Ring - it's not very good, is it?

[MARKMAN]

Last night my girlfriend went off to bed and I settled down, turned the lights off and watched Ring.

It wasn't very good.

I was not chilled in the slightest - I cannot remember feeling even vaguely jumpy. It had a so-so plot, poor characterisation, it wasn't particularly well acted or directed and worst of all it was BORING!

I am at a loss as to why people like this film so much, it didn't do anything for me. This, along with Audition (which I also found to be sub-par), are to big recent disappointments for me.

Look for my copy of Ring on the Classifieds.

[wide_inside]

is that your coat over there?

wide

[Arch Stanton]

:rolleyes:

[MARKMAN]

Thanks, Arch and Wide for those comments, they have truly made me see the error of my ways.;)

[RichB]

I had heard good things about Ring, and when I got around to watching it I didn't think it was great - strangely I prefered the 2nd film which most people think is worse!
I really liked Audition tho

[Mr Flibble]

Well, I'll agree with you - after so many positive reviews I was really looking forward to this, but felt that the hype didn't live up to the end result - glad I saw it on FilmFour now rather than buying it.

[Arch Stanton]

You should really like Ring 2. Give it a watch...

[MARKMAN]

I know a lot of people slam Blair Witch - but that is one of the only recent films (along with Stir of Echoes) that has actually chilled me. I found "Ring" lacklustre.

[Mr Flibble]

Spookily enough, Blair Witch is a film I enjoy too - I also think the DVD is a great package with plenty of decent features on it too - same goes for Stir Of Echoes - I hired it, watched it twice the same night and got the DVD as a trade on here :)

[wide_inside]

Thanks, Arch and Wide for those comments, they have truly made me see the error of my ways.

pearls before swine baby, pearls before swine.

wide

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by wide_inside


pearls before swine baby, pearls before swine.

wide

You obviously have knowledge of me and my viewing tastes then? You must have to make this statement?

[Dear Mr Echo]

I thought Ring wasn't that interesting to start with but it mostly redeemed itself by the end, which was truly creepy.

Stir of Echoes was pretty good but I thought the end was a bit of a let down... really good use of sound and an excellent jump scene. Though the R1 disc had to have THE worst behind the scenes footage ever... now that was scary.

I really enjoyed Audition though - definitely the best horror/thriller I saw last year or even in the last 10 years or so.

Andrew

[wide_inside]

You obviously have knowledge of me and my viewing tastes then? You must have to make this statement?

come on sweetheart, keep up. I don't need any knowledge of your viewing tastes. you said you didn't like the film, I do. You categorically cannot understand my point of view, and I cannot understand yours. I can't convince you to like something which you don't, so I used a Biblical analogy to express my point of view. Next time I'll do it in pretty colours instead, maybe with a link to the teletubbies site?

"Laa laa likes her bag, Po likes his scooter" kind of thing?


wide

[Dene]

"Ring" is terrific, I think.

Chilled me to the bone, first time I saw it! And the cinema audience were SCREAMING (with fear).

Second time I also watched it in a cinema, and again I was spooked (and my mate Paddy was too, who I had raved about it to).

Third time unlucky, however. I showed it to another friend on DVD, and he could quite easily have fallen asleep.

So...it probably depends on the atmosphere, etc.

I still think it's great, and look forward to the DreamWorks remake starring Naomi Watts, out in August. Even if it's crud (and hopefully it won't be), it'll make more people seek out the original.

[gjkendall]

i watched this Saturday night, very very disappointed.


One bit was vaguely spooky, turned it off after an hour, could not take any more inane dialoge.

Does it get scarier?

I have it for trade if anyone wants it (and part 2) :D

See classifieds

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by wide_inside


come on sweetheart, keep up. I don't need any knowledge of your viewing tastes. you said you didn't like the film, I do. You categorically cannot understand my point of view, and I cannot understand yours. I can't convince you to like something which you don't, so I used a Biblical analogy to express my point of view. Next time I'll do it in pretty colours instead, maybe with a link to the teletubbies site?

"Laa laa likes her bag, Po likes his scooter" kind of thing?


wide


Such a reposte I don't think I have heard (or seen) before. Fantastical use of the nonsensical in both your 2nd post and this one. You have now contributed not once, not twice but thrice to this thread, and only is it now that you state that you like the film. Now I can see where you are coming from. The syntax in your previous posts was that they lacked both an opinion or a point.

The reason I, apparantly, "cannot understand your point" of view is that you hadn't stated one. For all I know you could have been talking about any of the three films I stated.

Does that make it any clearer, Petal? Or should I type slower for you?

[wide_inside]

Such a reposte I don't think I have heard (or seen) before. Fantastical use of the nonsensical in both your 2nd post and this one. You have now contributed not once, not twice but thrice to this thread, and only is it now that you state that you like the film. Now I can see where you are coming from. The syntax in your previous posts was that they lacked both an opinion or a point.


fantastic, bad day, need to let off steam.

Where exactly is the nonsense? I apologise if I didn't credit you with enough stupidity. I should have spelled it all out for you (or maybe shown you what I meant with pictures) and not left anything to the imagination.
I think my opinion was perfectly clear, from the first of my three previous posts, but I will endeavour to make it a bit easier for the lower end of the forum to understand.

aahhhh. That feels better, thank you.

wide

[MARKMAN]

Wide - you have made my day. Brilliantly ineffectual attempts at wit. They were so good you felt the need to repeat them and still add nothing.

When the vote comes around for "Forum Member 2002" it will be really hard to choose between you and dvdfan10 - the level of plotless posting is THAT good.

[Jimmyboy]

Originally posted by MARKMAN
Last night my girlfriend went off to bed and I settled down, turned the lights off and watched Ring.

It wasn't very good.

