The first review thread was closed and I couldn't really find another thread that was suitable so I created this one.......please, no bitching about duplicate threads, the mods will close this one if they feel it's necessary (because of me not finding something similar in my search):

First, I can't for the life of me understand why people are bashing this flick to no end, I liked it better than the first even though a lot of the awesome visuals are missing.

Story wise, yeah it ain't perfect but you can still follow it easily and it makes sense, again, I don't know what the problem is here either.

My main gripes with the film would be with showing Samara a little too much, the length of the film, and a few "what the hell?" moments (i.e. )

But none of the above really ruined the film for me. I will admit the best place to trim this movie would have been where the young boy "walks" home and sits on the couch for a good 15 minutes.

The ending was even better the first I was pretty damn creeped out by .

I bought the movie blind and will definitely watch it again.

Hey, I know - to each his or her own, me persoanlly; I thought it was pretty good.

Not as good as the first, but I still enjoyed it. Extended felt too long - it should've been kept under 2hrs.

**1/2

My wife and I both watched it this week, and although we loved the first one we both thought this movie dragged on and was essentially inferior to the first. There were a lot of "cheap scares" that didn't have any payoff. I'm not talking about the type where a cat jumps out at you or a loud noise goes off. One example would be when she's in the basement of the farm house. They show the lights going off one by one as "something" gets closer to Rachel, then she simply gets spooked and runs out of the house. Poorly done in my opinion.

Ring 2 will definitely be in my Top 10 (if not Top 5) of the worst films of 2005. For those CGI deer if nothing else.

The fifteen minute short was better than the whole film. It would have been cool if they expanded that instead of going in the direction they did.

I was just coming in to say the same thing.

Watched it last night with the wife and definitely didn't enjoy it as much as the first one. The first Ring had that wonderful sense of dread that kept building and you were seeing the "mystery" unravel as it went along. I just felt like this one had too many Samara appearances, too much water, was too long, and too many bad cgi deer.

I like the beginning of Ebert's review where he says "I am not sure I entirely understand the deer".

I understood the deer just as I'd understood the horse in The Ring. The Ring, however, was one of the most chilling movies I'd seen in a while (I just saw it a few weeks ago for the first time), and the second just didn't deliver for me. It wasn't a 'bad' movie per se, but it wasn't something I'd ever watch again. I guess I expected more from the director of the Japanese versions.

= J

I agree, I kept dozing in and out of sleep, to make a horror film so deathly dull is not a good move.

I mistakenly had high expectations for the sequel too as it was directed by Hideo Nakata. Movie wasn't bad..just incredibly mediocre in the sense that it had none of the dread and tension that the first film had.

The first half really bored me, and although it did pick up some steam in the second half and I thought it had a decent ending, it wasn't enough to pull it out of mediocrity.

Don't mean to shill two of my threads in a row but f' it, it's a forum:

I agree, the movie is way too long just like the first. I don't mind it too much but I think adding and additonal 28 minutes (I think it's 28 minutes) to a movie that's apparently 'unrated' but shows no signs of why it should be unrated........is too much.

I believe 20 minutes were added back in. (still too much I agree) And as is pretty standard nowadays, the unrated title simply means that version wasn't resubmitted to the MPAA. It may or may not contain anything that would change it's previous rating.

I watched this for the first time since theaters and Jesus Christ was this terrible. I honestly don't know how they could have made a worse sequel to a very chilling original movie. It's long, boring, and not scary in the slightest. I honestly don't know how they fucked up so badly.

Wow, I love the Ring 2?

To answer your question, no, you really shouldn't.

It was OK. but mostly I am partial because it was filmed on the Oregon Coast. Kinda wish these were included in the upcoming Arrow Blu-ray release of the Japanese originals.

Props to the thread bump for giving me something to boost my post-count on.

Nowhere near as riveting as the first movie.

But how could it be? Now that we know what watching the paranormal video portends, and all the weirdness of the week leading to Samara's eventual real-world manifestation - the uneasy, unknowing dread has been removed. There's no shock coming this time.

'The Ring' was the first horror movie in decades that had truly made me feel afraid. The sequel did nothing to me. No fear felt. No effect whatsoever, other than "oh, hey - that bathtub water special effect is pretty cool".

Using the good old classic rating system, 'The Ring' I gave 4 stars. A must-see horror classic.

Ring 2 gets 2 stars. An okay timewaster.