Rings.

Review #1919: Rings.

Cast: 

Matilda Lutz (Julia), Alex Roe (Holt Anthony), Johnny Galecki (Gabriel Brown), Vincent D'Onofrio (Galen Burke), Aimee Teegarden (Skye Johnston), Bonnie Morgan (Samara Morgan), Chuck David Willis (Blue), Patrick R. Walker (Jamal), and Zach Roerig (Carter) Directed by F. Javier Gutiérrez.

Review: 

You know what would have been a better idea than making a re-hash from before? Doing nothing at all. Ring (1998) is generally considered the best of the Ring movies, and it was the first film adaptation of those Koji Suzuki novels that had inspired everything in the first place. But The Ring (2002) was a decent American adaptation, one that played the mystery angle with a bit less subtlety but just as useful execution. The Ring Two (2005) stunk when it came to trying to expand on the narrative of its threat of "Samara". Granted, it is hard to make a sequel of a film that doesn't fall into the trap of explaining too much, but it just didn't justify itself in where it wanted to go without becoming silly. Honestly, the better premise for a sequel came with the 2005 short film Rings, which involved teenagers circulating the VHS tape from before as a subculture within Oregon that pass the tape along when they get too afraid at what they see before the one-week deadline, complete with videoing their reactions. Twelve years later, here we are with a film called...Rings. The 2005 film told you who was the mother of the main threat, now you get to find out the father and the manner of conception. Well, and the tape has a new twist to it, because even I would be surprised if they re-used the exact tape from 15 years ago without any sort of change. The screenplay by written by David Loucka, Jacob Estes, Akiva Goldsman while the story was done by David Loucka and Jacob Estes, which evidently took a few elements from Suzuki's 1995 novel Spiral (that book had its own Japanese film adaptation, which coincidentally was a movie with terrible critical reception). The movie was directed by F. Javier Guttierez, who had exactly one feature credit in Before the Fall (2008).

Congratulations, you made a boring teenager movie. There is just nothing here to really grab on when it comes to any sort of new scares, unless you count everyone but D'Onofrio being bland as horror. Remember that short film? There is a resemblance to that in this film, since both films involve a group of kids deciding to get their kicks in checking out the VHS tape (at least there is file copying) before they find a mark to pass it on. Of course, the opening scene is something a bit different: someone trying to avoid the curse by riding on an airplane. Let's just say you would be better off being frozen instead. I do think there is something about the weirdness of people willing to take an experiment involving the soul and other gobbledygook (college, remember). The problem is that the film veers back into the Morgan plot in making a more "intricate" story...oh hell, it doesn't end mattering when you think about it. Does it really matter to know that a priest held someone captive and had a child with them only to, you know...? Besides, the twist ending that comes in the final minutes may have been a better idea to do an actual feature rather than as sequel bait (which apparently was spoiled in marketing, begging the question how one can market so badly). But nope, you get the mildest of mild people trying to make things interesting for the most uninspired efforts. Lutz and Roe just can't make this work out together, seemingly bewildered at being in a teen movie that can't distract itself with gore or any kind of meaningful characteristics that happen even in hack films (you know, ones that are overly self-aware...); in short, when they make dumb decisions, I don't even feel like caring about it. Galecki is barely worth mentioning in the movie, as out of all the people I would assume could play the role, he would probably rank in the bottom tier. Simply put, he brings nothing to the role beyond what a community theater actor might bring to a role that is barely written to begin with, and you don't even get to see him very much once the movie ditches its first narrative trick. If it wasn't for the fact that D'Onofrio is already in the movie, you would've ditched Galecki to the side of the road, because D'Onofrio at least makes the effort for deranged dignity, one that grabs your attention like any seasoned pro would do without hamming things up. The idea of terror veering its way onto new technology (i.e. not just a friggin' VHS tape) does sound like part of an interesting idea for a film, but it doesn't come together for something to justify its 102-minute runtime. Instead, it goes with bland cheap tricks and writing that doesn't know what it wants to be that results in a forgettable effort. You would be better off spending an hour looking at a film shelf rather than this movie.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: One more movie for Halloween: The Week After 4.0 to close the circle. 3 from Hell.