I was not chilled in the slightest - I cannot remember feeling even vaguely jumpy.
I can honestly say that I found Ring to be one of themost terrifying movie experience's ever, and Im a horror buff.
Had to turn it off after 30 minutes and it took me a week before I cound face watching the rest and the sequel.
I had a powercut mid-way through Ring 2 which certainly didnt help matters.
For the record, I found Blair witch project crap. :D

I take it your idea of horror is one of those films which has 1 real scare for every 8 anti-climax scares ?.:D

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by Jimmyboy

I take it your idea of horror is one of those films which has 1 real scare for every 8 anti-climax scares ?.:D

Not at all - my favourite horror of all time would probably be "Alien" (forget the sci-fi setting, it's a horror film). I would also class "Suspiria" as up there, due to the fantastic pulp feel of the film.

I can't understand why anyone would think Ring terrifying!:confused: Once you got over the basic urban legend premise there was nothing there. The only thing that scared me about the film was the fact that the Social Services hadn't been onto that cow of a main character for leaving her young son on his own all the time. I'd report her if I could speak Japanese.:)

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by Jimmyboy


Had to turn it off after 30 minutes and it took me a week before I cound face watching the rest and the sequel.


*cough**puff**cough*:D

[wide_inside]

Wide - you have made my day. Brilliantly ineffectual attempts at wit. They were so good you felt the need to repeat them and still add nothing.

pots, kettles, and all sorts.

wide:D

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by wide_inside


.....must.....get.....last......word...........in :type:

wide:D

[wide_inside]

erm, see my last post.

wide

[MARKMAN]

:clap: :D :clap: Oh, the irony :clap: :D :clap:

[wide_inside]

ok, now just read your own post.


wide

[MARKMAN]

Never has a point been so finely proven. Wide - you are a star in the making. Well done.:clap:

Who's a clever boy then?:D

[MARKMAN]

Back on track after mr. _inside's mild diversion, what exactly made Ring so scary/terrifying for those that found it so? I can't see it.:confused:

[Jimmyboy]

Originally posted by MARKMAN
*cough**puff**cough*:D
I know what coughing is but whats a Puff ?.
Are we talking about the sugar puff honeymonster now ?.

:rolleyes:

[Analog Kid]

MARKMAN & wide_inside, are you guys going to be the next comedy double-act then or what? ;)


As for Ring, it's the only film that really freaked me, so much so that I had to see it again in order to make some sense of it although unfortunately that meant obtaining a copy of the lousy Tartan disc. I don't know exactly what sets it apart from other films but there is an unsettling atmosphere that pervades the whole film which the score certainly goes a long way to creating as do some of the images (the photos for a start). The Tartan disc really doesn't do it justice though, the subtitles are hard to read in several places and there's plenty of detail lost in the dark. Eg. where she rummages around the video recorder under the TV in the lodge you can't even see the cabinet the video is sitting in never mind the VCR! The Film 4 presentation was far superior but you'd need to dispense with the Mark Kermode junk in front of it.

Regarding 'Blair Witch', I didn't find that scary really. More disturbing than scary although I guess we'd lost the effect what with all the hype crossing the pond before the film got here, had I gone in and been taken in by the 'Documentary' story then I'd probably have had a very different reaction to it but it really relied on the lie for it's effectiveness IMO. 'Ring' doesn't.

[MARKMAN]

An interesting point, but I don't think that any feeling of urgency or impending doom prevailed. Instead we just got a brief bit at the beginning and a very protracted ending - which inevitably set itself up for sequels in a, and I must admit, quite ingenious fashion.

I didn't like the lead woman (Asakawa?) and there wasn't really any pointy in Ryuji being her ex-husband. The whole background story of Shizuku and Sada wasn't very well developed, and the fact that Sada's father was probably not of this earth seemed to have been thrown in.

As I said at the beginning of the thread, I wasn't chilled once, whereas with BWP, even though we all knew it was not a real documentary, the final image still ranks as one of my all time spine tinglers.:eek:

[wide_inside]

My only problem with it was the whole phsycic thing. her and her husband, that is It does just seem to be chucked in there in the middle, and I can only hope that it is more signposted in the original language. Apart from that, the last five minutes scared me brown. Proper, "turn on the lights!" kind of stuff.

wide

[MARKMAN]

Wide, are you talking about the part where Sada comes out of the t.v.

If so, it just didn't have any impact on me, and (for me) was nowhere near as chilling as the last five minutes in the house in BWP.

Maybe something was lost in translation, but I can't think that it would be so much as to just throw in significant plot points.:confused:

[urruri]

no

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by urruri
no


urruri - is that no as in you are agreeing with me - saying No - it isn't good.

OR

Is that no as in you are disagreeing with me.

OR

Is it no to a different question?

:confused: :confused:

[wong fei hong]

I really, really love Ring. fnarr.

Trying to have an open discussion about it without spoiling the film for the uninitiated will be hard, but...
It's a perfect horror movie, with an all encompassing hit-point - ie the viewer is inducted into the plot by the same means as the protagonist (the fantastically glacial Nanako Matsushima). For she and the audience, a voyeuristic approach longer is no longer 'safe': if you watch, you're involved.

That as a premise would be enough, but the film is built as a perfect crescendo. Neither Hitchcock nor Argento ever paced a movie as well as this. It's that gripping. A palpable panic had seized myself and Aunt Yee by the end... it's just... unbelievable.

It's filled with imagery and ideas of body horror, the fear of puberty and sex, and ties them in beautifully with classic motifs of Japanese horror. One word: Wells. If you've seen the likes of Onibaba (look it up if you haven't), or read pop-horror manga comics like Rumiko Takahashi's Inu-Yasha, the theme of the well as an origin of horror in Japan will be familiar. Do you need me to go all Freud to explain the significance?

I can understand it not being to peoples taste: subtitles, muted colours - especially a lack of the red stuff, understated performances. Some films just don't click with people, however well recieved they are. I urge everybody to see Ring, even on the dubious Tartan disc (it's not all that bad).

[MARKMAN]

I generally agree, the less of the red stuff that a film relies on - the more of the grey matter it uses (classic example is Texas Chainsaw Massacre - a masterpiece of mind manipulation). However, we should not get gore mixed up with menace. I watched Ring to find out what people were raving about (it being "the scariest movie I've ever seen"), and came away thinking "What....????"

