Rating: 
Summary: See the DVD... I don't quite dare watch the videotape.
Review: ...Still, it wasn't a bad film by any means. I might not agree with others that it was the scariest movie ever, but I thought it was skillfully-made and had some genuinely creepy moments. I really liked the overall atmosphere it created, and the effects were subtle, for the most part, not overdone. The meat of it is that I enjoyed it. It's a good scary movie, though classics like "The Haunting" are still scarier.The thing I think I appreciated most about "The Ring" is that it wasn't trying to be a "hip" scary movie, like the "Scream" series or its many clones. It was a serious, genuine attempt at a classic horror film. The first 5 to 10 minutes of "The Ring" probably represents the most genuinely scary part of the whole movie. This was a good way to go, as it certainly put me on edge for the rest of the movie. When one starts looking at particulars, it gets even better. The main subject of the film (as is probably well-known by now) is a videotape which, once watched, somehow guarantees that the person who watched it will die in exactly seven days. The reason for this is somewhat explained by the end of the film. As a video geek, I liked some of the details thrown in about the tape itself, such as the fact (revealed fairly early) that it has no timecode track, and any copies made similarly have no time track. As a practical matter, this is pretty much an impossibility. Which is why this detail creeped me out quite a bit, and certainly lent a great deal to the mystery of the origin of the tape. Another nice detail was the way the images from the tape are worked into the days that follow. It's not made obvious in all cases, as in through a flashback or anything, but if one is observant pretty much every disturbing image from the tape (and there are some very disturbing images) is reflected in a similar image in the events after it is viewed. One exception to this turned out to be in a deleted scene on the DVD, so it was clearly intentional, even if not quite completely carried out. Some of the parallels between "real life" and the tape are subtle, but they are definitely there. One really surprising thing about the film was the music, which was understated and subtle throughout. This is not surprising in itself, but it is when you consider the composer. I thought perhaps it might have been Maurice Jarre or even Thomas Newman, with their tendency towards quiet undertones and ambient sounds. The surprise came at the end when I saw in the credits that Hans Zimmer, usually author of skilled but over-the-top scores such as "Gladiator" or "Mission: Impossible 2," had worked on "The Ring." I admire Zimmer and I enjoy his scores in general, but he truly outdid himself for this film. The music is a strong counterpoint to the atmosphere of the movie, and Zimmer abandoned his usually-identifiable style and allowed the tone of the film to set the tone of his score. He had a soft touch with the music, for once, and it really added a great deal to the movie. As for the scary stuff, there was plenty there to be found. Though I have to say, "The Ring" is not so much scary as it is intense. Somewhat like "The Blair Witch Project," "The Ring" sets up an effective tone early on, and never really lets up. Through a steady series of surprises, it manages to keep the audience guessing about what's going to happen next. I won't give away any of the specifics, because if you haven't seen it yet then they're best seen fresh, and my description likely wouldn't do it justice anyway. But basically, as you watch the film and think that something can't happen, that what's about to happen is impossible... that's when it does. I had several "gasp" moments during the film, because it managed to surprise me several times. And the effects were done well enough that even such impossiblities remained convincing. The scares in "The Ring" are well-placed and skillfully executed. During the film I was sucked right into it, only afterwards could I start to appreciate how well it had been done. The end result is that "The Ring" is a good, solid horror film, and makes no pretensions otherwise. Though not as good as some of the classics, it definitely hearkens back to the days of movies like "The Haunting" or "Rosemary's Baby," as one of those rare horror movies that simply accomplishes what it sets out to do - scare the heck out of you - and is satisfied. Which is not to say there is not some social commentary inherent in the film, even though it takes a back seat to the story. The fact that the film's terrors reach us through our new media - television, video, and telephone - says something about the pervasiveness of these media. We trust them implicitly as methods of communication and modes of entertainment. "The Ring" seems to suggest that this trust is not earned, that these media can be used for evil as much as they can be used for good. That message blinking on the answering machine is an unknown quantity until you listen to it, that videotape is a mystery until you watch it, and a screen full of static may be the most frightening thing of all.
Rating: 
Summary: This movie is downright creepy!
Review: I like this movie because it's scary. I watched this because a friend of mine recommended it.
I like how this movie scares you to death because it sounds like something out of a Lovecraft novel. I'm sure that Midnight Syndicate's scary Cd's will probably remind you of things which you see in the movie. Who cares if this movie is not horror? It doesn't have to rely on blood and gore. This is a suspense movie. Highly recommended.
