The Ring

Charles Livingston · 14th October 2003, 09:50 AM

Alright Joshua, have at it.

Anyone else want to discuss. I personally liked the movie alot.

Nyarlathotep · 14th October 2003, 10:26 AM

I liked it a lot too. It was one of the most original horror films I have seen in a long time. That little girl was downright creepy.

Checkmite · 14th October 2003, 10:27 AM

All right....problems with The Ring.

The Ring is a cool movie (to start things off). The "haunted video" is initially disturbing after a fashion simply by virtue of the unexplainable nature of the images contained therein. The sense of urgency and "racing against the clock" certainly lends the atmosphere of a thriller here. Still, there were problems.

All the images in the video were satisfactorily explained. While this may not be a problem in and of itself (though it does take the "creepy factor" away from the video), they were explained in a lame way. It's obvious that the images were a set of clues - a "trail" of sorts for one to follow, in order to solve the mystery. But at the end, we find out that the solving of the "mystery" is absolutely and thoroughly pointless and has no effect whatsoever on the characters' fate. So, what was the point, then, of the video? It functioned essentially as a spider web to trap new victims. Fine, and all, but since just about the entire movie was based around deciphering this unimportant "mystery", after having gone through all that futility the audience is left with a feeling of indifference.
The horse suicide. Tasteless, in my opinion, and not scary or creepy in the least, and it serves absolutely no point in the movie. Probably traumatizing, though, if your age consists of a single digit. Please don't let your kids watch this scene. Better yet, don't let them watch the movie for a few years.
The final "surprising" killing scene, where the girl crawls out of the television. OK, neat special effect, but that's about it. The problem with it is that it was cool, not scary, and this is supposed to be a horror movie. Perhaps I'm prejudiced against this scene, though...it utilizes a special effect I like to call the "creepy walk effect". This effect is created by having the actor intentionally walk in slow motion. Try it yourself - nobody can actually walk in slow motion; at the end of your stride, your forward foot falls toward the floor faster than it should, because you cannot keep balance. Film somebody walking this way, then speed up the film during playback so the pace is relatively normal, and you have a choppy, lumbering, tottery stride - the "creepy walk". I hate it, because it is overused in films lately, so much so that to see it throws me right out of the film.
The movie leaves absolutely no questions unanswered. In most movies this is ideal; however, in horror movies, you want the opposite. You want the audience to leave thinking about the incatricies of the movie, not just its special effects. In The Omen (1976), the director and writer intentionally orchestrated the film's events such that they could all easily be coincidental or happenstance - the audience left wondering whether the little boy really was the devil's son (though subsequent movies ruined this effect), or whether Gregory Peck was just insane. You don't leave The Ring wondering about anything, except why you sat through a two-hour movie just to find out at the very end that nothing the main characters did during those two hours makes one bit of difference.

That's enough for a conversation starter, I suppose.

HarryKeogh · 14th October 2003, 10:52 AM

i thought this was an excellent flick.

as for the horse suicide being tasteless...would it have been less tasteless if it was a human? i don't know. i felt creeped out by that scene because it's something i've never seen before.

plus whoever lets their young child (especially in single digit years) see any R-rated horror flick has some serious problems.

MoeFaux · 14th October 2003, 10:53 AM

I have to say that Ring was the scariest movie I've ever seen in my life. I saw it as an unbeliever (horror films I viewed growing up as a believer made them pretty scary) and I was still absolutely terrified.
When it came out on DVD, I watched it again with two friends. It was just as scary the second time, except I knew when to close my eyes to avoid seeing the scary face at the beginning.
We watched it over at another friends house who was out of town (he has the best home theatre), and when my two friends left, I spent the night since it was very, very late.
All alone, in his giant house. I was scared out of my mind.
One of the friends who watched it with me told me the next day that he was going to call my cell phone before I went to bed to say "7 days...". But he thought it would be too mean. Good thing, because I probably would have peed my pants.
I hear the Japanese version is even scarier.

Martin · 14th October 2003, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MoeFaux
I hear the Japanese version is even scarier

I've never actually seen the US version. But, yes. Yes, it is.

Checkmite · 14th October 2003, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by HarryKeogh

as for the horse suicide being tasteless...would it have been less tasteless if it was a human? i don't know. i felt creeped out by that scene because it's something i've never seen before.

No, it would've been less tasteless to leave the scene out, since it neither explains nor reveals anything, nor advances the plot, nor aids character development, nor...well, you get the idea.

Checkmite · 14th October 2003, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Martin
I've never actually seen the US version. But, yes. Yes, it is.

The Japanese version, by the way, is called Ringu; and its release in the US was delayed in favor of the The Ring, which is essentially a remake. This has been done with a number of foreign films. In any case, The Ring's release was trumped by Feardotcom, also a stylized remake of Ringu. I really didn't find either film especially compelling; I haven't seen Ringu yet.

Nyarlathotep · 14th October 2003, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MoeFaux

I hear the Japanese version is even scarier.

I ddin't think it was. It was better in some ways, worse in others but I think the U.S. version was the scarier of the two.

Chanileslie · 14th October 2003, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Joshua Korosi

The Japanese version, by the way, is called Ringu; and its release in the US was delayed in favor of the The Ring, which is essentially a remake. This has been done with a number of foreign films. In any case, The Ring's release was trumped by Feardotcom, also a stylized remake of Ringu. I really didn't find either film especially compelling; I haven't seen Ringu yet.

I have seen all three. I loved the Ring, it was compelling, interesting, and different. Ringu, wasn't much different from the Ring. There was some strange psychic link thing, and the male character was more the hero in Ringu rather than a side character he was the Ring which focused mostly on the female protagonist. Feardotcom, was interesting, but in some parts it was really drawn out, and dull, and the end just sort of fell flat.

Hexxenhammer · 14th October 2003, 11:40 AM

I really liked The Ring. I went with a a couple of very skittish (sp?) people who were squirming the entire movie. That helps make things scarier. And I was never so creeped out as when the fly was twitching while the video was paused and then flew out of the screen. It was just so off the wall, I loved it.

Suezoled · 14th October 2003, 03:52 PM

Lol. I rented both versions. The US release was playing on the TV, when the power went after right after the evil video tape played and someone had said "seven days" on the phone. Not only did the power go out, the phone rang. THAT made me jump. Watching the Japanese version of Ring, the tv glitched out after watching that cursed video, and the phone rang again.

Japanese pronounciation meant to make it "Ring" and not "Ringu." And the version released from Japan to the US is a remake of the TV show. The TV show is an adaptation of a book trilogy. The book trilogy takes the sterotypical story of the tragic, innocent Japanese girl who dies horribly and her ghost returns to seek revenge until it can be laid to rest. This story has been told, retold, precocessed, canned, and served so often. It's even in manga (comic) format. (In the book trilogy, it goes on to explain that somehow the video passes on a bit of Sadako's DNA ifyou watch it. If you don't die in 7 days, or you don't save your own life with that special technique, you "hatch" a new Sadako out of your body. This Sadako has no memory of her "mother self" Oh yeah and you die anyway.)

What impressed me about the US release was that the little girl's hair was in front of her face; a sure sign of a mournful, vengeful Japanese ghost. Samara should have been missing her fingernails, though.

I do believe there was some mystery left over in the US version:

1.) How did Samara make her pictures on X-ray film? The same ability to make a video, sure, but what was it? (Yeah, yeah, the power of Nensha in the Japanese version. So, did it carry over to Sadako's US counterpart?)
2.) How did the girl in the mental institute (who had been friends with the movie's first on screen victim) know without asking that Rachel had 4 days to live?
3.) If Samara never sleeps anyway, why do "the horses keep her up at night"?
4.) Would watching only half the video mean Samara would only half kill you? (Okay, that was mine alone, but still...)

