New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Ring 2

post #1 of 13
3/18/05 at 11:17am
Thread Starter 
Anyone going to see this despite the bad reviews? I'll be there. It can't be as bad as the the rest of the crap we've been fed so far this year. I'm sure it'll still take no.1 at the box office.
Reply
post #2 of 13
3/18/05 at 11:34am
Just a re-port from the pre-release thread:

I really think I kind of loved it. It's so completely different from anything I was expecting, and the Rachel/Aidan/Samara dynamic kept my eyes glued to the screen.
Reply
post #3 of 13
3/18/05 at 2:55pm
I'm going tonight, I'll report back with my opinion later. I have a feeling I'm either going to love it or hate it, it doesn't seem like the kind of movie I could be up in the air about.
Reply
post #4 of 13
3/19/05 at 2:00am
Well I just got back, holy hell did it suck. If you threw all the elements that made the first popular in a blender with about ten cups of water and some melodrama and hundreds of bad CGI deer you'd end up with this.

It's worst sin is that not only is it bad, it's boring. This is one of the few times I've actually felt cheated out of my money after a movie. While I was watching it I kept thinking that I'd be more entertained at home sleeping. This is also one of those few cases when I would encourage other people not to see it, it doesn't even have that cheese factor that can make some bad movies fun.
Reply
post #5 of 13
3/19/05 at 3:42am
Well seeing as how the first one sucked, I'm not surprised.
Reply
post #6 of 13
3/19/05 at 11:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt45
Well seeing as how the first one sucked, I'm not surprised.
The first one wasn't anythign special, but at least it knew how to carry the audience's interest considering the running time.

This second one is just pure bile.
Reply
post #7 of 13
3/19/05 at 12:56pm
The first one got over-hyped way too much. I didn't see it until the DVD release because, well, I just never got around to the theater. But, until I saw it, everyone and their mother had seen it and ranted "It's the scariest movie ever!" "I didn't sleep for six months after I saw it!!!" So, I figured that it should be pretty good. Boy was I wrong...
Reply
post #8 of 13
3/20/05 at 3:52am
Was it all that scary? No.

As a ghost story, I thought it was pretty effective. It didn't do what most horror sequels do and ditch the universe set up by the first one and turn their monster/killer into some kind of silly invincible monster, which I liked. It didn't have the drive the first one did, mainly because in the first one Rachel serves as the eyes of the audience, discovering things with us and never beforehand. It dragged in a few spots, and the elk thing was kinda ridiculous, but I don't see how it's getting all this "Holy crap this is the worst fucking shit ever!!" reaction.

And I really dug how they handled how to get Samara out of the kid--however, I thought it would've been better if Adian had died as a result of the drowning. Would've given the ending the same bang the first one had. But the movie served as a nice conclusion to the story. Even though I know there's gonna be a Ring 3 eventually (this one's gonna make a mint, so it's required to have one), this is where I get off.
Reply
post #9 of 13
3/20/05 at 5:05am
Well, it wasn't as bad as I was expecting, but it certainly wasn't great either.

I just got back from a post-midnight show a few minutes ago. The story kept me interested, but it dragged a whole lot more than its predecessor. It was cool seeing Astoria, Oregon again after so long. It's the same town where The Goonies and Kindergarten Cop took place and I had the chance to visit it back in 1993. As for the performances, Naomi Watts was good and hot as Rachel yet again and she appropriately kept my attention with her plight to save her son. As for David Dorfman, that kid now officially scares the FUCK out of me. Even his chewing of the PB&J sandwich was fucking creepy. Overall, it wasn't a complete waste of two hours like Cursed was.
Reply
post #10 of 13
3/22/05 at 12:38am
Hmm. For one they took out the atmosphere of the first and replaced it with "jump" scares. Pretty tepid sequel, but not the worst I have seen recently in the horror field. Was it great? No, but it wasn't the festering pile of dog crap that everyone claimed it was. Basically, it's just kind of "there". While they did attempt to advance the story, they just did not choose an interesting direction to take it in. Also, all these talks of the inevitable 3rd film being a prequel about Samara's past are also incredibly silly. What else is there left in her past that wasn't shown and explained in both the first one and this one? Nothing as far as I can tell. I like the idea of the videotape deaths becoming a nationwide epidemic, but they would probably never go for a storyline like that, and even if they did it would probably turn out as lackluster as this was. I should have gone to see Hostage instead like my instincts told me to. Oh well.
Reply
post #11 of 13
3/22/05 at 4:31pm
Thread Starter 
I decided to wait for video on this one. The DVD should be out in a couple weeks anyway. I haven't been to the theatre for a horror movie yet this year. So far '05 sucks pretty bad. I must have been dilusional when I thought that after last year Hollywood had finally understood what horror fans wanted. I'd rather sit through the horrible FvJ again than anything that has been released this year.
Reply
post #12 of 13
3/22/05 at 7:08pm
Good lord, this was dull. I couldn't even get excited about the interest of an anti-gay subtext. And the deer scene was fucking ridiculous. It looked like they were being attacked by TOY STORY.
Reply
post #13 of 13
3/27/05 at 10:21pm
it has moments of hilarious bad-ness. the whole cinema i saw it with cracked up laughing when rachel pours about half a ki of powder onto the kid's sandwich, seriously you'd think we were watching a comedy.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Creature Corner Main