Log in / Sign up
 
    Share this page

    Rings

    Advertisement

    Reviewed by
    adamwatchesmovies@

    This franchise has been a roller coaster ride. It started way up high, then spiked to the bottom so quickly I now feel like throwing up. I’ll be shocked if “Rings” doesn’t end up on my “Worst of 2017” list. As a sequel, it’s unnecessary; as a horror movie, it’s terrible; as a film in general, it’s flat and so poorly written it’s basically unwatchable.

    When Julia (Matilda Lutz) saves her boyfriend Holt (Alex Roe) from the hideous fate that awaits all of those who watch Samara Morgan’s cursed videotape, she discovers new footage that leads to a new mystery to be solved.

    The film ignores “The Ring Two” completely, which is for the better (at least in theory), but it isn’t even consistent with the first film. The mystery to be unraveled revolves around Samara’s biological mother. Wait, wasn't the girl born to Mrs. Morgan under weird circumstances? Did I misinterpret that birth certificate (found at 1:15:00) in "The Ring" or the line "My Wife was not supposed to have a child"? More than likely I paid more attention to the franchise than the people who made this film! I’d be able to look past this oversight if "Rings" was good, or anything above drench-yourself-in- gasoline-and-set- yourself-on-fire-to- make-it-stop bad, but...

    This is a profoundly uninspired picture. The direction is flat, the actors wooden, the scares non-existent. However, there are plenty of loud noises to startle you. All of these flaws pale in comparison to the story, courtesy of David Loucka and Jacob Aaron Estes. They've created the stupidest college students I’ve ever seen. These are the kinds of people that have never seen a horror movie, will wander into strangers’ homes in the middle of the night, can’t put together the simplest clues, can't remember to use their cell phones, or keep an ear out for imminent dangers.

    Early on, there’s a clue to Samara’s end game. It’s so obvious I had it figured out the moment I caught a glimpse. The dunderheads we call protagonists take an eternity to figure it out. They’re so unobservant it drives you loony. When asked to describe the new footage she’s witnessing on-screen, Julia calls a flooded graveyard with three tombstones a “cross in water”; a skeleton in a crematorium is “a burning body”. Does she not realize that these clues could mean the difference between life and death?!

    To see "Rings" is to witness writing so awful it becomes tasteless. I could not believe this plot made it to the screen in 2017. This kitty-litter resident plays out like a hybrid of the worst parts of “Final Destination” and “Silent Hill”, with little sprinkles of Onryō horror, at least theoretically."Rings" is never scary, inventive, or anything else but bad. (Theatrical version on the big screen, February 21, 2017)

    1
    HelpfulNot helpful  Reply
    adamwatchesmovies@  4.3.2017 age: 26-35 2,881 reviews

    Show all reviews for this movie
    Note: The movie review posted on this page reflects a personal opinion of one user. We are not responsible for its content.

    Did you see ''Rings''?

    There is a problem with your e-mail address and we are unable to communicate with you. Please go to My Account to update your email.

    How do you rate this movie?

    Select stars from 1 to 10.
    10 - A masterpiece, go, see it now
    9 - Excellent movie, a must see
    8 - Great movie, don't miss it
    7 - Good movie, worth seeing
    6 - Not bad, could be much better
    5 - So so, okay if you don't pay
    4 - Not good, even if you don't pay
    3 - Poor movie, not recommended
    2 - Very bad, forget about it
    1 - Worst ever, avoid at all costs

    Please explain. Write your comment here:

    Please choose a username to sign your comments. Only letters, digits, dash - or period. Minimum 4 characters.

    Your age and sex:

    We publish all comments, except abusive, at our discretion.