Rings - Somebody Saw It Follows!
- Thread starter Marter
- Start date
Not that it makes it good but is it fair to say that it copies It Follows? Wasn't the "Have someone else watch it to break the curse" in the original too? Or am I misremembering stuff?
Ultimately, I suppose it doesn't matter as the movie just looked awful and I have no real intention of seeing it. There are some horror movies that I'll give a chance to no matter the critical reception (Love me some Jason X and Freddy Versus Jason) but this one just looked awful from the first trailer...
Ultimately, I suppose it doesn't matter as the movie just looked awful and I have no real intention of seeing it. There are some horror movies that I'll give a chance to no matter the critical reception (Love me some Jason X and Freddy Versus Jason) but this one just looked awful from the first trailer...
I think so ... for the most part. I believe it was just "make a copy, pass it on," not "make a copy, make sure they watch it before time runs out." But it wasn't a movie built on internal logic anyway, and the sequel disregarded that, so yeah.tippy2k2 said:
Or, just maybe, it came out 15 years ago, I haven't seen it in 6, that discovery only happens at the very end, it isn't identical to how it works in the new one (I'm pretty sure; like I said, it's been a long time), and its own sequel ignores it.Omey said:
And if you meant the original-original, Ringu, the American movies are different from the Japanese ones, so that's not relevant. (It's the "it's explained in the books" argument, which doesn't hold weight.)
008Zulu said:
I second this motion.
So many of these crappy horror movies are jump scares and nothing else. A child could give you a jump scare, that doesn't make a child scary (there are plenty of reasons why children are scary but that's not one of them).
Just a heads up for anyone reading: this post contains spoilers for The Ring and The Ring 2...not gonna put them in boxes considering how old (and lame 
) they are.
The Ring establishes the notion that if you make a copy of the tape after watching it, you'll be fine. The Ring 2 - in its opening sequence - establishes the "It Follows premise" of "Get someone else to watch the tape after you've watched it and you'll be fine." So yeah, to be fair, if anything it would be that It Follows borrows from The Ring 2. But at least It Follows has the whole "it's a metaphor for STDs" thing going for it...where as the writers for Samara are kinda like the writers for the Superman comics in that they let her just do whatever the hell she wants to in order to further the story.
But there's the other questions that remain...like how in the first movie Samara is just a ghost of some weird girl with apparent supernatural powers that kills people that watch her art-house home movies. While The Ring 2 tries to elaborate on her story, suggesting "Oh, she was just a girl with apparent supernatural powers that just wanted a loving mother to love her." Ok...well her biological mother tried to drown her "because my baby told me to". But what about her adoptive mother? What did she do wrong? Samara was the one that kept fucking with her adoptive mother's horses and driving her insane to the point of killing Samara and then herself. Sooooo if Samara just wants a mommy, why'd she drive that one to madness? Also if Samara just wants a mommy, why is she just a straight-up killer in the first movie? Why not do all that possession crap we see in The Ring 2 in The Ring?
Basically this series just flies by the seat of its pants, contradicting itself - at times - within the same movie (quite prevalent in The Ring 2, I haven't seen this new one so I can't vouch for it).
Oh well, any word on whether or not then intend to adopt The Grudge vs The Ring to western audiences? At least that movie would be deliciously cheesy! Still trying to find a good subtitled version of it in the mean time.
) they are.That's the thing about these movies: the lore behind them isn't quite clear and Samara breaks/redefines her own rules as a killer ghost-demon-thing whenever she feels like it.Marter said:
The Ring establishes the notion that if you make a copy of the tape after watching it, you'll be fine. The Ring 2 - in its opening sequence - establishes the "It Follows premise" of "Get someone else to watch the tape after you've watched it and you'll be fine." So yeah, to be fair, if anything it would be that It Follows borrows from The Ring 2. But at least It Follows has the whole "it's a metaphor for STDs" thing going for it...where as the writers for Samara are kinda like the writers for the Superman comics in that they let her just do whatever the hell she wants to in order to further the story.
But there's the other questions that remain...like how in the first movie Samara is just a ghost of some weird girl with apparent supernatural powers that kills people that watch her art-house home movies. While The Ring 2 tries to elaborate on her story, suggesting "Oh, she was just a girl with apparent supernatural powers that just wanted a loving mother to love her." Ok...well her biological mother tried to drown her "because my baby told me to". But what about her adoptive mother? What did she do wrong? Samara was the one that kept fucking with her adoptive mother's horses and driving her insane to the point of killing Samara and then herself. Sooooo if Samara just wants a mommy, why'd she drive that one to madness? Also if Samara just wants a mommy, why is she just a straight-up killer in the first movie? Why not do all that possession crap we see in The Ring 2 in The Ring?
Basically this series just flies by the seat of its pants, contradicting itself - at times - within the same movie (quite prevalent in The Ring 2, I haven't seen this new one so I can't vouch for it).
Oh well, any word on whether or not then intend to adopt The Grudge vs The Ring to western audiences? At least that movie would be deliciously cheesy! Still trying to find a good subtitled version of it in the mean time.
Sounds like it based on RJs post there. If all you had to do was make a copy then that curse would be over awfully quick as my copy would get sealed up, weighted, and dropped into the ocean like I was on the Slice of Life...Marter said:
(that's Dexter Morgan's boat if people don't get it...)
I haven't seen It Follows myself, but just to clarify, the "copy the tape and make someone else watch it" was a thing at least as far back as The Ring Two (2005), maybe even further back if you take the Japanese films into account (not as familiar with those). It was also the main premise of the short film Rings, which from the looks of it, was far superior to this iteration.
Not that any of that matters, since according to Sadako vs. Kayako (and maybe one of the canon films), the "cheating the curse" bit is a load of bunk anyway. (And by the end of that movie, the curse is spread through the internet and more than doubles in power anyway. )
)