Rating: 
Summary: Beware of the VHS
Review: What is it about VHS that makes it so scary. Is it the poor quality sound and picture, the rewinding, the lack of extras, or the bad think annoying size. Well the Ring plays on some peoples fear of the format. It involes a tape that kills you seven days after you watch it. How doesn't say, why doesn't say, what is going on doesn't say. I can tolarate little plot but not no plot. The little girl soal appear to kill through the TV. How she made the tape? how her spirit got so powerful? So many questions that have no answers. They say horror movies are the easiest kind of movie to make and The Ring is the biggest example of this. Sorry moddy setting, and scary music do not equal a good horror movie. It needs some kind of story. The Ring has no thought or talent. Please skip this and remember. "You should have bought a DVD player"
"I don't I was going too"
"NO EXCUSES"
Rating: 
Summary: Stylish, but overrated
Review: This review contains spoilers. Don't read this if you haven't seen the movie yet. I consider myself a horror movie afficionado, so when I hear so much buzz about a new horror movie, I'm always curious to see what all the fuss is about. Sometimes, I'm rewarded, such as when I saw "28 Days Later." However, sometimes the hype just sets me up for dissapointment. Such is the case with "The Ring." I have to give Gore Verbinski credit. He knows the meaning of "atmosphere," and he can be very versatile in his tone. His work in "Pirates of the Carribean" was delightfully fun, and here, he steeps the movie in a constant sense of dread. Meanwhile, he's great with the "BOO" moments, the most notable being the infamous girl in the closet. He's quite good with the whole imagery thing, using his stylish approach to make the audience remember what they saw. The problem is that despite the general spookiness of the movie, it doesn't stick. Yes, you remember the girl in the closet and the horse and the girl in the well, but there's no reason for you to be scared. There is no prevailing principle to the movie. Most great horror movies have some underlying point to them. "Halloween" had the pure evil of Michael Meyers as the suburban terror. "The Shining" toyed with madness and inevitability. "A Nightmare on Elm Street" had fun with the whole dream thing, forcing the audience to try to figure out how much of the last hour and a half was real, if any of it. If the horror movie doesn't have some kind of driving principle, then it better be so unbelievably suspenseful that you can't help but fear what is presented. Many Hitchcock movies rely not on a central principle, but on the best suspense you'll ever see, like "Psycho" or "The Birds." Likewise, "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" set out to horrify the bajeezus out of you, and it worked. "The Ring" displays neither of these traits. It has no real point to it, and it can't be simply terrifying, because the plot doesn't make any sense. When I bring the plot contrivances to the attention of some of my Ring loving friends, they will state that I simply didn't "get it." Oh, I got it alright, it's just that the movie relies on ridiculous coincidences and actions that would never happen. I'm not begging for realism here. I'm begging for continuity. For example, If you're a mother, and you've just watched a video tape that will kill you in a week, are you going to leave it sitting around for your kid to see? No, you aren't. It's problems like this that screw up the movie. My one big problem is that when you really think about it, nothing happens in the entire hour and a half that you view the movie. At the end, the kid complains that "You weren't supposed to let her out! Don't you see? She never sleeps!" Yeah, that sounds kind of creepy, but really, what's different, now that she's "free?" Before freedom, she killed whoever saw the tape in 7 days. Now that she's out, she does the same thing. So what's the problem with letting her out? In other words, I've just spent 90 minutes watching characters make ridiculous connections in a videotape who's "meaning" hinges on far fetched coincidences just so that they could learn to copy the tape. That's the only thing that is accomplished in the movie. I've heard it stated that the girl wasn't to be let out because now she can kill at will. I see no evidence to support this. She kills no one who hasn't seen the tape, and Naomi Watts still has her son copy the tape for protection. There is nothing to suggest that anything is changed. Meanwhile, there is no sense of "she's coming to get me!" in this movie. This isn't like how Michael Meyers just got up and walked away at the end of "Halloween," or how there could be some kind of Norman Bates waiting for us at a motel. No, the movie tells us how to beat the evil presented, and it's not even a difficult task. Therefore, I do not have that subconcious fear of an actual killer tape like this, because I get a whole week to copy it, and then I'm in the green. That's silly. In short, the movie is great the first time through, because the jumps moments are new, and the atmosphere is fantastic. Despite this, the plot is lame, and the movie doesn't hold together on reflection.
Rating:
Summary: truly scary movie
Review: I grew up with jason, freddy, mike myers, alligators in the sewer, jaws, poltergiest, and many more. This was the golden era of horror,and gave us some good scares. I missed the chance to see " The Ring" in the theatres and when it came out on video I immediatly rented it thinking "hey how bad could it be." Whithin the first five minutes of the film all my tough guy facades came crashing down and I spent the next 90 or so minutes peering through my fingers. The film has the style of an old fashioned ghost story combined with hairpin turns in the plot like those that made films like "seven", and "the cell" mega thrillers. What we are seeing is like the antithesis of sherlock holmes, where as he had 25 sequential, super-detailed explanations for every move the bad guy made, our new evils leave the good guys struggling to keep up and the viewers holding on for dear life! "The Ring" is a rollercoaster ride with no seatbelts and just when you think the ride is over the cars fly completely off the tracks. It's the scariest film I've seen in years.
