Perry Kate
Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!
PlatinumRead
Just so...so bad
Teringer
An Exercise In Nonsense
jacobjohntaylor1
This not scary. I did not why it got a 6. That is just overrating it. The Ring (1998) is better and that was an awful movie. If this movie had not been made the remake would not have been made and that is only good thing I can say about this movie. The Ring (2002) is also a lot better. That one is very scary. This movie has an awful story line. It has awful acting. It is not scary. Do not waste your time. Do not waste your money. Do not see this movie. It slow and boring and not scary. I give 4 out 10 because it is a horror movie that is not scary. If you want see something scary See The Exorcist. Do not see this movie. It is not scary at all.
Leofwine_draca
Apparently, director Hideo Nakata was drafted in to shoot this sequel to 1998's RING when that film's original sequel, RASEN – shot back to back with the first – flopped with Japanese audiences. RING 2 is more of a straightforward successor to RING, logically following on from events portrayed in the first film and feeling exactly the same in terms of tone, lighting, and look. Heck, even most of the actors and actresses are back from the first film, so watching these two back-to-back would be akin to sitting through a three-hour film.For starters, RING 2 isn't as good as the first film. It lacks the surprise and the originality of that movie, and all of the shocks here are familiar to anyone who's seen the original film – and anyone who hasn't will be scratching their heads and wondering what the heck is going on here. The film is very talky and very slow, as with the original film in the series, and once again the overlaid English subtitles are extremely hard to make out, so some of the dialogue is missed. However, there's always plenty going on so there's never time to get bored, despite the slow pacing, and the return of many cast members from the first film is a real treat – especially Hiroyuki Sanada, who doesn't let his character's death in RING stop him from coming back here! The plot twists and turns in many directions and opens up new areas of the mythology, incorporating psychic powers and the mysterious channelling of psychic energy into water. I admit that I was engaged with the story and never found it lacking for a second.Thankfully, the horror in this film is just as creepy as ever. Nakata keeps a slow-burning tension that builds up until the first real shocks that occur about an hour into the production. My favourite scene of all is the bit where the reporter examines the videotape and discovers that something weird is happening to the head of the girl on film – things get more surreal as she becomes a creation of ghostly evil, and there's a fantastic use of a 'jumpy' special effect like the ones used in JACOB'S LADDER and THE HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL remake. Many creepy scenes from the first flick are repeated, like the grainy television set images and the excellent bit involving the woman combing her hair in a mirror. Things culminate in a nightmarish ending which returns things to the well – and what happens is as disturbing as ever. RING 2 doesn't top the experience of watching the first, and best, film in the series, but it proves to be a worthy sequel with plenty of scary bits to enjoy.
gianmarco888
The "Ringu" series is a saga, and a morality play, that was amazingly directed by Hideo Natata, and Hiroshi Takahashi. "Rasen" (Spiral) was more poorly done, and is a little disappointing, but is still pretty good. The main problem with the inconsistency of the story line has to do with too many cooks not following the recipe.You will notice how the books upon which the movies are based do not correspond. They makes for good movies in themselves, but are out of sync. The telling of the story gets more off kilter with each new novel Koji Suzuki writes.You won't really get where he's going with the story until you read "Loop" (2005), whose movie hasn't been made yet. I hope when they do, Takahashi writes and Nakata directs. As far as I'm concerned, "Rasen" and "Ringu 2" were not up to par with "Ringu" and "Basudai" (Birthday, aka Ringu 0). For those who want more meaning, "sada" means "pure one" and "ko" means "girl". So who is Sadako? She is the embodiment of duality. Good/evil, man/woman, hate/love reality/ unreality and in fact the merger of demon and woman. You have to read the manga (comic book) series to get the background. That duality is what is frightening, especially to people of regimented views of how the world "should" be. Things that were once thought to be the realm of only men or women have in modern times become blurred. Japan is about 30 years behind us in the change of sex-rolls, etc. This is the underlying theme of the movieSo how do we pick up these ideas? We are of course "infected" by the media, and our thinking evolves, and we are no longer who we were. There is naturally no going back. That is progress, though many fight it. What were once evil ideas, become accepted as every day fact. So is Sadako a kind of messiah? The evil one? We also have our own dualities. We can find ourselves beside ourselves with anger, or filled with manic euphoria. We can feel so angry we could... Or, our happiness can seem to radiate to all. I was also really disappointed that in Rasen and Ringu 2 we don't see the wonderful Yukie Nakamura, who just knocks my socks off. Very charming actress. Why we see a substitute in Rasen only makes sense in the context of alternate universes, which may be the point.Where Suzuki is headed with this remains to be seen. The movies might start wading into "the matrix", which could tie the story lines together. Can he weave these webs into a consistent story? Hopefully he can keep up the good work. Without the right writer, director and cast, you'll get mush. If they do it right, look out!!!.........As for the American versions...what a disappointment. They just don't get it. The actors were poorly cast. They don't seem to understand how beautiful and quirky people who are very intelligent, can also be really creepy, because they can see and comprehend things faster than the rest of us, but like Cassandra, are sometimes helpless to change things because everyone else is so slow. They live a blessed, but cursed life. Like Sadako, their blessing is also a curse. The tension should lie in pulling us and repelling us. Don't use gore as filler for a poorly written and cast movie. I guess too many studio executives had a hand in the broth.
The3Extremes
The first film was a brilliant chilling masterpiece, and this is a good little follow up considering that sequels to classics are a bad idea usually. However as the film progresses it gets gradually worse and then you realise it is just another example of bad sequels to classics. There are, however, some chilling scenes e.g, the scene where the mirror on the wall reflects Sadako's mother combing her hair and that eerie tone kicks in. Then there's the scenes that just go too far with the supernatural ideas and result in being near fantasy. The end is by far too much of a muddle and the whole idea of water being transferred through the mind is too far-fetched. However, despite what i've just said, I urge you to watch this instead of the remake which is ten times worse!
