To wait 12 years for a sequel is a tall ask especially when the sequel is to a flailing series of American remakes of a cultural classic however, with a title as poignant to the genre as THE RING, Samara returns to haunt movie goers once again.

 

After the long wait, surprisingly RINGS picks up after the events of THE RING TWO and refuses to reboot or remake the franchise once more. This time around, a Professor (Johnny Galecki) enlists the support of his university students to understand tapes mysticism and unravel the realisation that the soul exists. Unfortunately, he picks the wrong candidates as the chain of copy, show, repeat breaks as Holt’s (Alex Roe) girlfriend Julia (Matilda Lutz) enters the fray. As one of the Professor’s students dies at the hands of Samara’s curse, Julia discovers the tape and a hidden easter egg meant for her attached with a race against time to understand its meaning.

 

Director F. Javier Gutierrez evidently knows the series that was only two deep back in 2005 as he maintains the tone and feeling that bought the franchise to the mainstream West. The most interesting thing to pick out is that the previous entries were not scary horror films and instead put the story of a troubled girl at the centre of a supernatural thriller. That theme continues here as RINGS never manages to raise more than a slight shiver at the anticipation of something that never comes.

 

Add into this a complex story of the origins of Samara and it’s hard to read past why this was ever a RING film as it feels more akin to an original thriller with the title and characters tagged in. This entry has come 10 years too late and anyone who still has interest in the American remakes has hopefully grown up to understand that the Japanese origins are much better and scarier than any of the translations.

 

Lutz and Roe manage to keep attention on the plot and there are some interesting tweaks on the supernatural but all in all, RINGS fails to capture the spark of the series and suffers from the delay which requires knowledge of its predecessors before entry.

 

Yet, beyond all of that, there’s a love for a franchise like this that the genre NEEDS. Back in the last decade where SCREAM, I KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER and FINAL DESTINATION gave us cheap thrills, memorable deaths and a buzz when any sequel announcement was released, so THE RING franchise manages to fill a void in mainstream horror. Take into account that this entry will be one of the most visited in cinemas despite poor reviews and an overall forgettable experience. And why shouldn’t we celebrate that? Where films like THE WITCH and THE NEON DEMON divide critics, the real loser is an audience not bought into the artistic horror trope that has taken a wave over the genre in recent years. An audience of cinema goers don’t go to their Cineplex for horror and prefer the big budget popcorn cinema that is offered ten a penny, and RINGS joins that overlap of popcorn horror. It may not be the best experience but I now look back at the Freddy and Jason sequels with love and nostalgia for what was once mere regret.

 

So raise a bag of popcorn and admit that RINGS isn’t going to win over horror fans, but will certainly give non-horror fans something to cherish and ween their way to the dark side.

Director: F. Javier Gutierrez

Released: 3rd February 2017

Running Time: 107 minutes

Age Rating: 15

 

Reviewer: Martyn Wakefield

RATING



Plot: 3

Fear: 2

Gore: 1



R3/5​