Q&A: Director Tom Harper and the Deliberate Dread of The Woman in Black 2

2012’s The Woman in Black was arguably the best of the modern Hammer lineup, a film which drew from both a classically-styled novella (from author Susan Hill), as well as classical filmmaking to craft an eerie, if cozy, affair. As an unequivocal success, The Woman in Black of course spawned a sequel, one that retains only its spectacularly Gothic setting and vengeful title specter. They are not minor aspects to inherit. And UK filmmaker Tom Harper does so both beautifully and chillingly in The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death

Together with cinematographer George Steel, Harper trades in traditional ghost story, but does so with painterly, deliberate images, shrouding Eel Marsh House and its inhabitants in melancholic, haunting atmosphere and forceful dread. There’s a shot in which once-rich, deteriorating drapery are the source of unease, not even the possibility of what’s behind them. And that’s not to mention The Woman herself, here realized often as a physical presence, and one that’s exploited for the threat to children she is.

There’s true delight in something this traditional in nature—the UK ghost story—told so well; the familiar, but nonetheless effective creeps from a horror story in the dark. Shock Till You Drop spoke with Harper, who makes his feature narrative debut after excellent television work on the likes of This is England ’86, about working within and rising above such constructs.

Shock Till You Drop: How do you go about crafting such an atmosphere of dread?

Tom Harper: You use the organic elements of the time, that mist and the sea and this sense of isolation and being cut off. That was really important to me and I wanted to capitalize on the fact that the fog is almost an eleventh presence and the tide has the ability to cut them out on the causeway. Then it’s a question of playing with that and trying to get the most out of it in order to keep the audience on the edge of their seats and create that sense of dread. That’s certainly something that we really wanted to achieve, just that continuing sense of tension and fear and dread. A lot of it comes back to the location, the isolation and being right out in the middle of nowhere.

Shock: When you’re making a period piece, are you given to using visual cues and techniques that recall a more classical style of filmmaking? You pull back big in a train station, for instance, opening up the frame in a very classical way.

Harper: What we wanted to do was build this world that felt classical, but also use modern, visual storytelling techniques as well. I think there’s something nice about telling a ghost story. Lots of ghost stories capitalize on the fact that these happen in the past, and by setting the scene around these facts and this time that we know to be true—during the Second World War, that there were things that we know we were correct—embedding within that the legend of the Woman in Black somehow makes it feel, or the possibility for the mist to exist is somehow, a little more real and therefore makes it scarier.

Stylistically, I wanted the cinematography—the colors we used, the grade, the shot composition—to embrace a more classical form of storytelling, particularly in the beginning. And then, as we slowly get into the world of Eel Marsh House, it becomes a bit more subjective from Eve’s point of view and we bend those rules a bit more.

Shock: What was your impetus to set the film during World War Two?

Harper: I think one of the things that attracted me about the idea of setting it 40 years later was a time when there was so much lost; lots of lives, and there was a sense of sons were dying, fathers were dying. Without being too specific about it, as a backdrop I thought that was quite interesting and feeds into the core fear of the film: the fear of losing a child. Not to relate it too directly, but an overall feeling the war gives it.

Shock: Just by virtue of being a ghost story, the film has roots in centuries of a type of storytelling, and at least a century of cinematic horror storytelling. What’s your approach when you’re crafting something of a tradition; how do you try and go about it so that it is effective and not something audiences are tired by?

Harper: I think what we’re dealing with, the haunted house/ghost story, has been around for hundreds of years, if not more than that, because there’s something that resonates with us. It’s like this fear of the uncanny, which is in this place like “the home,” that’s sort of what we know, but just a little bit different.  I have no doubt that in a hundred years’ time, or two hundred years’ time, we’ll still be telling ghost stories about haunted houses. The idea of the uncanny, the place that feels so familiar yet is somehow a little bit different, is so chilling.

To answer your question as to how I sort of sink into that and still craft scares that feel different: I suppose the way I looked at it was we have a rich history of wonderful ghost stories, particularly in the UK. There’s lots of brilliant horror/ghost story writers that have come out of the UK. Clearly, it’s a genre that works, but also what it gives is expectations. So an audience will come to it with expectations, which can be useful both going with them and going against their expectations sometimes. We all know if there’s a locked door at the end of the corridor, then something evil is likely to be behind it. Sometimes, that turns out to be true, sometimes it turns out not to be true. I guess the real thing with providing scares is about the art of distraction and never quite knowing when it’s going to come.

Shock: Conversely, because it is a tradition, is it exciting to dig in and design your own period ghost story? There’s a moment where even the drapes look menacing.

Harper: Immensely exciting, it was one of the most fun parts creating this sagging wallpaper and the space and the leaves and the hospital. It was such rich terrain, it was great fun. 

 

The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death opens Friday, January 2nd

Movie News
Marvel and DC
X