You say that the pacing was perfect, I say that it was lacking. I felt no urgency, no sense of time running out, and no sense of fear from the cast.

The main character I didn't like, we didn't know anything about (which can be a good thing), and her relationship with her ex-husband and son was never explained. To throw in, halfway through the film, that her husband was psychic disrupted any flow that the film had built.

The fact that the film was subtitled bothered me not, and the direction/cinematography I found to be unremarkable. It was the pacing of the film that I had the major problem with, and had this been handled better then maybe I would have been more "terrified" at the ending. A missed opportunity in my opinion.

[Analog Kid]

Originally posted by MARKMAN
You say that the pacing was perfect, I say that it was lacking. I felt no urgency, no sense of time running out, and no sense of fear from the cast.

The pacing is very good, slow and deliberate, revealing a little more each day (like the video which gets ever-so-slightly longer each time you see it). As for time running out, there are prominent captions on screen at the beginning of each new day to remind you that time is ticking away and as for fear from the cast? Maybe not fear but there was certainly desperation and frustration at many points and certainly towards the end of the film with the exception of the finale and that one horrifying glimpse through Sadako's hair when she appears to claim Ryuji which for me is the most chilling moment I have seen on film to date.

[Jimmyboy]

Originally posted by MARKMAN
It was the pacing of the film that I had the major problem with, and had this been handled better then maybe I would have been more "terrified" at the ending. A missed opportunity in my opinion.

The pacing of Ring is near faultless.
I find myself wondering if this is your first attempt at watching a subtitled film because you seemed to have missed so much because of a cultural gap.
Ring is a perfect example of just how terrifiying horror can be when you find a new angle in which to draw the viewer in.
"Jaws" had an invisible attacker which lurked under the sea which terrified people at the time, while "Elm Street" attacked the victims in their sleep which again at the time was quite desturbing because everybody has to sleep.
Ring builds and betters on all previous horrors that use this formula by almost becoming interactive horror. By watching the film, your involved & thats exactly what makes it so differcult to watch.

Also remember

That Japan & China have a serious bootlegging problem, which adds an extra scare factor.


Maybe you'll enjoy the American remake more.
:nuts:

[Bedford]

The only good thing about the film really was finding out why it was called "Ring"

apart from that, not much cop, don't get me wrong it aint crap, but not wow, jesus that was some scary soup.

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by Jimmyboy


The pacing of Ring is near faultless.
I find myself wondering if this is your first attempt at watching a subtitled film because you seemed to have missed so much because of a cultural gap.


Jimmyboy - I don't think you could sound any more condescending. Ring is NOT my first attempt at a subtitled film. Bit of background - I am 31 years old, I have been watching international films for the last, say, 15 years. My all time favourite is Seven Samurai which I discovered over 10 years ago. Look through my dvd and video collection and you will find Hidden Fortress; Seven Samurai, Discreet Charm of the Bourgeousie, City of Lost Children, Delicatessen etc. to name but a few - however, justifying myself is not the issue.

I take exception to the thought that because I found Ring less than expected both yourself and Wong Fei Hong wondered if subtitles put me off. I have not once slated the film, I just found it severely flawed in a number of places (as with Audition) - for reasons I have explained perfectly.


Ring is a perfect example of just how terrifiying horror can be when you find a new angle in which to draw the viewer in.

That's where our views differ, I find the premise of the film no more than an Urban Legend, and perhaps stolen a little from Cronenberg's "Videodrome".

"Jaws" had an invisible attacker which lurked under the sea which terrified people at the time, while "Elm Street" attacked the victims in their sleep which again at the time was quite desturbing because everybody has to sleep.
Ring builds and betters on all previous horrors that use this formula by almost becoming interactive horror. By watching the film, your involved & thats exactly what makes it so differcult to watch.


Ring delivers a less than interesting premise, in a slightly plodding fashion, with a few new twists, but also massive plot deficiencies. For me, and remember - this is all my opinion, it doesn't build on anything it merely plateaus and fails to measure up to the sum of its parts.

Also remember

That Japan & China have a serious bootlegging problem, which adds an extra scare factor.


Two things - the information in your spoiler tag, it is irrelevant as the original tape was from a recorded t.v. channel. Also, I think you'll find that Japan and China are two massively different countries, and therefore the correlation is negated. Japan does not have any bigger problem with piracy than the u.k. You are probably thinking of Korea.


Maybe you'll enjoy the American remake more.
:nuts:

Based on the fact that I didn't like the original, I doubt it very much. Oh, I get it - you think I can't handle foreign films.

[Joober]

Ring scared the crap out of me I can tell you. Some really freaky nightmarish things happening, i couldnt sleep for days with my tv at the end of my bed! lol.

[Jimmyboy]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MARKMAN

I take exception to the thought that because I found Ring less than expected both yourself and Wong Fei Hong wondered if subtitles put me off. I have not once slated the film, I just found it severely flawed in a number of places (as with Audition) - for reasons I have explained perfectly.

Instead of taking exception, maybe you should question why both me & Wong came to the same conclusion ?.
Its probably to do with the pacing issue you brought up.
The pacing is perfect and I wont listen to anyone (and I think its only you anyway) who says otherwise, if that sounds arrogant so be it.


That's where our views differ, I find the premise of the film no more than an Urban Legend, and perhaps stolen a little from Cronenberg's "Videodrome".

Actually its far more like Poltergeist mixed with the to close for comfort feel of The Blair Witch Project.
Influence's are clear in Ring, yet no other movie has managed to capture the interactive aspect which I mentioned earlier.


Ring delivers a less than interesting premise, in a slightly plodding fashion, with a few new twists, but also massive plot deficiencies. For me, and remember - this is all my opinion, it doesn't build on anything it merely plateaus and fails to measure up to the sum of its parts.


It is only your opinion as you say, and thankfully your very much in the minority.
Ring is one of the most terrifying films I've seen in recent years, If not THE most terrifying.
Come to think of it, I cant think of another film I found more desturbing with the possible exception of Don't Look Now.
Im sorry it didnt have the same effect on you because your missing something genuinely unnerving.
Ring has set the benchmark for other horrors to match.