Nyarlathotep · 14th October 2003, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Suezoled

4.) Would watching only half the video mean Samara would only half kill you? (Okay, that was mine alone, but still...)

I wondered that too, though the way I put it to my wife was "so if you only watch a couple of seconds does that mean in seven days you will stub your toe really, really hard?"

Bikewer · 14th October 2003, 05:16 PM

A good solid ghost story. I didn't find it particularly frightening, but then as a 57-year-old cop, I don't frighten easily....

Glory · 14th October 2003, 05:20 PM

Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers!

I liked The Ring a lot. It isn't perfect but I was creeped out and that was the goal.

The horses suicide was gratuitous. She has already noted the horse having a negative reaction to her. I actually said, "she's tainted." out loud when the horse starts freaking. She has to push the issue and go to the horse? I thought it made the character look really dumb. The point was made well before the horse jumps over board.

I also wondered about the horses keeping her up. I thought perhaps she just blamed the horses but that doesn't work.

I recognised the image of the ring as a well. I don't know how, actually, I just knew that was what it was. I obviously had seen that image before. Regardless, I knew very early that someone had gone down a well. It didn't ruin the movie for me.

I don't think solving the mystery was futile. Had she not done that, her son would have died. Also, now that it is known that copies are the key to survival, we get to wonder about the phenomenon growing exponentially.

Glory

Checkmite · 14th October 2003, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Glory

The horses suicide was gratuitous. She has already noted the horse having a negative reaction to her. I actually said, "she's tainted." out loud when the horse starts freaking. She has to push the issue and go to the horse? I thought it made the character look really dumb. The point was made well before the horse jumps over board.

Another reason I don't like this movie is that it's hard to feel sympathetic for a character we know nothing about. We never really learn anything about Rachel, other than that she's a researcher. She has no depth. The only reason anyone would feel compelled to watch her struggles is that we know the reason she's doing all this is to save her son.

Willing suspension of disbelief is key to enjoying a movie, but it can be abused. To watch this movie, we have to be willing to believe that a ghost can create this video and use it to kill people - fine. But here are some things I cannot believe (time for another list):

I cannot believe a professional documentarian, after becoming aware of the first deaths, would so quickly jump on a haunted video tape as the most likely explanation.
I cannot believe that, having become convinced that the video is 1) real and 2) probably directly related to these peoples' deaths, this woman would be so compelled to actually watch the damned thing. This makes the woman a "dumb teen who takes the dare to spend the night in the haunted mansion" horror-flick cliche.
I cannot believe that, in the diner scene, everybody - including the main characters - would react so ho-hum after noticing that their faces are distorted on the security camera image...which was the most intriguing effect, in my opinion. Watch the movie again - it's little more than a "hmm, that must mean we're in for it. Anyway, as we were saying..."
I cannot believe that Aiden (the little boy) knows so much about the ghostly goings-on (as we are led to believe), yet is of absolutely no help until the very end of the movie.

Quote:

Originally posted by Glory
I also wondered about the horses keeping her up. I thought perhaps she just blamed the horses but that doesn't work.

I thought of this point during the movie. The only explanation I can come up with is that it's what the movie folks call a "tuiti" (short for "fortuitous") - an event or statement whose only purpose is to advance the plot, but is otherwise unconnected to anything else in the movie. In this case, I believe the writers had the girl make the comment about the horses keeping her up because if she hadn't, Rachel wouldn't have figured out so quickly that she should look in the barn. Call me cynical - but apparently nobody else here has a better explanation.

There are other puzzling statements in the movie as well. For example, after watching the tape and looking at some of Aiden's drawings, Rachel muses that "I think before you die, you see the Ring". Well, if she means you see the ring/well motif in the video, she's absolutely right; but we knew that already, because she (and we) have already seen it. If she was talking about before the actual moment of your death, then she's wrong - all you see is the girl coming out of the well and crawling out of your TV screen, but not the "ring" well image. This statement was important enough to make the trailer and even become the movie's logline; but it is never explored in the movie.

Quote:

Originally posted by Glory
I recognised the image of the ring as a well. I don't know how, actually, I just knew that was what it was. I obviously had seen that image before. Regardless, I knew very early that someone had gone down a well. It didn't ruin the movie for me.

I don't think solving the mystery was futile. Had she not done that, her son would have died. Also, now that it is known that copies are the key to survival, we get to wonder about the phenomenon growing exponentially.

I disagree. When I say "solve the mystery", I'm referring to how and where the girl died, and going down into the well to "save her", or whatever. After solving the mystery, Rachel comes home to tell her son, after which he notes that "you weren't supposed to help her". It is only after this discussion - and Noah's death - that Rachel learns the reason she was spared wasn't because she solved the mystery, but because she made a copy of the tape. That's why the final scene has her having her son also make a copy of the tape - precisely because she does realize that solving the mystery was futile and won't help her son.

Denise · 14th October 2003, 09:58 PM

The Ring scared the sh*t out of my daughter. She had no problem watching any horror films before. Hell, she laughed throughout the Exorcist. Right now she is sleeping on the couch having turned it away from the tv. Until she goes to bed- which will be with me. For a long time she wouldn't be alone in a room with a tv. No joke.

I am still kicking myself for letting her watch it.

I liked the movie, but still don't understand why she is trying to kill people. Also, was she adopted or not?

Glory · 14th October 2003, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Joshua Korosi
Another reason I don't like this movie is that it's hard to feel sympathetic for a character we know nothing about. We never really learn anything about Rachel, other than that she's a researcher. She has no depth. The only reason anyone would feel compelled to watch her struggles is that we know the reason she's doing all this is to save her son.

Now tht you mention it you're right but it didn't bother me when I watched. I wasn't board and I did want both her and her son to live so I don't feel that knowing more is necessary. It might have improved the film had they better developed the chracter but I don't see it as a flaw.

Quote:

I cannot believe a professional documentarian, after becoming aware of the first deaths, would so quickly jump on a haunted video tape as the most likely explanation.

She was creeped out and ran with it. Again, now that you mention it, I can see that you are right. She should have different profession or have been at least a little skeptical. However, had she been a skeptic, we would once agian have seen another skeptic learn the error of her ways which I really can't stand. I would rather her be a believer than have her skepticism be systematically exposed as fool hardy.

Quote:

I cannot believe that, having become convinced that the video is 1) real and 2) probably directly related to these peoples' deaths, this woman would be so compelled to actually watch the damned thing. This makes the woman a "dumb teen who takes the dare to spend the night in the haunted mansion" horror-flick cliche.

Glory · 14th October 2003, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Denise
The Ring scared the sh*t out of my daughter. She had no problem watching any horror films before. Hell, she laughed throughout the Exorcist. Right now she is sleeping on the couch having turned it away from the tv. Until she goes to bed- which will be with me. For a long time she wouldn't be alone in a room with a tv. No joke.

I am still kicking myself for letting her watch it.

My daughter is just now getting to the point where she has enough understandingof what she sees me watching that I have to censor her viewing. She protests violence of any kind loudly and asks the characters if theyu are all right a lot. I don't like to let her see anything which involves death. Sex, on the other hand, she has no objection to.

Quote:

I liked the movie, but still don't understand why she is trying to kill people.

She's evil. She enjoys hurting and scaring people and doesn't seem to care if they survive the experience or not.

