stairs, holding on to the railing...and suddenly feeling like you're being dropped off a building! You really have to be engaged in the story for the maximum impact though. I've gotten to the point where I can watch it alone in my basement, but it's still a serious struggle at that 'particular' moment. Even knowing what's coming I still feel like I'm hanging on just to get through it! Just feels like a direct assault on the viewer, and once you've seen it...it's imprinted on your mind...and you can't get rid of it. I love many forms of horror films, but I can't cite ANY one moment in ANY other film (big budget or small) that has the effect this scene has on my senses. I wonder if in some way this new version attempts to replicate this scene? Also good call on Turn of the Screw / The Innocents. Another more recent film, filled with similar gothic menace would be 'The Others'.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 9:12 p.m. CST

    Hit the Gym...

    by KiwiMetal

    Find a sunbed, let the chin fuzz grow and he could be a younger Hugh Jackman Damn - mistahtibbs great minds think a like. I didn't even read the posts before replying.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 9:14 p.m. CST

    Creepy Little Girls

    by Clio

    There is absolutely nothing creepier on film than soulless looking little girls with that thousand yard stare. Terrible Dream House trailer because it gave away the whole fracking plot. I hate that! I saw THE WOMAN IN BLACK on stage in London. Good scary fun, not nearly as dark as the movie looks to be. At every jump scene (yep, on stage) teenage girls in the audience screamed like banshees, and one girl went running out...but they were laughing screams. Like I said, way different than the upcoming movie.

  • Aug. 17, 2011, 9:47 p.m. CST

    Radcliffe can be a stage actor for the rest of his life

    by Jaka

    His choosing to do "Equus" and "How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying" assured that. He may never be a huge film star again, but I doubt he'll ever have a hard time being a working actor.

  • Aug. 18, 2011, 4:26 a.m. CST

    this looks like shit, is this a made for TV movie?

    by WINONA_RYDERS_PUSSY_JUICE

    oh wait, Harry Potter is in this? He needs to fire his fucking agent. A.S.A.P. Ignore this advice at your own peril, Harry Potter!

  • Aug. 18, 2011, 4:42 a.m. CST

    NOTE TO TRAILER GUYS

    by Mr Gorilla

    Now I've seen that big spoiler in DREAM HOUSE I most definitely won't be paying to watch it. Because you just told me what happened. Couldn't you have just featured the amazing stars and scary vibe and left the plot twists for people who actually see the movie. I mean, a horror movie with Craig, Watts, Weisz - isn't that enough of a sell? WOMAN IN BLACK much better - at least it's all atmosphere and doesn't lay out the story for you. I wish Dan and the other Potter kids all the very best. You are a talented lot, and don't let any nasty bitching internet trolls tell you otherwise. They'd kill for a tiny percentage of your talent and success.

  • Aug. 18, 2011, 6:45 a.m. CST

    Now that's a trailer!!

    by AsimovLives

    Colour me intrigued.

  • He could had jsut stoped. He's richer beyond we can imagine. He's set for life. He could jsut spend the rest of his live doing nothing, being a playboy without a worry in the world. Instead he persues a career. And not just of the blockbuster variety. In fact, he seems to try his best to distance himself form blockbusters in all his work outside of the Harry Potter franchise. Kudos to this young man. He's showing far more maturity then most people his age and in his position would. Daniel Radcliffe is alright.

  • Aug. 18, 2011, 7:03 a.m. CST

    Roger Corman Revival?

    by seansarto

  • Aug. 18, 2011, 7:33 a.m. CST

    Not only that asimovlives, but I read he made sure that his co-stars

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    were offered a decent amount of money instead of him getting the lion's share. Hollywood needs more humble and generous stars like this.

  • Aug. 18, 2011, 7:49 a.m. CST

    grammaton cleric binks

    by AsimovLives

    Indeed. just compare and contrast him with such others like Linday Lohan. Lohan made a mess of herself and she had not even been in such a big international franchise as Harry Potter, and still look at what a spoiled diva she became. And look at Radcliffe. If you read his interviews, the dude just sounds like an eager young actor who's starting in the business, but full of wosdom beyond his age. And a notorious lack of of a big ego. One intervie i rad him clearly demosntrates he's a very well uided young man who learns his lessons fast: He once told that when he once complained that he was tired and exausted from his work, his father put him down to earth by telling him "you are not working on the mines, are you?". It put him in his place and made him aware that he haviing it way easier then most. It also humbled him. When he wa asked what car he wanted to buy, he with all his money, his answer was: "have you sene the latest VW Golf? They are great." This multi-millionaire young man is excited and wants to buy a VW Golf. Anycunt as would had gone for a Ferrari, he wants a Golf. That made me respect him so much. And the Golf is indeed a great car. Always been. The dude knows.

