| Overall Grade: |
F |
|
| Story: |
N/A |
|
|
| Acting: |
N/A |
|
|
| Direction: |
N/A |
|
|
| Visuals: |
N/A |
|
|
4 things that you were supposed to be scare of...
by (movies profile)
Mar 16, 2007
41
of
65 people found this review helpful
Ok, I mean really. WHO ARE YOU PEOPLE!?!?!? Not only was the first Ring not nearly as good as you all thought it was (and definitely not a "classic"!) but the second one should never have happened; and the film the Ring 2 is proof in itself. We have learned four things that the writers and directors think all people truely fear: 1) women with greasy, stringy, long black hair covering most of their face (see the Ring and the Grudge for examples) 2)water 3)disfigured jaw bones and 4) crazy four legged mammels with hooves.
Despite all of these 4 terrifying, must-have elements, the scariest thing about this movie is that someone, somehow thought this would be a good movie. IT DOESN'T EVEN MAKE SENSE. The first one left most of the creativity to the audience to resolve all of the hanging/unexplained plot lines. This one leaves it all up to you. For example: the best part of the movie completely fails to tie into the story line... the Deer. What do they have to do with anything? (I think they stole it from When Animals Attack, thought it was cool, and slipped it in there for good measure) Now, for those of you that have seen it, you may have been fooled into thinking that they explained the existance of Samara, but did they really? For those of you who haven't good luck. And what about this "way out" always having been open? Doesn't that mean that the name "The Ring" should have really been "The Crescent"? And who were all these other ladies that had visited the real mother and what happened to them? Had they succeeded Samara would be trapped forever in the well? Had they failed, Samara would still be eating their peanut butter sandwiches and pleasently content, cause "all she wants is a mother". I could on and on. Point being, this one makes absolutely no sence. I guess simple minds accept simple explanations, or none at all (yes i'm talking to all of you that gave this movie and "A" or even a "C")
I know, those of you who haven't seen it, still have this inclination to see it and most likely will, but wait until it hits the video store (or better yet TV). It's so bad it could almost be funny (but then again it even fails at that). |
My Public Profile 