Quote:

Also, was she adopted or not?

No, she wasn't. Her birth certificate had her mother's name on it. I definitely got the impression that Samara's mother had done something unholy to get a baby. Something that she regretted.

Glory

Hal 2001 · 15th October 2003, 12:17 AM

I have seen both the japanese and the US version.

I prefer the Japanese version. I thought that the whole "feeling" of the japanese version made it better. The color choices, the way of cutting it, and the acting, but I am biased.

I have a hard time understanding, why the US movie industry have to make remakes of movies that were perfectly good in the first place. The remakes are usually really bad compared to the original. Very few time I have seen a remake come up to the standard of the original flick, and even fewer have I seen it surpase the original movie. I must admit though that the Ring is one of the better remakes.

By the way if you liked Hideo Nakatas "Ringu" I am sure you would like one of his newer movies: "Dark Water"(Us title). I think it's even better than "Ringu".

Mss Hal

Hal 2001 · 15th October 2003, 12:19 AM

oupssss double post
Mss Hal

Checkmite · 15th October 2003, 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Glory
Samara was clearly waiting for someone like Rachel to come along. What she wanted more than anything was release. The big reveal is that after finding out everything that happened to Samara, it turns out to be a trap. In most stories releasing the wronged party ends the haunting. In this one, the problem suddenly becomes a hundred tiomes worse. Samara has been tossing out bread crumbs for a long time. She has a very limited amount of power. Once she is released by someone who finally took the bait she laid out she is a force to be reckoned with. Rachel, thinking she is helping, has released something very bad into the world and she can't put the genie back in the bottle.

Again, I must disagree. I can't find any change in the way things are after Rachel "releases" Samara. Samara was already killing people with the tape. Rachel's boyfriend still dies, and her son is still in danger of dying simply because they didn't make copies. They would've ended up dead even if Rachel hadn't "released" Samara. Although it's implied that Rachel shouldn't have done what she did ('You weren't supposed to help her'?!? What was I supposed to do, then, you little brat?), we're given absolutely no reason why this should be so - thus we have to invent one, independent of the movie. My explanation was that Samara left all the clues behind simply to waste the poor victim's time, after which they would still die anyway (unless they made a copy, of course).

Checkmite · 15th October 2003, 04:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hal 2001

I have a hard time understanding, why the US movie industry have to make remakes of movies that were perfectly good in the first place. The remakes are usually really bad compared to the original. Very few time I have seen a remake come up to the standard of the original flick, and even fewer have I seen it surpase the original movie. I must admit though that the Ring is one of the better remakes.

I have a harder time understanding why the US movie industry is compelled to produce remakes of movies that absolutely sucked. For example, there was a ridiculously horrible French film by the name of Little Indian, Big City, which was released in the U.S. with redubbed English. Despite the terribleness, Hollywood felt compelled to remake it (Jungle 2 Jungle), an effort which ultimately couldn't make an ugly thing any prettier.

Graham · 15th October 2003, 04:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Glory

The horses suicide was gratuitous. She has already noted the horse having a negative reaction to her. I actually said, "she's tainted." out loud when the horse starts freaking. She has to push the issue and go to the horse? I thought it made the character look really dumb. The point was made well before the horse jumps over board.

Glory

Would you say they went "overboard" on the horse thing, then?

. . .

(sorry)

I've only seen the US version and I quite enjoyed it. One of the lads I was with at the theatre chose and extremely tense moment to pull the straw out of his drink and the reulting creak reduced half the audience to near hysterics . . .

Graham

Hal 2001 · 15th October 2003, 05:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Joshua Korosi

I have a harder time understanding why the US movie industry is compelled to produce remakes of movies that absolutely sucked. For example, there was a ridiculously horrible French film by the name of Little Indian, Big City, which was released in the U.S. with redubbed English. Despite the terribleness, Hollywood felt compelled to remake it (Jungle 2 Jungle), an effort which ultimately couldn't make an ugly thing any prettier.

I agree, I have actually seen the original your talkin about (I think it is the one), The only reason why I didn't stop watching it right away was because it stared Thierry Lhermitte whom I kinfd of like (in the light genre".

I remember US remakes of bad french comedies from the 80s. I also remember bad remakes of good french comedies from the 80's.

Mss Hal

MoeFaux · 15th October 2003, 07:05 AM

The simple reason that they did all the things they did in the movie was...
It was in the script!
If things hadn't been so "cryptic" and kept the lead searching, the movie would have been only 20 minutes long.
Don't overanalylize it. Either you liked it or you didn't.
I liked it, it scared me, simple as that.

Glory · 15th October 2003, 07:12 AM

I do think that that satisfying the character's and the audience's curiosity about what the tape means and where it came from is reason enough to have the characters go through what they did. Also, they still get to look over their shoulders for the rest of their lives, or keep looking for a way to stop Samara. They have no reason to assume that she won't come after them again if, say, she were bored.

The pay off for all that work is a life time of paranoia.

Glory

Stainless_Steel_Rat · 15th October 2003, 12:28 PM

*spoilers below, but nothing more than already posted above*

I didn't find it scary in the slightest. The video reminded me of a Tool video.

I thought the movie was lacking in tension. It just didn't trigger anything "creepy" for me. My wife felt the same way.

And after, I too was left asking, "Why wasn't she supposed to help her?" Why did the little girl want to be found, and then still threaten others? The only real answer was the little girl WAS evil.

SSR
Still waiting for a good horor(not gore) flick.

alfaniner · 15th October 2003, 01:24 PM

One word: Sequels.

I understand the Japanese series has three or four movies.

Now that it's been a few weeks since I've seen it, I have to admit I'd kind of like to see it again, but I will definitely see the Japanese version first.

An interesting marketing ploy regarding the Japanese version -- I noticed that the title on the DVD box has "RINGU" in large letters, but the bottom of the logo is faded out to match the background color. Therefore someone glancing at the box would read "RINGII" and may think it's Ring II, a sequel, rather than the original.

(A story written shortly after my first impression follows)
This one just reinforced why I hate most horror movies. (I should note that I detested The Shining when I first saw it, but have since come to highly appreciated it.) I heard about how scary this one was, but to me, disturbing <> scary. There were some unsettling images which unfortunately keep coming back. I just hate having a bunch of stuff set up and SO many unanswered questions at the end. I will grant that it wasn't boring, and had some stylishly shot scenes.

There was a kinda neat subliminal on the DVD. Just after the horse gets plowed under the ferry boat's propellers, the soundtrack rises to a loud shriek and there's a jump cut to the next scene. If you freeze frame right there, there is a single frame of the Ring image inbetween the scenes. I don't know if there were any others.

I have to admit it is a move that stays with you (at least for a week!!) I was a little freaked out last night when I realized it had been exactly a week since I'd seen the video. After watching fireworks, I happened to be walking past a cemetery on a boulevard that had no lights, and only a slim crescent moon to light the way. There was a group of people about 50 yards ahead of me that was walking a little slowly, and I didn't feel like catching up to them, so I crossed the street to the other side which went along a golf course.

After a while I noticed I didn't hear them laughing or talking anymore, and realized they must have turned into the cemetery! The place is closed at that time of night. I couldn't fathom them parking there as the golf course parking lot was right across the street, and I'm sure they didn't turn around and go the other way. I never saw a car pull out, either.

That got me thinking about the movie. The premise of it was that exactly a week after seeing a certain video, you die, and just before that happens, you see The Ring. A few minutes later (now walking a little faster!) I thought of the timing of it, and heard a "Ring! Ring!". I turned and saw a circle of light approaching. OK, heart attack time. Turned out it was a biker also returning from the firework viewing area, and ringing her little bell to signal she was coming up behind.