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by Jimmyboy
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MARKMAN

I take exception to the thought that because I found Ring less than expected both yourself and Wong Fei Hong wondered if subtitles put me off. I have not once slated the film, I just found it severely flawed in a number of places (as with Audition) - for reasons I have explained perfectly.


Orignally posted by Jimmyboy
Instead of taking exception, maybe you should question why both me & Wong came to the same conclusion ?.

For the sake of pointless stereotyping, maybe? Jeebus, it's not I who should question WHY it's you guys. Why did you feel the need to think that subtitled films would lose some people - a little bit of snobbery methinks.


Its probably to do with the pacing issue you brought up.
The pacing is perfect and I wont listen to anyone (and I think its only you anyway) who says otherwise, if that sounds arrogant so be it.

I don't care if it is only me, you have to be subjective in discussions or they get nowhere. I still regard the pacing as the major issue in the film - yes there are date stamps - but that is really it. IT LACKS URGENCY!

Also, this woman, who is in danger of dying, decides to spend what could be her last few days away from her son!!!



Originally posted by Jimmyboy
Actually its far more like Poltergeist mixed with the to close for comfort feel of The Blair Witch Project.
Influence's are clear in Ring, yet no other movie has managed to capture the interactive aspect which I mentioned earlier.

It's NOTHING like Poltergeist (apart from the obvious t.v. reference), there are no things that go bump in the night - take the t.v. away (and the fact that the girl goes INTO the t.v. in poltergeist) and you have lost your pop reference.

Also I don't really agree with your Interactive reference, I can see where you were coming from, but don't totally agree. Again, if you want interactivity then watch "Videodrome", or for that matter "Tron" or "The Last Starfighter".

originally posted by MARKMAN
Ring delivers a less than interesting premise, in a slightly plodding fashion, with a few new twists, but also massive plot deficiencies. For me, and remember - this is all my opinion, it doesn't build on anything it merely plateaus and fails to measure up to the sum of its parts.


Originally posted by Jimmyboy
It is only your opinion as you say, and thankfully your very much in the minority.
Ring is one of the most terrifying films I've seen in recent years, If not THE most terrifying.
Come to think of it, I cant think of another film I found more desturbing with the possible exception of Don't Look Now.
Im sorry it didnt have the same effect on you because your missing something genuinely unnerving.
Ring has set the benchmark for other horrors to match. [/B]

There you go with a superiority complex, why does it matter that I am in the minority? Why thankfully?
I'm glad you liked the film as much as you do and I'm glad it did to you what you wanted it to. However, for me - it ain't a benchmark, it's just an also-ran. I can't believe that someone like you, who called yourself a "horror buff" would find it the scariest film ever.

I will say once and for all, I didn't hate the film, it ain't a bad film - it just ain't particularly any good, innovative or original. There are some good points about it but the plot lacks conviction and urgency.

Although I was just as equally disappointed in Audition - I did find Audition genuinely more disturbing.

[Mr Vampire]

OK. I don't know what stance I'll be roped in at, but I found Ring to be more unerving then scary. Agreed people will dislike it, some people will say it's not scary. But, reading bits of the posts above, don't try to influence peoples judgement because you loved/hated a film. Let people decide for themselves, and given that the film isn't in anyway bad. It won't be a waste of someones time.

Oh, and before I forget... I should get more sleep instead of posting unorganised drivel. :D

[Mr Flibble]

Perhaps it's WHEN I watched the film (a sunday afternoon) that kind of effects the way the film came over to me, and I don't mean to be arrogant - but to claim that Ring is one of the most terrifying films to watch is frankly hilarious - sorry.

There were bits that were a bit, tense I suppose, but nothing that genuinely freaked me out in any way at all.

ang on, I'll just get my flame-retardnt jacket ;)

[MARKMAN]

I don't think anyone has tried to influence any other person either way, Vamps - people just expressing veiwpoints, is all!

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by Mr Flibble
Perhaps it's WHEN I watched the film (a sunday afternoon) that kind of effects the way the film came over to me, and I don't mean to be arrogant - but to claim that Ring is one of the most terrifying films to watch is frankly hilarious - sorry.

There were bits that were a bit, tense I suppose, but nothing that genuinely freaked me out in any way at all.

ang on, I'll just get my flame-retardnt jacket ;)

I'll lend you mine, Flibble. :D

I watched it at 11.00 at night in a darkened room, on my own and got no feeling of terror at all. Sure, there is menace - the actual video is creepy. However, a film like Se7en was more disturbing than Ring.

(Wow - how's that for cross referencing)

[Analog Kid]

Originally posted by MARKMAN
Also, this woman, who is in danger of dying, decides to spend what could be her last few days away from her son!!!

Precisely because she is desperate to find a way out of the situation that she has got herself into in order to save him from Sadako's curse.

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by Analog Kid


Precisely because she is desperate to find a way out of the situation that she has got herself into in order to save him from Sadako's curse.


Well, surely she should have taken him with her. Then again, she doesn't mind leaving him on his own for days on end, so she's probably not that bothered - cow!:D

[Mr Flibble]

I'll agree with you Markman - it does depend on when you watch the fim and who you're with - I watched Stir Of Echos' one night by myself and found it well freaky :eek:

New release 'Long Time Dead' is another film that was a bit creepy in places too - not a great movie, but still worth a watch - a decent disc and a budget price might even convince me to make a purchase :)

Everyone likes different movies (as this thread proves) and some people are affected by certain movies more than others are - but I'll agree about the actual video clip in Ring - that was well done and worked very effectively.

[MARKMAN]

Because I didn't like the film - for perfectly valid reasons, which I have explained in full - people like Jimmyboy seem to think that there is something wrong with me and adopt an antagonistic stance. Now I know how rival football supporters feel:(

[SimonInd]

Thought I'd throw my tuppence into the well as it were.....

