FuzzyBallz

Man, that crawling out of the TV scene made Hell Raiser look like a holloween party.

NoxHaveN

Surprisingly (at least to myself), I found that I enjoyed the US version more than the Japanese version as well. But that may at least partially be due to me having watched the US version first.

I'll tell ya, I jumped like a little girl at a number of parts througout the first viewing of this movie. Definitely one of the better horror/suspense movies I've ever seen. I've had a good scare off of a number of horror movies in my life, but far fewer ever leave a lasting impression that gave me goosebumps days after viewing.

Ahhh who am I kidding, I'm just a big wuss.

Supermallet

Yes. The first film, Ring (aka Ringu), was based on the novel Ring by Koji Suzuki, and for the most part is a fairly faithful adaptation (it changes the lead character from male to female and combines a few other characters, but for the most part doesn't stray very far). That is, until the ending. The ending of Ring differs from the novel. It was such a huge hit in Japan that they wanted to do a sequel. Now, there is a sequel to the novel Ring, called Spiral, but the changes made to the ending of the film made it impossible to adapt Spiral as the sequel (there's also a third novel). So the filmmakers wrote an entirely original story that built on the events of the first film. It has a very strong first half and a second half that seems like they were using The Exorcist II as their inspiration. So Ring 2 is half of a good film. Both of these films were directed by Hideo Nakata.

Nakata left after Ring 2, as did all the rest of the creative crew. However, Ring 2 made enough money to warrant another film, so the producers hired nobodies to make Ring 0, which is based on a short story by Suzuki. It's about Sadako before she dies, and how she comes to be the spectre we all know and love. However, unlike Ring 2, it's not even half of a good film. It's just all around bad.

And, Regurgitator, it is fairly explicit in both versions of the film that the tape must be copied AND viewed by someone else in order for the curse to be lifted. How could Sadako's virus be spread if no one watched the video? You could just make a copy and destroy it, no harm done.

Numanoid: Your wife is brutal!

Regurgitator

We both agree that the tape has to be copied in order to spread the virus. Now my point is that it doesn't have to be viewed by another person within 7 days rather it can be viewed by someone whenever. If you destroy it you just condemned yourself to death. In essence, once the tape has been copied and the tape hasn't been destroyed you're safe to live.

Supermallet

Then what's the point of the time limit? It would just be "copy this tape or die." The copy of the tape must be shown to someone who hasn't already seen it within 7 days.

Watch Ring 2 (the Japanese), there's a subplot where a girl watches it, makes a copy for this news reporter, and he forgets to watch it. She dies 7 days later.

Regurgitator

Well, I haven't seen Ring 2 (The Japanese) movie so I can't comment on that. I'm only discussing on the American "The Ring" version. We know that this movie has been altered quite a bit from the Japanese version so the ending could also be different.

Now the point of the time limit is to realize that you had to make a copy of the tape.. that's it! You have 7 days to do just that. As long as it's done and not destroyed for others to view eventually you're safe.

Supermallet

That defies all storytelling logic. Where is the horror in making a copy of a video, if you don't have to show it to anyone? If you don't have to show it to someone within 7 days, why should you have to show it to anyone at all? That's not horror, that's just lame. It makes no sense.

johnglass

I think they should have gotten off on a technicality by both Rachel and her kid making a copy, then each watching the others copy. Then they could have given the finger to the evil little bitch and been done with it.

Regurgitator

Look.. in every horror movie the main logic behind it is to find a way to escape the horror and survive. Now with the Ring.. who would have thought to escape it is to copy this video? Bet you not a lot of people would so you're given 7 days to do that. You can also add in that everyone thinks it's just a movie and nothing will happen after 7 days. So there's your horror!

Supermallet

It doesn't count if a person who's seen it watches it again.

And Regurgitator, you're simply wrong. On matters of opinion, I let people think what they want. But you are factually wrong. Someone else watching the copy within 7 days is intregal to the curse. Sadako (or Samara in the American) is a virus. How can she spread if no one watches the movie?

Regurgitator

Who said the virus can't be spread? The original tape and every copy of it will be lying around somewhere waiting for the next victim to watch it.

How does one define the extent of a curse? You can't. My opinion is that the curse ended once a copy has been made within 7 days and that's it. Of course, that's a matter of opinion. I guess you could add in that another person has to watch the copy in the 7 days too but there was no fact to prove if that was the case for sure.