Damm, I hate horror movies!

Melissa Johnson · 16th October 2003, 08:51 AM

I hated it and it scared me to pieces

I tivo'd it and wouldn't let my husband watch it, just in case.

It was filmed not just in my part of the world, but part of it was filmed in my home town and I've traveled many times on those ferries. I've also raised horses in this area. Nothing made me so upset as when that horse went over the side, and I never wanted to kick a character in the head so much. If the horse was freaking, why did she go to it? I'd split. Anyway--

It seriously bugged me. I doubt I would watch the Japanese version, if it was scarier. And movies don't usually scare the stuffing out of me like that.

The use of water was so depressing. It's pouring here and it's going to be pouring for a week. Bleh. Now I know why I prefer happy shiny movies, like Full Metal Jacket

corplinx · 16th October 2003, 11:31 PM

I watched the entire japanese ringu trilogy. Perhaps better than a horror film was the third ringu movie which was more a drama.

plindboe · 17th October 2003, 05:41 PM

Prefer the Japanese version much more. The scene where she climbs out of the TV in the end was extremely scary in that version, while in the US version it was just kinda neat.

Ed · 17th October 2003, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nyarlathotep
I liked it a lot too. It was one of the most original horror films I have seen in a long time. That little girl was downright creepy.

Yeah, but it was a rip off of some Jap thingie.

Very good flick, though.

Brown · 5th January 2004, 07:25 AM

I saw this movie for the first time this weekend. The movie aired on HBO.

I discovered that is really difficult to be scared when the lead actress is really attractive.

There were a couple of scenes that were creepy. The business about the blurred photos was eerie (and reminded me of a similar creepy device in The Omen).

At the end of the movie, the heroine frantically asks herself: "What did I do that he didn't??" In my mind, I came up with about a dozen different things, and copying the tape wasn't one of them. Yet somehow this one action was siezed up as being the "way out." What if the "way out" was actually something else, like plunging into the well or scaring the horse?

ASRomatifoso · 5th January 2004, 10:01 AM

I thought The Ring and Ringu were both good with The Ring being a little more effective in creeping me out. Recently, I saw a movie called Wendigo, which only opened in a couple of theaters here. I thought it was really good and genuinely creepy in many ways. Obviously, they had a lower budget to work with than the makers of The Ring but it is certainly worth checking out.

Feardotcom IMO is easily one of the worst movies I have seen in a while. Worse than The Hulk and almost as bad as Charlie's Angels 2.

Aardvark_DK · 7th January 2004, 09:37 AM

I think the Japanese version of Ring is vastly superior to the remake (but then I have a thing about Asian movies). The sequel isn't bad either. The third film in the series is actually a prequel and was done by a different director (I haven't seen it though). There is also a different sequel called Rasen (this is all rather confusing) and a Korean remake (which is supposed to be quite good)!!!

I'd like to second the recommendation of Dark Water - it is an incredibly atmospheric (sp?) film.

And while we're talking about Asian horror the Korean movie A Tale of Two Sisters is also excellent (hardly surprising since all the best movies these days are made in Korea).

HarryKeogh · 9th January 2004, 04:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Brown
I saw this movie for the first time this weekend. The movie aired on HBO.

I discovered that is really difficult to be scared when the lead actress is really attractive.

pssst, rent mulholland drive.

for her (and for the spanish chica) ,not for the plot because the movie makes absolutely zero sense. interesting movie but as moe from the simpsons would say "wierd for the sake of being wierd"

PygmyPlaidGiraffe · 18th January 2004, 10:12 AM

I have not seen "The Ring"

but I have seen "Ringu"

I have not read the novel.

I enjoyed Ringu

Aardvark_DK · 18th January 2004, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by PygmyPlaidGiraffe
I have not seen "The Ring"

but I have seen "Ringu"

When Ringu first came out in Europe and the US it was called Ring, but after the release of the remake the original was rereleased as Ringu - another thing that adds to the confusion.

bozothedeathmachine · 20th January 2004, 09:33 AM

I guess I'll be only person that dissents on the original/remake argument. I thought Ringu wanged chung. I had seen the US version first so maybe that's the reason but I found the Jap. version to be slow and inconsistent. The daughter was just there, there wasn't much in the plot about her, just "...oh yeah, and there's a daughter who can kill you with her mind."
I found the whole psychic thing to be cheesy in general. But that's just my opinion.

P.S. Oh yeah, and Naomi Watts is über hot.

14th October 2003, 09:50 AM	#1
Charles Livingston Critical Thinker Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 425	The Ring Alright Joshua, have at it. Anyone else want to discuss. I personally liked the movie alot.

14th October 2003, 10:26 AM	#2
Nyarlathotep Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 7,514	I liked it a lot too. It was one of the most original horror films I have seen in a long time. That little girl was downright creepy.
	__________________ Why stay sane in a sick world?

14th October 2003, 10:27 AM	#3
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,879	All right....problems with The Ring. The Ring is a cool movie (to start things off). The "haunted video" is initially disturbing after a fashion simply by virtue of the unexplainable nature of the images contained therein. The sense of urgency and "racing against the clock" certainly lends the atmosphere of a thriller here. Still, there were problems. All the images in the video were satisfactorily explained. While this may not be a problem in and of itself (though it does take the "creepy factor" away from the video), they were explained in a lame way. It's obvious that the images were a set of clues - a "trail" of sorts for one to follow, in order to solve the mystery. But at the end, we find out that the solving of the "mystery" is absolutely and thoroughly pointless and has no effect whatsoever on the characters' fate. So, what was the point, then, of the video? It functioned essentially as a spider web to trap new victims. Fine, and all, but since just about the entire movie was based around deciphering this unimportant "mystery", after having gone through all that futility the audience is left with a feeling of indifference. The horse suicide. Tasteless, in my opinion, and not scary or creepy in the least, and it serves absolutely no point in the movie. Probably traumatizing, though, if your age consists of a single digit. Please don't let your kids watch this scene. Better yet, don't let them watch the movie for a few years. The final "surprising" killing scene, where the girl crawls out of the television. OK, neat special effect, but that's about it. The problem with it is that it was cool, not scary, and this is supposed to be a horror movie. Perhaps I'm prejudiced against this scene, though...it utilizes a special effect I like to call the "creepy walk effect". This effect is created by having the actor intentionally walk in slow motion. Try it yourself - nobody can actually walk in slow motion; at the end of your stride, your forward foot falls toward the floor faster than it should, because you cannot keep balance. Film somebody walking this way, then speed up the film during playback so the pace is relatively normal, and you have a choppy, lumbering, tottery stride - the "creepy walk". I hate it, because it is overused in films lately, so much so that to see it throws me right out of the film. The movie leaves absolutely no questions unanswered. In most movies this is ideal; however, in horror movies, you want the opposite. You want the audience to leave thinking about the incatricies of the movie, not just its special effects. In The Omen (1976), the director and writer intentionally orchestrated the film's events such that they could all easily be coincidental or happenstance - the audience left wondering whether the little boy really was the devil's son (though subsequent movies ruined this effect), or whether Gregory Peck was just insane. You don't leave The Ring wondering about anything, except why you sat through a two-hour movie just to find out at the very end that nothing the main characters did during those two hours makes one bit of difference. That's enough for a conversation starter, I suppose.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

14th October 2003, 10:53 AM	#5
MoeFaux Suspicious Mind Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 3,919	I have to say that Ring was the scariest movie I've ever seen in my life. I saw it as an unbeliever (horror films I viewed growing up as a believer made them pretty scary) and I was still absolutely terrified. When it came out on DVD, I watched it again with two friends. It was just as scary the second time, except I knew when to close my eyes to avoid seeing the scary face at the beginning. We watched it over at another friends house who was out of town (he has the best home theatre), and when my two friends left, I spent the night since it was very, very late. All alone, in his giant house. I was scared out of my mind. One of the friends who watched it with me told me the next day that he was going to call my cell phone before I went to bed to say "7 days...". But he thought it would be too mean. Good thing, because I probably would have peed my pants. I hear the Japanese version is even scarier.
MoeFaux Suspicious Mind Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 3,919	__________________ This post brought to you by the artist fauxmerly known as Moe.