On first seeing 'Ring' at the ICA 18 months ago I was slightly underwelmed. 'Sight and Sound' had published a very complimentary review, by Mark Kermode I think, that month and I was looking forward to what I thought would be a real treat.

Neither myself or the guy I saw it with were blown away but we did both enjoy it, however the next time we met up for a beer ( a couple of weeks later ) we'd independantly revised our opinions based on the fact that the film was alot more memorable than it originally appeared.

I've since seen the film a couple more times and each time I watch it I seem to get more involved. The film is very atmospheric and nicely paced to build up a tension in the viewer. If anything I'd say that the subtitles and plot detract from this on first viewing as one is too busy worrying about what people are saying and what's going to happen next - a reasonable concern admiittedly. The horror/suspense/shock value is pretty low and people looking for the sort of thrills that make you jump should probably avoid this film, however if you view it as an atmospheric thriller then it's much more involving and enjoyable...

If you can be arsed I'd say give it another try, if not then hey, it's only a movie. If we all liked the same films then the threads on this forum would be pretty dull....

Simon

[Analog Kid]

Originally posted by MARKMAN
Well, surely she should have taken him with her. Then again, she doesn't mind leaving him on his own for days on end, so she's probably not that bothered - cow!:D

But given that they were off adventuring to places unknown and he was perfectly safe with his grandfather, why should she risk taking him? Plus, given the nature of the investigation why would she choose to expose him to all the disturbing things that she/Ryuji were already discovering?

It makes perfect sense to me that she would choose to leave him with his grandfather where he was safe rather than expose him to unnecessary risk elsewhere. Plus he's obviously quite an independant child as he is depicted setting off to School alone, I don't know if that's the norm in Japan but I put it down to cultural differences.

[MARKMAN]

It's not made me want to watch it again any time in the near future, however, if it was to come on C4 or somesuch in a year or so I would probably give it another go.

Do have to disagree with you about the pacing though!:)

[Mr Flibble]

I think that the point SimonInd raises kind of shows why I felt a bit let-down by it all. Being hyped as the most scary/terrifying/unsettling movie at the time makes me think it'll have a high 'jump' factor due to scenes in the movie - but the movie doesn't use this to scare the viewer.

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by Analog Kid


But given that they were off adventuring to places unknown and he was perfectly safe with his grandfather, why should she risk taking him? Plus, given the nature of the investigation why would she choose to expose him to all the disturbing things that she/Ryuji were already discovering?

It makes perfect sense to me that she would choose to leave him with his grandfather where he was safe rather than expose him to unnecessary risk elsewhere. Plus he's obviously quite an independant child as he is depicted setting off to School alone, I don't know if that's the norm in Japan but I put it down to cultural differences.

I semi-agree with you, I was only joshing. However, and this is one of the major problems I had with the lead character, she always left him on his own and he must have been, what, 6 years old. As you say, maybe this is down to cultural references in Japan - to me it smacked of poor parenting, and I struggled to sympathise with her.

[tpr007]

Originally posted by gjkendall
I have it for trade if anyone wants it (and part 2) :D

See classifieds

wherabouts?
I'd like it (part 2) :D

i apologise if uve already had lots of requests, but can't be trawling through the threads! :p

a thread of mine!! http://www.thedvdforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=46514

[Jimmyboy]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MARKMAN

It's NOTHING like Poltergeist (apart from the obvious t.v. reference), there are no things that go bump in the night - take the t.v. away (and the fact that the girl goes INTO the t.v. in poltergeist) and you have lost your pop reference.

You've taken the Poltergeist influence to mean that somehow Ring should mimic Poltergeist.
You state apart from the obvious "TV reference", so how can you say there NOTHING like each other keeping in mind the TV represents a home for the demon in both films ?.
The Poltergeist influence is more to do with the look and atmosphere anyway than books flying around the room.
The reflection from the TV screen casting shadows around the darkend room is very similar as is the girl siting 2 inches away from the TV screen.
My pop reference aint going nowhere coz its a valid one, & one that I know to be correct.


Also I don't really agree with your Interactive reference, I can see where you were coming from, but don't totally agree. Again, if you want interactivity then watch "Videodrome", or for that matter "Tron" or "The Last Starfighter".

Videodrome doesnt feel quite so voyeuristic.
You cant appreciate Ring because you couldnt tap into it, fair enough, but you must be able to realise that if you were unable to feel involved then your not going to find the film unnerving because thats the whole point !.


There you go with a superiority complex, why does it matter that I am in the minority? Why thankfully?

Because it will be a real injustice if others couldnt appreciate what a step forward Ring is to the horror genre, like I said previously its not just a great horror movie, its the benchmark that others need to beat.


I can't believe that someone like you, who called yourself a "horror buff" would find it the scariest film ever.

Because you couldnt get it.
If you didnt feel invovled with Ring, then I can see why its confusing to hear a horror buff giving it such high praise, but obviously for those that were able to, its a potential nerve shattering experience.
I've seen all types of horrors from Gore/Splatter/Possession/Shock/Slasher, you name it, but nothing from any of these genres left an impression like Ring.


I will say once and for all, I didn't hate the film, it ain't a bad film - it just ain't particularly any good, innovative or original. There are some good points about it but the plot lacks conviction and urgency.

Rubbish,
You talk like its fact, I would strongly dissagree with every point you've raised there.
You couldnt appreciate Ring, its your intitled opinion, but just because you personally couldnt appreciate it doesnt make it any less innovative or original, its both of these and a heck of a lot more.

[sticker]

I found Ring 1 INCREDIBLE - Just picked up Ring 2, but my girlfirend has pilfered it before I got to see it!

http://homepage.eircom.net/~garryleavycomedian/Avalon.jpg

[MARKMAN]

Going 'round in circles here, Jb!

Originally posted by Jimmyboy
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MARKMAN

It's NOTHING like Poltergeist (apart from the obvious t.v. reference), there are no things that go bump in the night - take the t.v. away (and the fact that the girl goes INTO the t.v. in poltergeist) and you have lost your pop reference.