Rating:
Summary: SCARY, GOOD, BUT I'D STICK WITH THE ORIGINAL.
Review: THE RING WAS A SCARY MOVIE. IN FACT, IT WAS SCARIER THAN ALIEN, THE SELF-PROCLAIMED SCARIEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME. BUT WHAT IS IT THAT MAKES GOOD MOVIES?
THE ACTING? THE STORY? THE ENDING?
IN THIS CASE, IT IS THE STORY. THE ACTORS DID A WONDERFUL JOB OF CAPTURING THE EMOTIONS OF THEIR CHARACTERS, BUT THE STORY I HAD A PROBLEM WITH. IT HAS COMPLETELY ORIGINAL IDEAS, SOME THAT DON'T HAVE PURPOSE. THE MOVIE COULD GO ON WITHOUT THE HORSES. SO, GET THIS MOVIE. IT'S GOOD, AND IT'S SCARY. JUST WATCH THE ORIGINAL FIRST.
Rating:
Summary: A good, scary movie
Review: A good ghost story. That's what this wants to be, and it succeeds. It succeeds in scaring, in entertaining and providing some good visuals along the way. If you like ghost stories and don't want to be treated like a child for doing so, this is a fine example of what a good scary film can be. I don't really understand the negative reviews of this one. There is no gore or gratuitous bloody violence, though some is hinted at and people do die (The film rated PG for heavens sake, a real virtue: Scare me, but spare me the silly blood spattered bodies.) The official Amazon review praises the movie fairly, but then gets miffed at its "pretense" and mish-mash of ideas. The plot is simple enough; it's really just ghost story threaded through a number of scenes (some weak, granted. OK, so take off one star). There are some false queues. And at least one marvelous ambiguity: the young girl's speech to the psychiatrist. That "pretense" and ambiguity makes the film worth watching over, more than once. It does hang together and the pieces fit. As for comparison to the Japanese original, we'll just be down to opinions there. If some find the American version needlessly complex, I found the Japanese far too obvious (it litterally spelled out the implications of the plot for you at the end, just in case you didn't figure it out for yourself) and paced too slowly. The video that is the central part of the plot paled in comparison. -- Maybe the West has a better developed tradtion of horror stories, or the Japanese an overdeveloped sense of restraint for the genre. So what the heck, watch them both and decide for yourself. That way you get to see two good scary movies and you can kick off some pretty interesting literary discussions as well.
Rating: 
Summary: save your money
Review: this movie was okay but i wish i didn't buy it. definitely not even half as good as people were saying. it's not very scary and a lot of the scenes just did not make sense or fit. the movie is like a big mess of boring scenes mixed with pointless scenes sprinkled with a few semi-scary scenes. nothing in the movie is explained too well but when watching the movie you hardly care because you're not entertained too much and you're just waiting for this poorly written mess to end. i watched it once and let a friend borrow it who asked me if i "got" what was going on in the movie and told me the movie was "okay." while i "got" what happened in the movie and explained it to my friend, it was just so ridiculous you have to wonder how the script made it to the big screen. not sure how this movie compares with the original, but the original just has to be better. buy that if anything.
Rating:
Summary: Hollywood does it once again!!!!!!!
Review: This is an example of how Hollywood can turn a good japanese horror movie and make a real mess out of it. The original Ringu is much more subtle and can really shock you without any gore and special effects. See Ringu and forget about The Ring.
Rating:
Summary: It's no Ringu
Review: I have always been a great fan of Japanese movies and anime, because they rely on the power of the unspoken. They still have plots that reveal in a subtle, yet chilling way. This art is lostt in Hollywood.
I saw The Ring (American version) first, and the shock-effects did nearly give me a heart-attack once or twice, but apart from that, I wasn't really impressed. The critics had been talking about intellectual horror, this movie just used gore and shocks, like any other horrormovie, hoping that they would give the audience, that's so easily satisfied these days, a good scare.
Then I saw the Japanese Ring at a shop for a bargain-prize, and decided to buy it. And I have to say, I think it was far better. It was the lack of special effects that left me chilled. Most people say that Ringu sucks, because it lacks the gore and unnecessary shock-scenes, but the lack of those things is what makes Ringu good, you morons! It's the power of the unspoken, the imagination. It's the good plot, which everybody misses, coz they're waiting for a demonic corpse (what was the use of that...?) to show up.
Ringu is intellectual horror, subtle and chilling, with a good plot, and scary because it leaves things to the imagination. The Ring is just your average Hollywood-horror, something that rots a few more braincells away, and it was totally redundant. Just to set an example of the fact that Western culture wants everything done their way, and totally screw it up in the process. Don't rent The Ring, unless you wanna see some gory images.
If you're smarter than your average, narrowminded movie-viewer, rent Ringu!
|