14th October 2003, 10:56 AM	#6
Martin Sceptic Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 898	Quote: Originally posted by MoeFaux I hear the Japanese version is even scarier I've never actually seen the US version. But, yes. Yes, it is.
Martin Sceptic Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 898	__________________ So the Universe is not quite as you thought it was. You had better rearrange your beliefs, then. Because you certainly can't rearrange the Universe. Isaac Asimov and Robert Silverberg, Nightfall

14th October 2003, 10:52 AM	#4
HarryKeogh Catholic School Survivor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: New York, NY Posts: 11,342	i thought this was an excellent flick. as for the horse suicide being tasteless...would it have been less tasteless if it was a human? i don't know. i felt creeped out by that scene because it's something i've never seen before. plus whoever lets their young child (especially in single digit years) see any R-rated horror flick has some serious problems.

14th October 2003, 11:00 AM	#7
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,879	Quote: Originally posted by HarryKeogh as for the horse suicide being tasteless...would it have been less tasteless if it was a human? i don't know. i felt creeped out by that scene because it's something i've never seen before. No, it would've been less tasteless to leave the scene out, since it neither explains nor reveals anything, nor advances the plot, nor aids character development, nor...well, you get the idea.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

14th October 2003, 11:09 AM	#8
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,879	Quote: Originally posted by Martin I've never actually seen the US version. But, yes. Yes, it is. The Japanese version, by the way, is called Ringu; and its release in the US was delayed in favor of the The Ring, which is essentially a remake. This has been done with a number of foreign films. In any case, The Ring's release was trumped by Feardotcom, also a stylized remake of Ringu. I really didn't find either film especially compelling; I haven't seen Ringu yet.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

14th October 2003, 11:14 AM	#9
Nyarlathotep Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 7,514	Quote: Originally posted by MoeFaux I hear the Japanese version is even scarier. I ddin't think it was. It was better in some ways, worse in others but I think the U.S. version was the scarier of the two.
	__________________ Why stay sane in a sick world?

14th October 2003, 11:20 AM	#10
Chanileslie Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 2,378	Quote: Originally posted by Joshua Korosi The Japanese version, by the way, is called Ringu; and its release in the US was delayed in favor of the The Ring, which is essentially a remake. This has been done with a number of foreign films. In any case, The Ring's release was trumped by Feardotcom, also a stylized remake of Ringu. I really didn't find either film especially compelling; I haven't seen Ringu yet. I have seen all three. I loved the Ring, it was compelling, interesting, and different. Ringu, wasn't much different from the Ring. There was some strange psychic link thing, and the male character was more the hero in Ringu rather than a side character he was the Ring which focused mostly on the female protagonist. Feardotcom, was interesting, but in some parts it was really drawn out, and dull, and the end just sort of fell flat.

14th October 2003, 11:40 AM	#11
Hexxenhammer Malleus Malefactorum Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 2,124	I really liked The Ring. I went with a a couple of very skittish (sp?) people who were squirming the entire movie. That helps make things scarier. And I was never so creeped out as when the fly was twitching while the video was paused and then flew out of the screen. It was just so off the wall, I loved it.
	__________________ Georgia's board of education approved the plan that allows teachers to keep using the word 'Evolution' when teaching biology. Though, as a compromise, dinosaurs are now called 'Jesus Horses.'--Jimmy Fallon on Weekend Update "I mean, if you buy into a religion, you're pretty much kissing good by(sic) critical thinking, aren't you?" --Riddick. Amen to that, brother. Gamers! Ultimate RPG Thread has a new home at skepticalcommunity! Check it out!

14th October 2003, 03:52 PM	#12
Suezoled Mentally Interesting Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 4,588	Lol. I rented both versions. The US release was playing on the TV, when the power went after right after the evil video tape played and someone had said "seven days" on the phone. Not only did the power go out, the phone rang. THAT made me jump. Watching the Japanese version of Ring, the tv glitched out after watching that cursed video, and the phone rang again. Japanese pronounciation meant to make it "Ring" and not "Ringu." And the version released from Japan to the US is a remake of the TV show. The TV show is an adaptation of a book trilogy. The book trilogy takes the sterotypical story of the tragic, innocent Japanese girl who dies horribly and her ghost returns to seek revenge until it can be laid to rest. This story has been told, retold, precocessed, canned, and served so often. It's even in manga (comic) format. (In the book trilogy, it goes on to explain that somehow the video passes on a bit of Sadako's DNA ifyou watch it. If you don't die in 7 days, or you don't save your own life with that special technique, you "hatch" a new Sadako out of your body. This Sadako has no memory of her "mother self" Oh yeah and you die anyway.) What impressed me about the US release was that the little girl's hair was in front of her face; a sure sign of a mournful, vengeful Japanese ghost. Samara should have been missing her fingernails, though. I do believe there was some mystery left over in the US version: 1.) How did Samara make her pictures on X-ray film? The same ability to make a video, sure, but what was it? (Yeah, yeah, the power of Nensha in the Japanese version. So, did it carry over to Sadako's US counterpart?) 2.) How did the girl in the mental institute (who had been friends with the movie's first on screen victim) know without asking that Rachel had 4 days to live? 3.) If Samara never sleeps anyway, why do "the horses keep her up at night"? 4.) Would watching only half the video mean Samara would only half kill you? (Okay, that was mine alone, but still...)
	__________________ "We must always fear the wicked. But there is another kind of evil that we must fear the most, and that is the indifference of good men." -priest guy from Boondock Saints "And we'll no longer memorize or rhyme/Too far along in our crime/ Stepping over what now towers to the sky/ With no connection" -Shins

14th October 2003, 04:08 PM	#13
Nyarlathotep Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 7,514	Quote: Originally posted by Suezoled 4.) Would watching only half the video mean Samara would only half kill you? (Okay, that was mine alone, but still...) I wondered that too, though the way I put it to my wife was "so if you only watch a couple of seconds does that mean in seven days you will stub your toe really, really hard?"
	__________________ Why stay sane in a sick world?

14th October 2003, 05:16 PM	#14
Bikewer Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: St. Louis, Mo. Posts: 9,522	A good solid ghost story. I didn't find it particularly frightening, but then as a 57-year-old cop, I don't frighten easily....