You've taken the Poltergeist influence to mean that somehow Ring should mimic Poltergeist.
You state apart from the obvious "TV reference", so how can you say there NOTHING like each other keeping in mind the TV represents a home for the demon in both films ?.
The Poltergeist influence is more to do with the look and atmosphere anyway than books flying around the room.
The reflection from the TV screen casting shadows around the darkend room is very similar as is the girl siting 2 inches away from the TV screen.
My pop reference aint going nowhere coz its a valid one, & one that I know to be correct.

B.S. it ain't correct. Ring had a totally separate feel from Poltergeist, the protaganist in Ring is not from the t.v., it is from the video and some hokey thrown in plot gist about psychic abilities that is never explained

That's like saying Cannibal Ferox influenced Silence of the Lambs, because they both had man meat eaters in them (oo-errr, sounds rude)


Also I don't really agree with your Interactive reference, I can see where you were coming from, but don't totally agree. Again, if you want interactivity then watch "Videodrome", or for that matter "Tron" or "The Last Starfighter".

Videodrome doesnt feel quite so voyeuristic.
You cant appreciate Ring because you couldnt tap into it, fair enough, but you must be able to realise that if you were unable to feel involved then your not going to find the film unnerving because thats the whole point !.

Videodrome is totally voyeuristic - I don't understand how you would think it isn't.
Ring not working for ME is exactly what I've been saying all along. It didn't work FOR ME! I have never said it couldn't work for other people, but it didn't work for me to such an extent that I cannot believe that people found it the most terrifying movie ever


There you go with a superiority complex, why does it matter that I am in the minority? Why thankfully?

Because it will be a real injustice if others couldnt appreciate what a step forward Ring is to the horror genre, like I said previously its not just a great horror movie, its the benchmark that others need to beat.

And I disagree - it isn't a step forward, so to me it ain't a benchmark. People will take it as they find it, and if the overwhelming majority love the film, so be it. I, unlike you, have only put forward subjective criticism and I have also taken on board things which fans of the film have said. You, for reasons that only you can say, seem to hold this film in such high regard (I have no problem with that), that you fail to see anyon elses point of view.


I can't believe that someone like you, who called yourself a "horror buff" would find it the scariest film ever.

Because you couldnt get it.

It's not that I didn't get it, what's not to get? It's the fact that I didn't think that much of it.


If you didnt feel invovled with Ring, then I can see why its confusing to hear a horror buff giving it such high praise, but obviously for those that were able to, its a potential nerve shattering experience.
I've seen all types of horrors from Gore/Splatter/Possession/Shock/Slasher, you name it, but nothing from any of these genres left an impression like Ring.

Fair enough, I haven't once detracted you for liking the film so much. If it ranks up there for you, so be it.


I will say once and for all, I didn't hate the film, it ain't a bad film - it just ain't particularly any good, innovative or original. There are some good points about it but the plot lacks conviction and urgency.

Rubbish,
You talk like its fact, I would strongly dissagree with every point you've raised there.
You couldnt appreciate Ring, its your intitled opinion, but just because you personally couldnt appreciate it doesnt make it any less innovative or original, its both of these and a heck of a lot more.

There you go again, you like to make massive, MASSIVE suppositions don't you. I haven't stated any of these as a fact, I have said all along that these are my opinions - that has been my entitled opinion. We have already discussed the fact that you think it is influenced by Poltergeist, and also the similarity with Videodrome - that kind of negates part of your "originality" argument. As for innovation, yes the film had some quite nice touches, but ground-breaking? I think not!

[Marwhite]

I'm another one who thinks that Ring is probably one of the best horror movies of the last few years. I certainly preferred it to Audition which although good, didn't really scare or disturb me in any way at all - i spent most of the movie waiting for the so-called horrific ending, and when it eventually came was a little disappointed. Audition's still a good movie, but Ring was far superior in terms of pacing, script and just about everything. Different strokes for different folks, i guess.

[Joober]

As I said before I found Ring very frightening, in the same way that BWP scared me. These are the only two films since I was 8 and watched Childs Play that have ever scared me. At that time I demanded my sister lock all her porcelain dolls in the loft, lol.

I think the best horror films are those that play on the imagination and don't reveal everything.

Just out of curiosity....Why is the film called Ring? did I miss something?

[Mr Flibble]

Because of the 'Ring' the phone gives when you've watched the video :eek:

[Jimmyboy]

Markman -
Yawn !.
It would help if you could learn how to quote correctly coz I cant be bothered with correcting your replies for a 3rd time.;)
There's very little I can add anyway, & I have to wonder why you feel the need to carry on with a debate which wont get anywhere unless your prepared to listen to opinions of those who appreciate the film.
You started this thread to see why it is people like Ring, you've got plenty of valid replies yet you seem to dismiss all of them.
Why bother ?.

[MARKMAN]

duplicate post, move on

[MARKMAN]

Oh dear, Jimmyboy - you really are a bit dim aren't you, I'm typing slowly so hopefully you'll get this:rolleyes:

First things first, lets get the petty out of the way, with your spelling I wouldn't really bring too much attention to how I use the quoting technology - it's a low blow, Jb, and belittles your post.

There's very little I can add anyway, & I have to wonder why you feel the need to carry on with a debate which wont get anywhere unless your prepared to listen to opinions of those who appreciate the film.

Talk about ironic, that was part of the basis of my last post - the fact you haven't taken anything on board that I have said. I have been perfectly happy to listen to everyones statements - and if you had actually read my posts, (instead of looking for an argument), you would have seen that I have agreed with what some people - yes EVEN you - have said. So, the question you should be asking is why are YOU pervading an argument, and then throwing flak in the other direction. Maybe it's a case of mis-direction, if it is, it just isn't a very good one.

Like in your posts to ~Phunk~'s thread in the General Forum, you seem to take it as a personal insult if somebody doesn't like what you like. That screams of insecurity and immaturity. Fine, you may be a 13 yr old kid for all I know!

