Movie Review


THE RING TWO

By: Rachel Reitsleff
Review Date: Friday, March 18, 2005

THE RING TWO starts out as a near-copy of its 2002 predecessor (and the 2000 Japanese original that spawned both), which might not have been a bad thing. A very nervous high school student (Ryan Merriman), aware of the one-week death curse surrounding a frightening videotape, tries to coerce his date (Emily VanCamp) into watching the thing. The sequence is predictable yet highly creepy the fact that we know what's going on does not undercut the tension. However, rather than follow the storyline of the Japanese RINGU 2, the original sequel, the new film tries to go in a new direction. This is brave but largely counterproductive. For one thing, there's plenty of material left in the whole notion of the cursed videotape, which goes unexplored here. Moreover, Ehren Kruger's screenplay essentially paints itself into a corner as it goes.

When we last saw journalist Rachel (Naomi Watts) and her young son Aidan (David Dorfman), Rachel was reluctantly but inexorably saving their lives by making sure that other people saw the cursed videotape, the only way to prevent death at the spectral wet hands of the ghost of Samara (Daveigh Chase and Kelly Stables), a child murdered by her mother. Rachel has moved herself and her son to a small town, where hopes they'll be safe. Rachel has secured a job at the local paper and when she goes to investigate a suspiciously familiar-sounding sudden death, she finds herself enmeshed anew in Samara's predations. This time, however, Samara's agenda is somewhat different than before.


On the one hand, it's understandable that writer Kruger and director Hideo Nakata (who helmed the first two Japanese RINGU films, though not the first American remake) had to come up with some explanation for how and why Samara doesn't simply kill Rachel. Nakata comes up with a lot of goosebump-raising images and sequences (there are some unconvincing CGI animals at one point, but it's not a crucial scene). Unfortunately, the explanation the film decides on for Samara's new focus means that she will not directly attack several specific characters, and most viewers are savvy enough to understand that RING TWO's mainstream aspects and PG-13 rating mean that it's incredibly unlikely certain plot developments will occur. What's left is a story that tries to rely to a large extent on psychological rather than physical horror, without adequately preparing either the audience or the characters for the switch in emphasis.

Even so, young Dorfman does an extremely good job with a very difficult role we believe him at all times. Watts is fine as the increasingly tense and horrified lead, even though she's given some overly on-the-nose dialogue.

THE RING TWO does have some good scares and fearsome visuals, but in attempting to be more than a high-powered fearfest, it sacrifices jolts in pursuit of a depth it doesn't achieve.


More Content By Rachel Reitsleff
88 Minutes
(Friday, April 18, 2008)
ALIENS VS. PREDATOR: REQUIEM
(Wednesday, December 26, 2007)
HITMAN
(Saturday, November 24, 2007)
SLEUTH
(Friday, October 12, 2007)
THE SEEKER: THE DARK IS RISING
(Sunday, October 7, 2007)
HATCHET
(Friday, September 7, 2007)
RUSH HOUR 3
(Friday, August 10, 2007)
STARDUST
(Friday, August 10, 2007)
THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM
(Friday, August 3, 2007)
SUNSHINE
(Friday, July 20, 2007)
Comments/Responses
1
• Mar 18, 2005, 11:46am •
The sequel was a very stupid and boring movie, don't waste your time or your money on this one; I saw it two nights ago at an advance screeing and it was just not worth it; used a lot of CGI -- specifically the deer -- and only two deaths for the whole movie, what's up with that?

• Mar 19, 2005, 08:49am •
I dunno. I liked it. Not as much as the Ring, but it wasn't bad. I did have a question about a major plot hole or seeming inconsistency, but it's spoilerific, so I'll post it later in the horror forum.

1
Login to post a comment!