14th October 2003, 05:20 PM	#15
Glory Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,068	Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers! I liked The Ring a lot. It isn't perfect but I was creeped out and that was the goal. The horses suicide was gratuitous. She has already noted the horse having a negative reaction to her. I actually said, "she's tainted." out loud when the horse starts freaking. She has to push the issue and go to the horse? I thought it made the character look really dumb. The point was made well before the horse jumps over board. I also wondered about the horses keeping her up. I thought perhaps she just blamed the horses but that doesn't work. I recognised the image of the ring as a well. I don't know how, actually, I just knew that was what it was. I obviously had seen that image before. Regardless, I knew very early that someone had gone down a well. It didn't ruin the movie for me. I don't think solving the mystery was futile. Had she not done that, her son would have died. Also, now that it is known that copies are the key to survival, we get to wonder about the phenomenon growing exponentially. Glory
Glory Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,068

14th October 2003, 07:35 PM	#16
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,879	Quote: Originally posted by Glory The horses suicide was gratuitous. She has already noted the horse having a negative reaction to her. I actually said, "she's tainted." out loud when the horse starts freaking. She has to push the issue and go to the horse? I thought it made the character look really dumb. The point was made well before the horse jumps over board. Another reason I don't like this movie is that it's hard to feel sympathetic for a character we know nothing about. We never really learn anything about Rachel, other than that she's a researcher. She has no depth. The only reason anyone would feel compelled to watch her struggles is that we know the reason she's doing all this is to save her son. Willing suspension of disbelief is key to enjoying a movie, but it can be abused. To watch this movie, we have to be willing to believe that a ghost can create this video and use it to kill people - fine. But here are some things I cannot believe (time for another list): I cannot believe a professional documentarian, after becoming aware of the first deaths, would so quickly jump on a haunted video tape as the most likely explanation. I cannot believe that, having become convinced that the video is 1) real and 2) probably directly related to these peoples' deaths, this woman would be so compelled to actually watch the damned thing. This makes the woman a "dumb teen who takes the dare to spend the night in the haunted mansion" horror-flick cliche. I cannot believe that, in the diner scene, everybody - including the main characters - would react so ho-hum after noticing that their faces are distorted on the security camera image...which was the most intriguing effect, in my opinion. Watch the movie again - it's little more than a "hmm, that must mean we're in for it. Anyway, as we were saying..." I cannot believe that Aiden (the little boy) knows so much about the ghostly goings-on (as we are led to believe), yet is of absolutely no help until the very end of the movie. Quote: Originally posted by Glory I also wondered about the horses keeping her up. I thought perhaps she just blamed the horses but that doesn't work. I thought of this point during the movie. The only explanation I can come up with is that it's what the movie folks call a "tuiti" (short for "fortuitous") - an event or statement whose only purpose is to advance the plot, but is otherwise unconnected to anything else in the movie. In this case, I believe the writers had the girl make the comment about the horses keeping her up because if she hadn't, Rachel wouldn't have figured out so quickly that she should look in the barn. Call me cynical - but apparently nobody else here has a better explanation. There are other puzzling statements in the movie as well. For example, after watching the tape and looking at some of Aiden's drawings, Rachel muses that "I think before you die, you see the Ring". Well, if she means you see the ring/well motif in the video, she's absolutely right; but we knew that already, because she (and we) have already seen it. If she was talking about before the actual moment of your death, then she's wrong - all you see is the girl coming out of the well and crawling out of your TV screen, but not the "ring" well image. This statement was important enough to make the trailer and even become the movie's logline; but it is never explored in the movie. Quote: Originally posted by Glory I recognised the image of the ring as a well. I don't know how, actually, I just knew that was what it was. I obviously had seen that image before. Regardless, I knew very early that someone had gone down a well. It didn't ruin the movie for me. I don't think solving the mystery was futile. Had she not done that, her son would have died. Also, now that it is known that copies are the key to survival, we get to wonder about the phenomenon growing exponentially. I disagree. When I say "solve the mystery", I'm referring to how and where the girl died, and going down into the well to "save her", or whatever. After solving the mystery, Rachel comes home to tell her son, after which he notes that "you weren't supposed to help her". It is only after this discussion - and Noah's death - that Rachel learns the reason she was spared wasn't because she solved the mystery, but because she made a copy of the tape. That's why the final scene has her having her son also make a copy of the tape - precisely because she does realize that solving the mystery was futile and won't help her son.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

14th October 2003, 09:58 PM	#17
Denise Succubus Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 2,869	The Ring scared the sh*t out of my daughter. She had no problem watching any horror films before. Hell, she laughed throughout the Exorcist. Right now she is sleeping on the couch having turned it away from the tv. Until she goes to bed- which will be with me. For a long time she wouldn't be alone in a room with a tv. No joke. I am still kicking myself for letting her watch it. I liked the movie, but still don't understand why she is trying to kill people. Also, was she adopted or not?
Denise Succubus Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 2,869	__________________ Sundog- Do the words Biosphere 2 convey anything to anyone?

14th October 2003, 10:21 PM	#18
Glory Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,068	Quote: Originally posted by Joshua Korosi Another reason I don't like this movie is that it's hard to feel sympathetic for a character we know nothing about. We never really learn anything about Rachel, other than that she's a researcher. She has no depth. The only reason anyone would feel compelled to watch her struggles is that we know the reason she's doing all this is to save her son. Now tht you mention it you're right but it didn't bother me when I watched. I wasn't board and I did want both her and her son to live so I don't feel that knowing more is necessary. It might have improved the film had they better developed the chracter but I don't see it as a flaw. Quote: I cannot believe a professional documentarian, after becoming aware of the first deaths, would so quickly jump on a haunted video tape as the most likely explanation. She was creeped out and ran with it. Again, now that you mention it, I can see that you are right. She should have different profession or have been at least a little skeptical. However, had she been a skeptic, we would once agian have seen another skeptic learn the error of her ways which I really can't stand. I would rather her be a believer than have her skepticism be systematically exposed as fool hardy. Quote: I cannot believe that, having become convinced that the video is 1) real and 2) probably directly related to these peoples' deaths, this woman would be so compelled to actually watch the damned thing. This makes the woman a "dumb teen who takes the dare to spend the night in the haunted mansion" horror-flick cliche. Yes, I completely agree with you on this one. However, the contents of the tape would need to be determined by someone investigating the deaths. Once the tape connection had been established anyone looking for an evil doer would have to look at the tape in order to figure out what the plot was. They would need to know how the tape fit in to the murders. It would be evidence. Quote: I cannot believe that, in the diner scene, everybody - including the main characters - would react so ho-hum after noticing that their faces are distorted on the security camera image...which was the most intriguing effect, in my opinion. Watch the movie again - it's little more than a "hmm, that must mean we're in for it. Anyway, as we were saying..." Yes they were fairly nonchalant about it, wern't they. Quote: I cannot believe that Aiden (the little boy) knows so much about the ghostly goings-on (as we are led to believe), yet is of absolutely no help until the very end of the movie. Okay, I should start out by saying that I hate kids in scary movies. They are always given knowledge that they don't share because, "they're little kids who don't understand anything." They say cute criptic things like ,"Mr. Funny shoes lives down here" instead of, "Mom! I just saw a roach the size of a '59 Caddilac!". Aiden was better than most but it still amounts to the same thing. He assumed his mother knew what he knew when his experience clearly indicated that she did not have his gift. Quote: I thought of this point during the movie. The only explanation I can come up with is that it's what the movie folks call a "tuiti" (short for "fortuitous") - an event or statement whose only purpose is to advance the plot, but is otherwise unconnected to anything else in the movie. In this case, I believe the writers had the girl make the comment about the horses keeping her up because if she hadn't, Rachel wouldn't have figured out so quickly that she should look in the barn. Call me cynical - but apparently nobody else here has a better explanation. They could have done better. I would simply have had Samara say "look in the barn" but then I would have had her use her rather extraordinary powers to get out of the well while she was still alive. Quote: There are other puzzling statements in the movie as well. For example, after watching the tape and looking at some of Aiden's drawings, Rachel muses that "I think before you die, you see the Ring". Well, if she means you see the ring/well motif in the video, she's absolutely right; but we knew that already, because she (and we) have already seen it. If she was talking about before the actual moment of your death, then she's wrong - all you see is the girl coming out of the well and crawling out of your TV screen, but not the "ring" well image. This statement was important enough to make the trailer and even become the movie's logline; but it is never explored in the movie. But the guy saw the ring on the table left by his coffee cup right before she came to get him. I thought they were referring to the fact that once you have seen the tape you somehow start seeing things which are reminiscent of the images in the tape, not the actual images. Rachel tracks down the sources of the images on the tape and so she sees the real things but I thought that everyone else sees things too, the last of which is the ring, the last thing Samara saw before she was in the dark forever. Quote: I disagree. When I say "solve the mystery", I'm referring to how and where the girl died, and going down into the well to "save her", or whatever. After solving the mystery, Rachel comes home to tell her son, after which he notes that "you weren't supposed to help her". It is only after this discussion - and Noah's death - that Rachel learns the reason she was spared wasn't because she solved the mystery, but because she made a copy of the tape. That's why the final scene has her having her son also make a copy of the tape - precisely because she does realize that solving the mystery was futile and won't help her son. Samara was clearly waiting for someone like Rachel to come along. What she wanted more than anything was release. The big reveal is that after finding out everything that happened to Samara, it turns out to be a trap. In most stories releasing the wronged party ends the haunting. In this one, the problem suddenly becomes a hundred tiomes worse. Samara has been tossing out bread crumbs for a long time. She has a very limited amount of power. Once she is released by someone who finally took the bait she laid out she is a force to be reckoned with. Rachel, thinking she is helping, has released something very bad into the world and she can't put the genie back in the bottle. No happy ending on this one. I like that. The final cut ended on Aiden asking about the person to whom they'll give the tape. The original ending was Rachel standing in front of a video store after having deposited the tape into the return box. She stands there watching the clerk putting the tape on the shelf and waiting for it to be picked up. She could have destroyed the tape and the copy she made and ended the whole thing but that would have meant sacrificing herself and her son. The obvious question is "what would you do?". Glory
Glory Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,068