You started this thread to see why it is people like Ring, you've got plenty of valid replies yet you seem to dismiss all of them.
Why bother ?.

How astute of you - you actually managed to get the point of one of my posts. However, you then turn it on it's head and show your ignorance again.

WHEN - have I dismissed peoples viewpoints, without putting across valid opposing points - I have dismissed all of them have I:rolleyes: Whereas you managed to say Originally posted by Jimmyboy

"The pacing in perfect and I won't listen to anyone!"
"If that sounds arrogant, so be it"


You have made mass sweeping statements with no evidence to back them up. Here are few of Jimmyboy's Gems (I'l paraphrase for impact):

"This MUST be your first subtitled film!"
"Maybe you'll enjoy the American remake more"
"Ring has set the benchmark for others to follow"
"My pop reference aint going nowhere coz its a valid one, & one that I know to be correct. "
"You talk like its fact, I would strongly dissagree with every point you've raised there. "

Jimmyboy - you need to do a few things if you want to bother replying to this:

REMEMBER - Everyone is not out to get you
READ - the posts before replying, instead of repeating what I said in an "I know you are but what am I?" fashion
READ my posts - you will see I've never called the film a bad film - just not very good
READ - my posts and see that I have taken things proponents of the film have put across
MATURE just a little

[wide_inside]

I'm right I'm right I'm right. Insult insult. You're wrong. I'm right.

Am I getting the gist of this thread now?

wide

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by wide_inside
I'm right I'm right I'm right. Insult insult. You're wrong. I'm right.

Am I getting the gist of this thread now?

wide

I was bored when you left the thread, wide;)

Nope, no ones right, it's all personal opinions, however, it seems that someone else takes my personal opinion as an attack.

More fuel to the fire - Wa HEYYYYY!!!:clap:

[wide_inside]

First things first, lets get the petty out of the way, with your spelling I wouldn't really bring too much attention to how I use the quoting technology - it's a low blow, Jb, and belittles your post.
How astute of you - you actually managed to get the point of one of my posts. However, you then turn it on it's head and show your ignorance again.

you need to be careful that people don't mistake your personal attacks as opinion. :D

wide

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by wide_inside


you need to be careful that people don't mistake your personal attacks as opinion. :D

wide


Shush now Wide - put your spoon away:)

[wide_inside]

good comeback.

wide

[Jimmyboy]

Oh dear Markman.
You still havent mastered the art of qouting despite your near 3000 posts so I cant answer each point piece by piece.


Oh dear, Jimmyboy - you really are a bit dim aren't you, I'm typing slowly so hopefully you'll get this


Yet you have the cheek to end your last post the the words MATURE just a little.
I assume you mean immature btw ?.

Your posts on this thread are a perfect example of someone who can only see things from their own point of view, whilst accusing someone who disagrees strongly with them of doing exactly the same.
You accuse my goodself of looking for an argument simply for defending a movie, whilst being completely unable to see the irony in a post such as your last.
If anyone has been looking for an argument its you !.
...and REMEMBER - not everyone is out to get you, so if you've read something that has made you believe this is (or at least was until your last post) an argument, then your the paranoid one.

No doubt your pride will force you to post back with an "its not me its you" type responce.

Your not related to APPRWA40WR by any chance ?.

[MARKMAN]

Be quiet, child, grown ups want to talk.

[wide_inside]

Be quiet, child, grown ups want to talk.

To be honest, from your tone so far, you sound about the youngest here. And not in a good way. Why can't you let it lie? This is pointless.

wide

[Jimmyboy]

:brickwall
anyways, moving on...............

I've read alittle about the American remake of Ring which supposedly replace's the -

Videotape with an email attachment.
It seems that more spooky things will take place to the viewer during the 7 days afterwards.
I can remember reading something about a girl who lives on a farm who receives the email and wakes the next day to find all her cattle dead, & other more bizarre events follow on from there.

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by wide_inside


To be honest, from your tone so far, you sound about the youngest here. And not in a good way. Why can't you let it lie? This is pointless.

wide

:rolleyes: :brickwall

[Analog Kid]

Joober asked:
Just out of curiosity....Why is the film called Ring? did I miss something?

And Mr Flibble replied:

Because of the 'Ring' the phone gives when you've watched the video :eek:

and our survey said ... :D
That's one way of looking at it but I think the real reason is given at the end of the film as she drives to her fathers with the video in the car. There is a voiceover which details the 'life cycle' of the video which goes something like:

Girl 1: They say there’s a way you can stay alive after you watch the video. You’ve gotta make a copy of it, and show it to somebody else inside a week.
Girl 2: But what about the person you show it to?
Girl 1: Well, then they make a copy and show it to somebody else. Again, inside a week.
Girl 2: (laughing) Then there’s no end to it.
Girl 1:That’s just it. There is no end. But if it meant not dying... you’d do it, wouldn’t you?

Which implies that the video forms a Ring as there are only so many people who won't have seen it before someone shows it to someone who's already seen it and I guess people would most likely show it within their circle of friends too.

Also, the phone didn't always ring, when Ryuji watches it in Asakawa's apartment, the phone doesn't ring even though they both expect it to. Nor does it when Yoichi views it at his Grandfather's house.

[MARKMAN]

Originally posted by Analog Kid
Joober asked:


and our survey said ... :D
That's one way of looking at it but I think the real reason is given at the end of the film as she drives to her fathers with the video in the car. There is a voiceover which details the 'life cycle' of the video which goes something like:

Girl 1: They say there’s a way you can stay alive after you watch the video. You’ve gotta make a copy of it, and show it to somebody else inside a week.
Girl 2: But what about the person you show it to?
Girl 1: Well, then they make a copy and show it to somebody else. Again, inside a week.
Girl 2: (laughing) Then there’s no end to it.
Girl 1:That’s just it. There is no end. But if it meant not dying... you’d do it, wouldn’t you?

Which implies that the video forms a Ring as there are only so many people who won't have seen it before someone shows it to someone who's already seen it and I guess people would most likely show it within their circle of friends too.

