MovieChat Forums > The Ring Two (2005) Discussion > So much better than the first American R...

So much better than the first American Ring movie

posted 8 years ago by fatpie42
10 replies | jump to latest

I don't understand why this did so badly. They brought back the original Japanese director, he knocked it out of the park and then nobody liked it. What gives?

It focussed on imagery, atmosphere, sound design and structure instead of the jump scare BS and randomness of Gore Verbinski's film. We have a proper mystery here instead of a film where Brian Cox randomly commits suicide by setting up huge amounts of unsafe wiring in his bathtub or where the jump scare noises try to make us terrified of a millipede in the filing system.

It seems to me that this was a good film and Gore Verbinski's remake was not. The problems mainly seem to arise from nonsensical aspects from the first movie and some less-than-perfect CGI for the deer attack scene. I certainly don't think we can blame Hideo Nakata for any problems in this film. It looks like he did the best job possible with the material...

And I'm sorry if people didn't want the Samara possession story. These films are, at least partially, based on a set of books and the books are ALL ABOUT the evil psychic trying to be reborn. If you want to see how stupid things COULD have been, check out the movie "Spiral" (original title "Rasen"): the original Japanese sequel to Ring that bombed. (Hideo Nakata came back to make an alternative much-improved sequel instead - and that's how we got the original Japanese "Ring 2"!) Spiral has Sadako (the Japanese name for the Samara character) transferring smallpox to her victims, even ones who've read the mother's journal (i.e. a journal written by Naomi Watt's character). It also features magic clones born from DNA transferred via tv signals who can be born as fully grown adults with all their old memories after a pregnancy lasting only one week. This series is frikkin' nuts and Hideo Nakata's version of Samara's plan to be reborn is a lot more palatable than the original story from the novels.

[–] thenikexperience 8 years ago

You are so completely and utterly wrong. LOL Gore Verbinski's film was artistic, believable, gritty, captivating, compelling, and the acting was damn good. So many memorable lines, scenes, moments, and ACTUAL SCARES. There were maybe one or two jump scares, but the whole film managed to make you feel pretty uneasy and creeped out consistently. There were also terrific sequences that were actually frightening, that didn't just rely on JUMP SCARES. When I was watching the Ring Two I felt like I was watching a bad Disney movie, like the haunted mansion or something. UGH!

The Ring Two lacked any kind of particular style - had RANDOM AF "imagery" that wasn't even really explained and was void any kind of meaning - the acting was horrific, the CGI was unnecessary and contrived, and the storyline (if you can even call it that) was disjointed and all over the place. Not to mention the writing was cheesy and completely ridiculous - especially the last line. It did have some redeeming moments, and that was when it closely emulated the first film that Verbinski created, not when it strayed off the path and had forced drama and lame moments where it was supposed to be scary.

[–] Colonel-T 8 years ago

Yes, "The Ring 2" was a massive let down. The first film was pretty hard to fault, but the second one jettisoned everything that made "The Ring" so fascinating and refreshing, and we got a fairly standard story of demonic possession that's been done a million times.

The short film "Rings" included on the DVD of "The Ring Two" is a much worthier follow up.

[–] thenikexperience 8 years ago

It is! They should have just made Rings longer and made THAT the movie, not the pile of random shyt that the Ring Two was...UGH! Still very disappointed by it and it's over 10 years later. LOL

[–] Colonel-T 8 years ago

Right there with you comrade 😉

[–] Branais (73) 8 years ago

> "The short film "Rings" included on the DVD of "The Ring Two" is a much worthier follow up. "

Certainly is, Ollie.

They ruined the Blu-ray of the first US film by altering the colour timing (from a CRT TV's blue glow to -- I presume -- a well-water mould green, but the blue made more sense in the story), but they did get a couple of things right, and one was including the short film "Rings" that had originally been on the second film's DVD.

The US remake is easily my favourite of all the Ring flicks (yes, including the Japanese originals), so I'm content with having it as a stand-alone story, and the short film as it coda, and forgetting both the full-length US sequels. (I haven't seen the third US film yet, but I've been told by friends not to bother.)

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MrJJay 8 years ago

You couldn't have been more wrong, lol. This one was just a cliche B class horror film. The first one was compelling and intriguing. Samara was a really interesting and complex character. We were curious about her, trying to understand her past her motives etc. In this one she was just a typical evil character. Nothing more. And when the antagonist is so shallow and uninteresting the film looses all its credit thus scariness. I was not scared even one moment whereas i was on a knife edge the whole time in the first film.

There's almost nothing great about this film. It's without question a failure.

[–] TheTragicPrinceBatman 8 years ago

I thought both movies were awesome. That part in part 2 when that horse goes crazy and jumps off the ferry was horrifying, though, to me when I first watched it. I had never seen ANYTHING done like that in a movie before. (then I saw The Reverant and they basically stole that idea and put it in that movie)

And that horse scene also reminds me of a story I heard about the movie Pulp Fiction. A woman was in the theater watching Pulp Fiction when it first came out in the theaters and then the part comes up when Mia gets plunged by Vincent with the needle and wakes up from the overdose. THE LADY ACTUALLY HAD A DAMN HEART ATTACK IN THE THEATER! I didn't have a heart attack and end up in the hospital but it certainly felt like it after seeing that horse scene in The Ring 2.

Update: The horse scene is from part 1. And I just watched the scene over on YouTube. It was nothing compared to when I first watched it. Maybe because I didn't watch it on a big screen with a surround sound system. I think I saw it in the theaters.

[–] soulsk8ter225 8 years ago

Horse scene is still traumatizing to me. A 60" screen isn't massive, but it gets the job done. It's my sound system that really does get you, though. When that horse freaks out for the first time and the strings start playing, you really start to tense up alongside the scene.

** Rest in peace, Timothy Volkert (1988 - 2003) **

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 4 years ago

I was trying to understand how a person could prefer this film over The Ring. And then I got to this

This series is frikkin' nuts and Hideo Nakata's version of Samara's plan to be reborn is a lot more palatable than the original story from the novels.

This guy prefers Ring 2 and The Ring Two over the original novels. Ggs there, to each their own.