14th October 2003, 10:29 PM	#19
Glory Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,068	Quote: Originally posted by Denise The Ring scared the sht out of my daughter. She had no problem watching any horror films before. Hell, she laughed throughout the Exorcist. Right now she is sleeping on the couch having turned it away from the tv. Until she goes to bed- which will be with me. For a long time she wouldn't be alone in a room with a tv. No joke. I am still kicking myself for letting her watch it. My daughter is just now getting to the point where she has enough understandingof what she sees me watching that I have to censor her viewing. She protests violence of any kind loudly and asks the characters if theyu are all right a lot. I don't like to let her see anything which involves death. Sex, on the other hand, she has no objection to. Quote: I liked the movie, but still don't understand why she is trying to kill people.* She's evil. She enjoys hurting and scaring people and doesn't seem to care if they survive the experience or not. Quote: Also, was she adopted or not? No, she wasn't. Her birth certificate had her mother's name on it. I definitely got the impression that Samara's mother had done something unholy to get a baby. Something that she regretted. Glory
Glory Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,068

15th October 2003, 12:17 AM	#20
Hal 2001 Scholar Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Benin Posts: 100	Comparing the two versions I have seen both the japanese and the US version. I prefer the Japanese version. I thought that the whole "feeling" of the japanese version made it better. The color choices, the way of cutting it, and the acting, but I am biased. I have a hard time understanding, why the US movie industry have to make remakes of movies that were perfectly good in the first place. The remakes are usually really bad compared to the original. Very few time I have seen a remake come up to the standard of the original flick, and even fewer have I seen it surpase the original movie. I must admit though that the Ring is one of the better remakes. By the way if you liked Hideo Nakatas "Ringu" I am sure you would like one of his newer movies: "Dark Water"(Us title). I think it's even better than "Ringu". Mss Hal

15th October 2003, 12:19 AM	#21
Hal 2001 Scholar Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Benin Posts: 100	Comparing the two versions oupssss double post Mss Hal

15th October 2003, 04:27 AM	#22
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,879	Quote: Originally posted by Glory Samara was clearly waiting for someone like Rachel to come along. What she wanted more than anything was release. The big reveal is that after finding out everything that happened to Samara, it turns out to be a trap. In most stories releasing the wronged party ends the haunting. In this one, the problem suddenly becomes a hundred tiomes worse. Samara has been tossing out bread crumbs for a long time. She has a very limited amount of power. Once she is released by someone who finally took the bait she laid out she is a force to be reckoned with. Rachel, thinking she is helping, has released something very bad into the world and she can't put the genie back in the bottle. Again, I must disagree. I can't find any change in the way things are after Rachel "releases" Samara. Samara was already killing people with the tape. Rachel's boyfriend still dies, and her son is still in danger of dying simply because they didn't make copies. They would've ended up dead even if Rachel hadn't "released" Samara. Although it's implied that Rachel shouldn't have done what she did ('You weren't supposed to help her'?!? What was I supposed to do, then, you little brat?), we're given absolutely no reason why this should be so - thus we have to invent one, independent of the movie. My explanation was that Samara left all the clues behind simply to waste the poor victim's time, after which they would still die anyway (unless they made a copy, of course).
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

15th October 2003, 04:34 AM	#23
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,879	Re: Comparing the two versions Quote: Originally posted by Hal 2001 I have a hard time understanding, why the US movie industry have to make remakes of movies that were perfectly good in the first place. The remakes are usually really bad compared to the original. Very few time I have seen a remake come up to the standard of the original flick, and even fewer have I seen it surpase the original movie. I must admit though that the Ring is one of the better remakes. I have a harder time understanding why the US movie industry is compelled to produce remakes of movies that absolutely sucked. For example, there was a ridiculously horrible French film by the name of Little Indian, Big City, which was released in the U.S. with redubbed English. Despite the terribleness, Hollywood felt compelled to remake it (Jungle 2 Jungle), an effort which ultimately couldn't make an ugly thing any prettier.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

15th October 2003, 04:36 AM	#24
Graham Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 1,465	Quote: Originally posted by Glory The horses suicide was gratuitous. She has already noted the horse having a negative reaction to her. I actually said, "she's tainted." out loud when the horse starts freaking. She has to push the issue and go to the horse? I thought it made the character look really dumb. The point was made well before the horse jumps over board. Glory Would you say they went "overboard" on the horse thing, then? . . . (sorry) I've only seen the US version and I quite enjoyed it. One of the lads I was with at the theatre chose and extremely tense moment to pull the straw out of his drink and the reulting creak reduced half the audience to near hysterics . . . Graham
Graham Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 1,465

15th October 2003, 05:04 AM	#25
Hal 2001 Scholar Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Benin Posts: 100	Re: Re: Comparing the two versions Quote: Originally posted by Joshua Korosi I have a harder time understanding why the US movie industry is compelled to produce remakes of movies that absolutely sucked. For example, there was a ridiculously horrible French film by the name of Little Indian, Big City, which was released in the U.S. with redubbed English. Despite the terribleness, Hollywood felt compelled to remake it (Jungle 2 Jungle), an effort which ultimately couldn't make an ugly thing any prettier. I agree, I have actually seen the original your talkin about (I think it is the one), The only reason why I didn't stop watching it right away was because it stared Thierry Lhermitte whom I kinfd of like (in the light genre". I remember US remakes of bad french comedies from the 80s. I also remember bad remakes of good french comedies from the 80's. Mss Hal

15th October 2003, 07:05 AM	#26
MoeFaux Suspicious Mind Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 3,919	The simple reason that they did all the things they did in the movie was... It was in the script! If things hadn't been so "cryptic" and kept the lead searching, the movie would have been only 20 minutes long. Don't overanalylize it. Either you liked it or you didn't. I liked it, it scared me, simple as that.
MoeFaux Suspicious Mind Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 3,919	__________________ This post brought to you by the artist fauxmerly known as Moe.

