Before You Die (of boredom with recent
horror movie releases), You'll See The Ring
Review by
Stine Fletcher
The Ring. Dir. Gore Verbinski. 2002.
I’ve been trying to figure out how to begin my review of this movie.
Should I begin with the fact that I was hooked, and I knew this movie
would actually scare me when I first saw the theater trailer . . .
Should I begin with the fact that during the movie, I actually covered
my eyes twice because I knew the most horrible thing was about to show
on screen, only to have to force myself to open them so I could honestly
review the movie for this e-zine. And should I add that I have NEVER
been compelled to perform this protective action before in my entire life
up til now . . .
Should I begin with how I and my cat have been distracted by odd
noises from the foyer outside my door in the past week since seeing this
movie, noises that never occurred before viewing the movie, I think . .
.
I will begin with the fact that this is the scariest horror film
since Candyman was released in 1992. This movie is a must-see
for horror fans while its still in theaters. Other movie-goers confirm
the film’s great fright potential. I have heard tales of others
covering their eyes, and the lead projectionist at my local cinema reports
fits of screams from the audience. For a Hollywood PG-13 movie that
seems meant to be the requisite clone of Signs, The Ring is
simply a good horror movie that is not dumbed down for the audience and
which actually has some depth. Dear viewer, you’ve read the summary
in other reviews. So let’s you and I get to the nitty gritty, to
the eerily in-depth look only Necropsy can give you.
My first impression with the movie’s overall look is that it’s reminiscent
of Signs. In Signs, the atmosphere is made up of
one dimly set after another. The movie does well at making the setting
of the farm an eerie haunted place. In The Ring, the characters
must face their own terror through a relentless blanket of rain.
The sky is always gray, and the sun is never seen except in the poignant
scene of a sunset at which point it gives off a blood-red glow. The
farm in The Ring is noticeable in that it’s the one big change director
Verbinski made to the plot of the Japanese original, Ringu.
This is what gives this reviewer the impression that this US remake of
the Japanese hit Ringu was made to be the annual clone for the other
big 2002 horror release, Signs. Queen of the Damned had
Blade II, and Mothman Prophecies had Dragonfly (an
obvious clone if ever there were one). The farm in The Ring
really adds nothing to the plot. Though Hollywood still can’t
accept that a well-dubbed edition of the Japanese film itself would have
had a market here in the US, and it used the remake for its own ends, Verbinski
has skillfully managed in his translation to keep the frightening tone which
reputedly pervades the original. Whatever the reason for Hollywood’s
habit of cloning good movie ideas each year, Verbinski’s change does not
take away from the plot set up in the original film. This is what
will make The Ring one of the classic US horror films from this decade.
While Verbinski’s remake holds true to its Japanese original, there
is another similarity to Signs, the role of the child characters.
In Signs, the children are merely tools to carry out the plot.
The daughter is psychic enough to reveal the solution to conquer the alien
menace. The son merely reflects and mouths the audience’s common knowledge
about extra-terrestrial life. In Ring and Ringu ,
the son is even less of a character in his own right. In Ring
, he is a psychic tool, a convenient combination of the two children in
Signs. He is vaguely aware of the truth, and he spouts less-than-helpful
bits of insight for his mother’s benefit. The boy in Ringu
barely has a part at all. He has inherited a psychic ability from
his father, but we rarely see evidence of it. The father is the character
with psychic insight. In Ring and Ringu, the child exists
as a common goal for the parents, a catalyst for them to find a solution to
the killing video since the son has viewed it and will also die in seven days
without their help.
The cardboard nature of the child characters in both versions of
The Ring does not take away from both movies’ compelling story
and imagery. Like Candyman, the plot is based on an invented
urban legend that kills if invoked. The title The Ring comes
from the main recurring image in the killer video, and as viewers will
find out later, it’s the most horrifying image when one considers how it
came to exist. After watching this video, the viewer immediately receives
a phone call stating he/she has only seven days to live. Seven days
later, the audience is left with some of the most horrifying images in filmdom.
We never see exactly how the characters die (only two are shown being killed—this
is in no way a body count flick), and this adds to the terror. What
the human mind can imagine is generally worse than the actual event one
could put on screen. Yet it is what Verbinski does show that also makes
this film frightening. Both versions of The Ring rely
on visual imagery to terrify. This does not involve the simple use
of gore and blood, but imagery that seems to be drawn from some well of Jungian
archetypal fear. And the most evocative images get the least camera
time under Verbiunski’s direction. They are flashed onscreen only
just long enough for the eye to recognize them, giving the audience no time
to desensitize to the horror. This gives the film its lasting haunting
effect (I am still jumpy eight days later). The images are memorable,
but are quickly seared into the viewer’s mind in all their awful glory.
The Ring will succeed over time where Signs does not
simply due to the genius of plot that inspired the original Japanese
Ringu, the novel of the same name by Koji Suzuki. Signs
’ plot is a pattern of scenes of tension and wee frights followed by not-too-overbearing
scenes of humor to break that tension. But Signs is not haunting
itself. Its startles, but it does not terrify. The Ring
never lets up on the tension, and unlike too many current horror movies,
the movie does not explain everything. Ringu and Ring
have the advantage of drawing from the detailed plot of a work of written
fiction, a plot that leaves room for the sequels to come (all the Japanese
movie sequels to Ringu are based on Koji’s sequel novels). Saying
The Ring has plot holes is like saying there are plot holes in
Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring. The author intends
for more to come. The movie directors seem to treat the audience as
an intelligent entity who can figure out some of the unexplained if given
the time for deep thought on the matter.
An English translation of the novel is due out in the Spring according
to the main website for the Japanese version, Ringworld (http://ringworld.somrux.com/remake.htm
). An October release was falsely listed on Amazon.com, and Amazon has
since removed any listing for this novel. Ringu has been released
on DVD in various European countries, including the UK. Horror fans
who make the effort may be able to get at least a VCD from Canada (see
Ringworld for a list of potential vendors). For now,
the majority of you will have to wait for belated US releases of Ringu
. This reviewer is eagerly waiting for an almost decent VHS copy
from the VCD a friend will acquire from the great white North (I own a cheap
model DVD player that will not play VCD). In the meantime, we can
all get insight into Ringu by reading the English translation of
the screenplay posted under copyright fair-use policies at Ringworld (http://ringworld.somrux.com/remake.htm
).
I’ve been pondering how I should end this review.
Should I mention the fact that I was glad my grandmother called me
seven days later during the period of time in which I viewed the movie
and its dread video and talked with me past the deadline for my demise
according to the film . . .
Should I mention the odd noises that distracted me and my cat during
this call, some of which sounded like a creature thwarted at my door
supposedly by the connection to the voice of my family matriarch . .
.
Should I mention that I, like the heroine, realized only after the
deadline how I likely managed to survive the curse . . .
And like her, I have nothing to say for myself on that matter and
thus I reveal the dark part of my psyche [Note to self: later this
week, call my buddy who saw the movie last week on my recommendation just
to check on him] . . .
I will end this review by advising you dear viewer to observe the
movie closely, and find your own solution to stay alive.