Also, the phone didn't always ring, when Ryuji watches it in Asakawa's apartment, the phone doesn't ring even though they both expect it to. Nor does it when Yoichi views it at his Grandfather's house.

I agree with you as to why it is called Ring, however
I didn't think she was driving to her father's house, I thought it showed her going elsewhere (perhaps another city).

The phone ring, as mentioned in the film, is apparently always at the phone in the cabin - that's why it didn't ring when Ryuji and Yoichi watched it(it was ringing at the cabin).

[Analog Kid]

Originally posted by MARKMAN
I agree with you as to why it is called Ring, however
I didn't think she was driving to her father's house, I thought it showed her going elsewhere (perhaps another city).

The phone ring, as mentioned in the film, is apparently always at the phone in the cabin - that's why it didn't ring when Ryuji and Yoichi watched it(it was ringing at the cabin).

I realise the reasons for the phone not ringing anywhere apart from at the cabin as they are explained (or at least hypothesised about) during Ryuji and Asakawa's investigation. However, as her main aim seems to be to save Yoichi after he watches the tape, I assumed that the reason she'd grabbed the video and rushed off in the car was to make a copy and show someone else (possibly her father). Also she calls her father from the car as she speeds along as follows:

"Dad? It’s me. I’m on my way over. Look, dad, I’ve got something to ask. It’s for Yoichi..."

which would seem to suggest that that's where she's heading :p

[MARKMAN]

Ahhh, I presumed that to mean will you look after Yoichi!

However, I was quite bored by that point - oops, better not start that again:D

[Joober]

aaah, well thats opened my eyes.

As for the American remake.....

They can either take the story and make it better, or go a completely different route along similar lines (i.e the email thing sounds good)

Either way I think that the fear factor in the original will be lost altogether. There's just something about half dead japanese women crawling out of televisions that frightens me :eek:

[Analog Kid]

Originally posted by Joober
aaah, well thats opened my eyes.

As for the American remake.....

They can either take the story and make it better, or go a completely different route along similar lines (i.e the email thing sounds good)

Either way I think that the fear factor in the original will be lost altogether. There's just something about half dead japanese women crawling out of televisions that frightens me :eek:

Hmm, I'm not sure that the American remake will be any cop myself, look what they did to Nikita! :D Anyway, it'll be interesting to see how it turns out. As for half dead Japanese women, I think you'll find that she's a completely dead Japanese woman (i.e. a ghost) :) and yes she was scary, especially that glimpse of the eye :eek:

[Joober]

Originally posted by Analog Kid

half dead Japanese women, I think you'll find that she's a completely dead Japanese woman (i.e. a ghost) :) and yes she was scary, especially that glimpse of the eye :eek:

OMG! Thats just made the film even more scary! Im gonna imagine completely dead japanese ghost women crawling out of my telly and glaring at me with a really big eyeball :(

So thats another 2 weeks worth of sleep up the swanny, lol.

BTW...would anyone reccommend the sequel? Ring 2? If it spoils what the first film leaves to your imagination by revealing too much...i dont think i want to see it. Otherwise if its really scary i'd love to see it!

[urruri]

Originally posted by MARKMAN



urruri - is that no as in you are agreeing with me - saying No - it isn't good.

OR

Is that no as in you are disagreeing with me.

OR

Is it no to a different question?

:confused: :confused:



No-it isn't good.

[Jimmyboy]

Originally posted by Analog Kid


Hmm, I'm not sure that the American remake will be any cop myself, look what they did to Nikita! :D Anyway, it'll be interesting to see how it turns out. As for half dead Japanese women, I think you'll find that she's a completely dead Japanese woman (i.e. a ghost) :) and yes she was scary, especially that glimpse of the eye :eek:


She isnt a ghost I dont think.
Instead its a curse which was captured on video tape.
So everytime the videotape gets played, the curse is being activated again.

...and yes Ring2 is good.
As fas as sequels go is a damn fine effort, if you really liked the 1st one then you should like Ring2.

[CraigKORE]

LMAO & the great patter between Markman and wide! :D

Back on topic though (kind of), reading this thread has made me want to check this flick out. I see it on Reg 2 at Play, is this the one to get, or is there some super dooper region 3 that you can get for about a quid?

[Arch Stanton]

Originally posted by CraigKORE
LMAO & the great patter between Markman and wide! :D

Back on topic though (kind of), reading this thread has made me want to check this flick out. I see it on Reg 2 at Play, is this the one to get, or is there some super dooper region 3 that you can get for about a quid?

Unfortunatly every regions version of Ring is pretty poor with the R2 being the worst of the lot.

Best version is the one the show on film four.

[wong fei hong]

ooooh! This blew up while I was out...

It's great to see people talking so earnestly about a movie so many would regard as niche/obscure, and that its audience get that it's about more than lowest common-denominator shocks.

MARKMAN, I hope you weren't offended by my post... I you read it again, you'll see I never accused you of 'not being able to cope' with subtitles. I was trying to give some reasons that a viewer wouldn't dig it, including:Some films just don't click with people, however well recieved they are.
Isn't that fair comment? Either way, sorry if I seemed patronising, it really wasn't my intent. :)

[Barney_Tabasco]

Phew, what a thread. A bit late coming in on this one but what the hey!

I agree that certain elements of the plot are a bit shabby and it does contain quite a few loose ends, but ultimately i found it quite terrifying.

Watched it on my own at about midnight. Was laying in bed at around 2am just staring at the TV in the bedroom and hearing strange noises in the landing (it was just the cats, but when you feel as paranoid as i did it's irrelevant).

Yes, it was slow paced but that was the whole point! The build up became very unnerving by the end and i did feel rather shaken.

Not the scariest movie of all time but certainly one of the eeriest.

:eek:

By the way MARKMAN, i agree with the parenting issues you mentioned. She even left her kid to get his own tea! :confused:

[Jimmyboy]

Originally posted by Barney_Tabasco
By the way MARKMAN, i agree with the parenting issues you mentioned. She even left her kid to get his own tea! :confused:
Its a cultural thing.