Guest areacode212 Report post Posted January 8, 2003 I originally read it on the DVDTalk forums, but fangoria.com is reporting this: At long last, U.S. viewers who have been waiting for the chance to see Hideo Nakata’s original RING (and haven’t gotten bootleg copies or all-region DVD players) will get their wish. DreamWorks will give Nakata’s film its American video debut (under its Japanese title RINGU) March 4, the same day they release their sleeper-smash remake on VHS and DVD. RINGU will be presented in widescreen on both tape and disc, in Japanese with English subtitles. As of now, the only supplement planned for the DVD of the American RING is an extended version of the creepy video, though more extras may be added between now and the street date. So both the original and the remake will be coming out that day. Hopefully it'll have more extras than just that extended cut of the scary video. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ravenbomb Report post Posted January 8, 2003 Ring AND Ringu?! HOLY FxCK!!!!!!! SWEET JESUS YES! WHOOOOOOOO!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest El Satanico Report post Posted January 8, 2003 Well it's great to hear that Ringu will be getting a US release. I'm also happy to hear that it will be subtitled. Dubbed in voices would've likely destroyed all of the atmosphere in the movie. Now we need a US release of Battle Royale, but that's wishful thinking at best. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest NoCalMike Report post Posted January 8, 2003 For those who have seen both.....is it worth it to own both versions?? From the opinions I have heard so far, from various message boards, opinions seem split as to which version is better....I might decide to get both, but may end up only buying one version. Damn it is night time and I am the only one awake in the house....I am creeped the fuck out thinking about this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest SP-1 Report post Posted January 8, 2003 The Ring creeped me out there towards the end. I'm glad the Japanese version will be released as I've wanted to see it ever since seeing the American remake. I'll likely get both if I have the cash. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest areacode212 Report post Posted January 8, 2003 I've seen both. I thought the remake was much better, and if I had to buy one, that's the one I'd get (I may get both). From what I've experienced on various boards, the one you saw first is the one you prefer, but the majority does seem to like the American film more. The boyfriend in the Japanese version looks a lot like Tajiri. I was half-expecting Sadako to take a stiff kick in the face. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ravenbomb Report post Posted January 8, 2003 Ringu is shorter and the two movies are a lot different. I, for one, will be buying nothing until March 4th, and probably nothing after that so I'll have plenty of $$$ for Florida Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest areacode212 Report post Posted March 7, 2003 BUMP! Since the DVD just came out, I thought some people might want to read the original movie thread. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ravenbomb Report post Posted March 7, 2003 ah, this brings back some memories... hey, about that Battle Royale release *points to link* http://www.pokerindustries.com/poker.store...=BATTLROYKO-DVD Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest EMAXSAUN Report post Posted March 8, 2003 Don't have much else to say except there are now three little girls that scare the shit out of me. The Exorcist, Angela from Sleepaway Camp 1 and the girl from The Ring. ROFL I watched Sleepaway Camp 1 when I was actually at sleepaway camp when I was 13. We were all watching this movie with some scary parts I guess, but mostly all corny shit. But then, the END, oh my, the horror, ~!THE HORROR!~ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vyce Report post Posted March 8, 2003 I've seen both, and I absolutely believe that the original is better. The remake was......lacking. Naomi Watts did a fine job, though. I have a sad feeling, though, that many people will favor the remake over the original, not because it's better, but rather because it's an Americanized Hollywood version. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Gamengiri2002 Report post Posted March 8, 2003 I watched Ringu first, since I felt I owed it to myself to do so. As such not only was I more frightened by it than it's American counterpart (though frightened isn't necessarily the right word) but I thought that it was a superior film as well. It all comes down to the comparison of the male leads being attacked at the films end, IMO, Ringu did this far better with the long, uninterrupted shot. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest hardyz1 Report post Posted March 8, 2003 I just saw this on DVD today. Good stuff. I like the nice touch on the menu screen where you can watch the actual Ring video, and when it ends it plays a sound of a phone ringing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Hamburglar Report post Posted March 8, 2003 I saw this last week, and I did find it quite the chiller right up to the end. It's odd, because its sort of the horror money shot, but I felt Samara lost some of her scariness when she came out of the well. As the guy scrambled round all I could think was "Fuck's sake, just slap her! Or strike her in the head with a blunt instrument!" How exactly did she kill him anyway? And how did she kill all the original viewers who didn't happen to be in the vicinity of a video recorder? That was my problem with the film, as soon as it finished I discovered huge holes in the plot and started inventing elaborate ways in which you could get round the whole seven day death thing. I mean, what if Samara came out of the screen whilst you were bollock naked and enjoying a hearty wank? How are you supposed to be scary whilst your intended victim is pumping the meat like a grinning madman? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ravenbomb Report post Posted March 8, 2003 in the book, the TV isn't what does it, it's reflective surfaces, such as a car mirror or the inside of the faceplate of a motorcycle helmet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest El Satanico Report post Posted March 8, 2003 I mean, what if Samara came out of the screen whilst you were bollock naked and enjoying a hearty wank? How are you supposed to be scary whilst your intended victim is pumping the meat like a grinning madman? I don't know about anyone else, but if some creepy looking little girl came out of my fucking TV it would scare the shit out of me rather i was jacking off or not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ravenbomb Report post Posted March 9, 2003 apparently Daveigh Chase also voiced Lilo in Lilo and Stitch...I'm never gonna see THAT movie the same again... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest areacode212 Report post Posted March 10, 2003 Let's talk about the subtext of the movie... During her life, Samara was basically shunned by everyone and stuck in a barn with only a crappy b&w TV for companionship. Do you think that the reason for her "die unless you go out and show copies" rule was that, in her own twisted way, she wanted people to go out and make human connections with others (by showing them the tape)? Is the movie about how people should turn off the TV, get off their asses, and start connecting with others again? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Edwin MacPhisto Report post Posted March 10, 2003 Okay, time to bring this thread back up. Spoilers a-go-go. I just watched The Ring. This is without a doubt one of the worst films I have ever seen, and I mean that earnestly. As far as studio films of a modest budget go, this was the drizzling shits. Poor, poor acting, a pretty awful script...some nice art direction, though. There are a few scary images. I very much liked Samara emerging from the TV in black and white, moving as a full-body but rendering in poor black and white film. But wasn't anyone else bothered by the fact that this shit made zero sense? I understand the hook at the end--have to make a copy and show it to somebody else for it not to kill you--but how on earth can anyone account for the actual creation of the tape? Did it mystically appear? How did this tape even get made? Was Samara trapped in the well with a stack of AV equipment? Did it just materialize, like the pictures we saw in the sanitarium video? Are we supposed to buy this as the explanation? What did the horses have to do with anything? This script is littered with loose ends, and not in the good open-ended sense--it's more the "I am a film not governed by logic in any way." How did Aidan (the son) know things about all this? Are we supposed to believe he's special in some way? How does he know that you're not supposed to let the girl out? Furthermore, what does Rachel falling into the well, learning the story, having a vision in the well--does that have anything to do with anything? Is it a fantastic red herring that doesn't matter at all? Can't be, considering the supernatural energies in the house. All told, I really don't get the hype for this film. I can get why it made a ton of money--stylish PG-13 horror film = big bucks--but hasn't anyone else picked up on the fact that this is a poor, poor piece of cinema? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ravenbomb Report post Posted March 10, 2003 How did this tape even get made? Nensha; the ability to burn images on film, or a tape in this case, with your mind. To each their own, I guess. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Edwin MacPhisto Report post Posted March 10, 2003 Nensha? Did that make into the American film? I don't remember it. I just wish this script had been more competent--more polished in the direction it wanted its viewers to take. For something that seems so important to the basic conceit of the film, it receives mind-numbingly little attention. I'm all for the suspension of disbelief, but don't like it being used to write off shoddy craftsmanship. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest El Satanico Report post Posted March 10, 2003 They never came out and said "she did it with her mind", but there were several times when you were led to believe that she did things mentally. It may not have been a "hitting you over the head" explanation, but there was one lurking there. Also the claims of "that's the worst movie ever" are so overused that it's lost all meaning. Someone strongly dislikes a movie for whatever reason so it's labeled "worst movie ever" ignoring decades of truly awful movies. Other than the MST inspired cult status it now has Manos: The Hands Of Fate is the "worst movie ever". You may not have personally liked The Ring, but it's totally absurb to claim that it's worse than Manos. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Edwin MacPhisto Report post Posted March 10, 2003 Other than the MST inspired cult status it now has Manos: The Hands Of Fate is the "worst movie ever". You may not have personally liked The Ring, but it's totally absurb to claim that it's worse than Manos. I disagree. I've seen Manos. It's obviously pure and utter crap. Anything on MST3K is horrendous, of course. You can go down to Blockbuster and rent any of a dozen straight-to-video Christopher Lambert flicks or Full Moon Productions projects, and those will obviously will be worse on an overall level than The Ring. There are thousands of worthless movies out there that cost a couple hundred thousands bucks to make. That's why I mentioned this in terms of "studio films of a modest budget." This is one of the worst $45 million pictures I have seen. It may not have been a "hitting you over the head" explanation, but there was one lurking there. I followed the hints, and yes, I do appreciate a bit of subtlety in my movies. Much better than blanket exposition (which, sadly, a lot of this movie does dabble in). To state my point more clearly: I don't mind that some of this was left ambiguous, but it's my feeling that a lot of this ambiguity is due to flawed craft, not any intention. We've got the suggestion that she does this with her mind. Does this come from anywhere? Is she gifted? Is it a metaphorical manifestation of her striking back for the abuses she's suffered? I love that last notion, but I don't think the filmmakers either hit on it or executed it in anything but a minimal sense. There's too many easy and, in some cases, essential questions left unanswered. The film comes off as if the people making it neither knew what they wanted to do with this story, nor knew exactly the behind-the-scenes logic of how everything really related. That's not a good sort of ambiguity, and a tendency to swing this way really hampers the film. I've got to watch myself. I'm coming off like a vociferous anti-Ring zealot when in fact I'm just a nitpicky writer who thought this was a stupid movie not worthy of the praise it's pulled in. Need to cut back on that damned cholesterol. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ravenbomb Report post Posted March 10, 2003 the Nensha thing didn't make the American version (not even sure if it made the Japanese version). Most of your questions can probably be ansered at http://ringworld.somrux.com/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest CoreyLazarus416 Report post Posted March 10, 2003 Spoilers ahead... Wow, Edwin...you analyzed it too much to enjoy it. Read your posts and "review" of the movie. All you do is nitpick about things that were MEANT to be left open. The tape was made by Samara transmitting images in her undead, ghostly "head" onto the film. In the scene when the doctor is interviewing Samara in the mental institution, it's made pretty clear that Samara can imprint images on film when they're not supposed to be there. The horses? You're questioning the reason for the horses? It's quite simple. All Samara wanted as a child was love from her parents. Her father hated her because she wasn't born naturally (as explained in a deleted scene), but through a somewhat primitive form of artificial insemination (sp.?), and spent all of his time with the horses. The same for her mother. And when the father moved Samara out to the barn, it's explained (via an epiphany of Rachel's while examining the barn with Noah) that Samara didn't sleep because the horses kept her up at night. I caught all of this with only a single viewing, while still in theaters. What else did you not like? Hmmm...well, you apparently didn't like the overall sense of macabre of the tale. Samara is pretty much an evil spirit due to the tortures she suffered in her young life (study some parapsychology, and it will make a lot more sense). The doctor on the island explains that Samara brought great pain when she arrived with her family, probably due to Samara having outstanding psychic abilities (thus making her a Poltergeist) and not knowing how to properly control them. Samara did not die right away, and felt more concentrated pain in her last seven days of life (hence the seven day-rule, another epiphany of Rachel) than ever before. However, all of the anger and resent and pain of her entire life had built up and created its own imprint on the world. Samara wants people to know of her, to give her attention, and since the only thing remaining of Samara is a restless evil spirit (once again, study some parapsychology), the way to get attention is negative, violent, and painful. I'll end this post with a statement I said today to a girl Amanda in my Health class that said she thought The Ring was a bad movie: The only people that didn't like The Ring are the ones that didn't actually "get it." Edwin, no offense, but you do fall into this category. Of course, I love it, because I have an obsession with parapsychology and the paranormal (spawning from watching Ghostbusters since I was 3), and thus have a better grasp at understanding it better. And I apologize if anything I have said comes off as "holier-than-thou" or rude, because I don't mean it in that way at all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Edwin MacPhisto Report post Posted March 11, 2003 See Corey, I picked up plenty of that stuff--I got that the horses actually