Review
By Colton Gomez | 03/29/25 | 3:55 P.M. Mountain Time
Horror | Rated PG-13 | 1 hr 25 min | "The Woman in the Yard" Release Date: March 28, 2025
“The Woman in the Yard” is Jaume Collet-Serra’s follow-up to December Netflix hit “Carry On.” This time, he ventures into horror with a small budget of $12 million (compared to “Carry On’s” $47 million). There are some good ideas here and interesting moments but much of the film’s best parts seem to borrow from other, better films of the genre. This film feels like an extended student project, which seems to describe the bulk of Blumhouse originals.
After a fatal car accident that killed her husband, David (Russell Hornsby), Ramona (Danielle Deadwyler) is left with a broken leg and is now a single mother to her two kids, Taylor (Peyton Jackson) and Annie (Estella Kahiha). They live in a fixer-upper house on a farm with sparse neighbors and electricity problems for the day. With no power and no one to ask for help, they are left to deal alone with a strange Woman in the Yard (Okwui Okpokwasili) clad in black cloth from head to toe, mysteriously warning them, “today’s the day.” As the family’s grip on reality loosens and the strange woman becomes a threat to their safety, Ramona is forced to confront her darkest sides to protect her kids and herself.
The cast is extremely small and most of the film takes place in and around this farmhouse except for a few flashback scenes. Deadwyler delivered a convincing performance but her ability to shine was held back by the lack of character nuance. Her character is angry for 95% of this film which makes this solely labeled “horror” film feel like more of an aimless domestic drama. Jackson turned in a serviceable performance though it is clear he lacks experience. He’s also confined in character to be a moody, coming-of-age teen who hates his mom. Taylor and Ramona spend a fair bit of time shouting at each other, which makes much of this film exhausting to watch. Kahiha was very good for as young as she is. With her smartly limited screen time, she does all she needs to for her part and helps to contrast the emotional cast with a quieter and shyer character. She essentially is the final emotional punching bag in the family rotation and has nowhere to direct her anger (if she had any).
As a low-budget movie, it doesn’t always look like it. The visuals are usually beautiful and cinematographer Pawel Pogorzelski finds interesting ways to shoot in a somewhat limited space. Perhaps some more of the budget should have been spent on developing the script as the first 45 minutes or so feel like a chore to sit through. The film grinds the same emotional rhythm for far too long, which essentially tells us that the family is dysfunctional over and over again. Collet-Serra could’ve found a way to condense scenes or remove redundant beats but it doesn’t seem like efficiency was at the forefront of his priorities. Instead, it feels like he’s trying to stretch the runtime of what could’ve been a really effective 20 or 30 minute short film. Especially with the lack of thematic depth, a feature-length runtime isn’t really supported by this student-film quality of script.
I believe this film’s ending is meant to be ambiguous, which could've hit harder for me if we were given more evidence for both sides of the outcome. In the first half, there wasn't much to discover or think about. In the second half, it seems like we get too much too fast or maybe I was still waking up. I couldn’t keep straight what the rules were and who was truly who by the end of the film because like in a scene of light-strobing, information and events ramp up and it’s hard to tell what’s going on. I think if I watched this film for a second time, I would learn a little bit more but not enough to justify the rewatch.
The film plays with the five stages of grief, The (Denial) Woman (Anger) in (Bargaining) the (Depression) Yard (Acceptance), but everything is accessed on the surface level which leaves little impact and resonance after the ending. Throughout is a sparsely included theme of mirrors, except for the ending, when it delivers heavy-handed metaphors. If you watch an explainer video after this film, I think you’ll be disappointed if you’re looking for something deeper than what the film actually offers. There are some cool nuggets of impact of lines being recontextualized and seeing events differently, but ultimately, the whole thing is a little disappointing.
The movie feels slightly vague and afraid of specifics overall. Despite being labeled a “horror” film, only in the last third or fourth of the film do things start to become more unhinged psychologically that dip into the realm of supernatural. This is where the rules of the world start to become confusing and at that point, I’m just grateful the film is only 85 minutes long.
_______________________________________________________________
Review by Colton Gomez
Colton Gomez earned his BA in Film Studies from Weber State University. He owns and operates ColtonGomez.com. Here, he covers new releases in theaters and on streaming. For short versions of his reviews, check out his LetterBoxd
_______________________________________________________________
Summary
Comments