15th October 2003, 07:12 AM	#27
Glory Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,068	I do think that that satisfying the character's and the audience's curiosity about what the tape means and where it came from is reason enough to have the characters go through what they did. Also, they still get to look over their shoulders for the rest of their lives, or keep looking for a way to stop Samara. They have no reason to assume that she won't come after them again if, say, she were bored. The pay off for all that work is a life time of paranoia. Glory
Glory Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,068

15th October 2003, 12:28 PM	#28
Stainless_Steel_Rat Muse Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 583	The Ring spoilers below, but nothing more than already posted above I didn't find it scary in the slightest. The video reminded me of a Tool video. I thought the movie was lacking in tension. It just didn't trigger anything "creepy" for me. My wife felt the same way. And after, I too was left asking, "Why wasn't she supposed to help her?" Why did the little girl want to be found, and then still threaten others? The only real answer was the little girl WAS evil. SSR Still waiting for a good horor(not gore) flick.
Stainless_Steel_Rat Muse Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 583

15th October 2003, 01:24 PM	#29
alfaniner Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Sorth Dakonsin Posts: 11,380	One word: Sequels. I understand the Japanese series has three or four movies. Now that it's been a few weeks since I've seen it, I have to admit I'd kind of like to see it again, but I will definitely see the Japanese version first. An interesting marketing ploy regarding the Japanese version -- I noticed that the title on the DVD box has "RINGU" in large letters, but the bottom of the logo is faded out to match the background color. Therefore someone glancing at the box would read "RINGII" and may think it's Ring II, a sequel, rather than the original. (A story written shortly after my first impression follows) This one just reinforced why I hate most horror movies. (I should note that I detested The Shining when I first saw it, but have since come to highly appreciated it.) I heard about how scary this one was, but to me, disturbing <> scary. There were some unsettling images which unfortunately keep coming back. I just hate having a bunch of stuff set up and SO many unanswered questions at the end. I will grant that it wasn't boring, and had some stylishly shot scenes. There was a kinda neat subliminal on the DVD. Just after the horse gets plowed under the ferry boat's propellers, the soundtrack rises to a loud shriek and there's a jump cut to the next scene. If you freeze frame right there, there is a single frame of the Ring image inbetween the scenes. I don't know if there were any others. I have to admit it is a move that stays with you (at least for a week!!) I was a little freaked out last night when I realized it had been exactly a week since I'd seen the video. After watching fireworks, I happened to be walking past a cemetery on a boulevard that had no lights, and only a slim crescent moon to light the way. There was a group of people about 50 yards ahead of me that was walking a little slowly, and I didn't feel like catching up to them, so I crossed the street to the other side which went along a golf course. After a while I noticed I didn't hear them laughing or talking anymore, and realized they must have turned into the cemetery! The place is closed at that time of night. I couldn't fathom them parking there as the golf course parking lot was right across the street, and I'm sure they didn't turn around and go the other way. I never saw a car pull out, either. That got me thinking about the movie. The premise of it was that exactly a week after seeing a certain video, you die, and just before that happens, you see The Ring. A few minutes later (now walking a little faster!) I thought of the timing of it, and heard a "Ring! Ring!". I turned and saw a circle of light approaching. OK, heart attack time. Turned out it was a biker also returning from the firework viewing area, and ringing her little bell to signal she was coming up behind. Damm, I hate horror movies!

16th October 2003, 08:51 AM	#30
Melissa Johnson Muse Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 575	I hated it and it scared me to pieces I tivo'd it and wouldn't let my husband watch it, just in case. It was filmed not just in my part of the world, but part of it was filmed in my home town and I've traveled many times on those ferries. I've also raised horses in this area. Nothing made me so upset as when that horse went over the side, and I never wanted to kick a character in the head so much. If the horse was freaking, why did she go to it? I'd split. Anyway-- It seriously bugged me. I doubt I would watch the Japanese version, if it was scarier. And movies don't usually scare the stuffing out of me like that. The use of water was so depressing. It's pouring here and it's going to be pouring for a week. Bleh. Now I know why I prefer happy shiny movies, like Full Metal Jacket
Melissa Johnson Muse Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 575	__________________ We use only the finest baby frogs, dew picked and flown from Iraq, cleansed in finest quality spring water, lightly killed, and then sealed in a succulent Swiss quintuple smooth treble cream milk chocolate envelope and lovingly frosted with glucose..

16th October 2003, 11:31 PM	#31
corplinx JREF Kid Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,944	I watched the entire japanese ringu trilogy. Perhaps better than a horror film was the third ringu movie which was more a drama.
corplinx JREF Kid Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,944	__________________ In the tradition of "Stop Silvia!" Stop Hal Bidlack: http://skepticalcommunity.com/forums...hp?f=1&t=28671

17th October 2003, 05:41 PM	#32
plindboe Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Denmark Posts: 1,244	Prefer the Japanese version much more. The scene where she climbs out of the TV in the end was extremely scary in that version, while in the US version it was just kinda neat.
	__________________ Peter "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." (Bertrand Russell)

17th October 2003, 07:33 PM	#33
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	Quote: Originally posted by Nyarlathotep I liked it a lot too. It was one of the most original horror films I have seen in a long time. That little girl was downright creepy. Yeah, but it was a rip off of some Jap thingie. Very good flick, though.
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	__________________ "The history of science is the record of dead religions" Phrases And Philosophies For The Use Of The Young Oscar Wilde (1854-1900) Our Guarentee: One obscure (or not) Python reference per day.

5th January 2004, 07:25 AM	#34
Brown Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Twin Cities, Canada Posts: 12,145	I saw this movie for the first time this weekend. The movie aired on HBO. I discovered that is really difficult to be scared when the lead actress is really attractive. There were a couple of scenes that were creepy. The business about the blurred photos was eerie (and reminded me of a similar creepy device in The Omen). At the end of the movie, the heroine frantically asks herself: "What did I do that he didn't??" In my mind, I came up with about a dozen different things, and copying the tape wasn't one of them. Yet somehow this one action was siezed up as being the "way out." What if the "way out" was actually something else, like plunging into the well or scaring the horse?
	__________________ Klaatu: I'm impatient with stupidity. My people have learned to live without it. Mr. Harley: I'm afraid my people haven't. I am very sorry. I wish it were otherwise. -- The Day The Earth Stood Still, screenplay by Edmund H. North "Don't you get me wrong. I only want to know." -- Judas in Jesus Christ Superstar, lyrics by Tim Rice

5th January 2004, 10:01 AM	#35
ASRomatifoso Thinker Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 186	I thought The Ring and Ringu were both good with The Ring being a little more effective in creeping me out. Recently, I saw a movie called Wendigo, which only opened in a couple of theaters here. I thought it was really good and genuinely creepy in many ways. Obviously, they had a lower budget to work with than the makers of The Ring but it is certainly worth checking out. Feardotcom IMO is easily one of the worst movies I have seen in a while. Worse than The Hulk and almost as bad as Charlie's Angels 2.
ASRomatifoso Thinker Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 186