  • What you want, that he would chew the scenery in all his scenes? You would had prefered the typical cute child acting bullshit form so many american children actors? Bullshit! Radcliffe has constantly shown he cna do comething thart eludes most children and young actors of his age: subtlery. what many pussy asses think is Radcliffe not acting is him beign subtle and playing the stoid quite very effectively. Those are actually the hardest type of characters to play right, and he does play them right. Just because Radcliffe doesn't do hystrionics doesn't mean he can't act, quite the contrary. Any fool can act hystrionic. It takes a real actor not to. A real actor.

  • Aug. 18, 2011, 9:41 a.m. CST

    In Victorian Era Men Wore Hats

    by frakthetoasters

    In the Victorian Era men wore hats outside. Especially a gentleman of Radcliffe's character's status. Maybe the filmmakers wanted to show DR without his forehead covering Harry Potter hairstyle. I don't know. The movie does look scary.....

  • Aug. 18, 2011, 11:19 a.m. CST

    asimovlives

    by Orbots Commander

    I agree that subtlety in acting is very underrated. The line that was likewise uses against guys like Jimmy Stewart or Cary Grant back in the day, was that, they were just playing themselves, when in reality, it was far from that. Not saying that Radcliffe is Cary Grant or Jimmy Stewart....yet, but a few smart choices down the road, and he may well be on his way. He's still in his twenties after all.

  • Aug. 18, 2011, 11:41 a.m. CST

    1989 Woman in Black

    by Rabbitcakes

    It's a bit creepy at times, but not overly scary. The shot that everyone remembers is the most startling "cat jump out of the closet" type jump scare I've ever seen, but I don't think it's actually scary in itself. In fact if you go into the movie knowing about it, you'll probably be disappointed. Luckily when I first saw the movie I had no idea it was coming and almost had a heart attack. Based on the trailer I'm looking forward to this new adaptation. Dream House's trailer on the other hand has given me the impression that I know the entire plot and I have no interest in seeing it.

  • Aug. 18, 2011, 11:52 a.m. CST

    One Problem: Radcliffe can't act

    by WWBD

    He gets a major pass because he's so much better than that kid who starred in Harry Potter 1, but seriously. Every time there's an emotional scene it's embarassing to watch.

  • Aug. 18, 2011, 11:57 a.m. CST

    Why isn't Hammer promoting itself very well?

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    I wouldn't have known they'd even returned to making films if I hadn't really looked or come across the info by accident. Hammer fims should be BIG news!

  • Aug. 18, 2011, 12:56 p.m. CST

    Exactly asimovlives, Radcliffe knows he can't rest on his laurels, knows he has to show

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    he can be more than Harry Potter. He's humble, and willing to learn, and stretch his boundaries. He's humble, generous, and treats people with respect. Why can't all actors be like this guy?

  • Aug. 18, 2011, 3:23 p.m. CST

    I don't care if he's nice or "smart" - he can't act!

    by WWBD

    Marlon Brando, James Dean, Monty Clift, Mickey Rourke, Jimmy Caan - these guys were all notorious nutcases and pricks. They didn't have "good heads on their shoulders." But they weren't as stiff and fake as a middle schooler in his first play like Radcliffe is.

  • Aug. 18, 2011, 7:08 p.m. CST

    ragingfluff

    by Clio

    You're right, the major plot point of the entire movie was shown on that trailer. I'll have to try and forget that part if I ever watch the movie---which I now doubt I'll do since the surprise twist has been spoiled. Wish I had never watched the trailer. Whoever cut that trailer should be canned.

  • Aug. 19, 2011, 12:46 a.m. CST

    That Malfroy kid or man now will probably have a career too.

    by The Founder

  • Dec. 1, 2011, 8:13 p.m. CST

    by John_lndn

    This is not based on the book, it's based on a Jane Goldman's script. She is great: Stardust, Kick-Ass, X-Men... so I'm really looking foward to it. Plus, this is Hammel's return! If someone knows how to make horror films its them. The art direction is already looking fantastic. I saw Radcliffe this year on Broadway and was very surprised, he is pretty brilliant. If he meets the right director who knows who to make him do that on screen, he'll be great. And if someone should play Dr. Who is him. He wouldn't even have to act, he would have just had to be himself. He IS Dr. Who.