According to traditional logic, Gore Verbinski’s The Ring (2002) is a movie that ought not work, since it’s both a PG-13-rated horror picture and a remake—two things that are often cited as the source of everything that’s wrong with the horror genre these days. What The Ring proves, I think, is that it’s not the PG-13 that’s the problem; it’s that the films are generally pitched at undiscriminating teens. As for the remake complaint, well, that’s only a problem if you bring nothing to the table and make a film that’s inferior to the original. I’d argue that The Ring not only brings much to the table, but is an improvement over the Japanese Ringu (1998) in every way. (I’m sure I’ll get an argument on this.) The two films have the same basic premise—that if you watch a certain videotape, you die in one week—but there’s greater artistry and added detail and depth in the remake. In fact, it may just be the creepiest film of its decade. When it came out, I ranked it as markedly inferior to the previous year’s The Others. Now, I’m not so sure.
Before you comment
The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.