kept her awake. And her father's resentment makes MUCH more sense with the bit about artificial insemination, but since that's not part of the actual completed film, it doesn't really apply. Same with your advice about reading up on some parapsychology. A good film that requires some spec knowledge works it into the framework of the piece seamlessly--or hell, even in some awkward exposition. This didn't. Hence my disatisfaction with what to the much better informed customer like you is open-ended. I liked the sense of macabre. Overall atmosphere was one of few qualities this really had going for it. Believe me, my original post wasn't near a full review. I just wanted to see if anyone had answers for the questions I had, and now I've gotten them, though I remain disappointed that so much of this critical information didn't make it into the final cut of the film. A full review would share my compliments to Brian Cox for being his usual memorable self in a small role, as well as my regret at seeing the very talented Naomi Watts have to stumble through some really awkward and poorly written exchanges. My nitpicks are a substantial part of what I didn't like, but not the whole of it. Largely mediocre performances, a really awkward and stilted dramatic structure, and a general lack of actual scares, thrills, or chills. I'll posit that a lot of people who didn't like The Ring are people who, whether they "got it" or not, were just put off by a lot of the same elements that had me leaving the festivities bored and disappointed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Crucifixio Jones Report post Posted March 11, 2003 My problems with the Ring have all pretty much been covered by ol Edwin here. A good movie shouldn't require the viewing of deleted scenes or a degree in the paranormal in order for one to "get it." That's just shitty filmmaking. I would understand completely if someone told me they didn't "get" The Ring and I wouldn't be so quick to condemn them as some idiot who just couldn't grasp it. I mean, this ain't Mullholland Dr. here. I'd totally sympathise with people who hated the Ring because the filmmakers did a poor job with the story. And while a ton of things were supposedly answered in the Ring, the answers were so minimal and vague that it wasn't even fair since they chose to confront the audience with larger-than-life questions that demanded more exposition or at least CLEAR explanations. Nearly every major plot point in The Ring is met with something you can barely call a sufficient explanation. I'm surprised the movie did so well in the box office because I'm sure the lowest common denominator in US theaters did not follow all of this movie. But I'm sure they didn't care as long as they got scared. Who needs to understand the story? You guys touched on the horses and how Samara's parents (at some points in the movie I was unsure if they were even REALLY her parents since it wasn't explained how she was conceived) seemed to love them more than her and how they kept her awake, but why did the horses all start dying? Why was Naomi Watts (and her special child who somehow knew everything, also not explained) suddenly blessed with the ability to touch a horse and make it go psycho and drown itself? We can all guess, but with a movie like this, one shouldn't be left to "figure it out" or "guess"; he should know and it should be explained. There were just far too many instances of this in The Ring. Like, if Samara imprinted these images onto film with her mind (in a process not really explained or even touched upon in the finished product) how did she have that image of her mother killing herself if she wasn't alive to see it? The Ring was just hole after hole after glorious plot hole and it wasn't even that scary, to boot considering all the hype it got. I can't believe America is this stupid or easily frightened. People say that if you had a problem with The Ring you analyzed it too much, I say that if you didn't have a problem then you didn't even give it a simply analysis, not even a scant once-over. Does the mind not rebel at ANY point or does everyone just turn on the tv and turn their brains off? There has to be SOME logic for me to enjoy and movie and The Ring was seriously lacking in that department. That doesn't mean I overanaylzed it or didn't get it, it means the Ring was deficient in a lot of areas that fans of the genre choose to overlook for some reason unbeknownst to me. I guess I'd better go read the screenplay, see the original, study up on the paranormal and review the deleted scenes and then maybe I'll understand why the storytelling here is still extremely piss poor. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Plushy Al Logan Report post Posted March 11, 2003 I finally watched it, this one of the few horror films that didn't scare me. I was actually scared shitless after watching RAW, I could not turn off the TV for some reason, so I changed the channels, I nearly pissed myself when I found a channel that had static. I havent slept all night. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Dames 0 Report post Posted March 11, 2003 You just completely contradicted yourself, Logan. Dames Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Edwin MacPhisto Report post Posted March 11, 2003 Maybe he's trying to say that he was scared by Raw. I know that Jazz's Bam-Bam Pebbles cavegirl outfit gave me nightmares. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
