Hey, everyone. "Moriarty" here with some Rumblings From The Lab.
Just flipping channels a moment ago, I happened past ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT and their Fall Movie Preview, where they showed clips from a movie called SEVEN DAYS starring Naomi Watts as a reporter who becomes involved in a horrific situation involving a cursed videotape, a phone call, and...
... hey, wait a minute. That’s RING. When did you guys change the title? And what’s the deal with just slipping it out there? This is a fairly high-profile picture, and it seems odd to change your title and not announce it officially. I’ll follow up at the start of next week to see what DreamWorks has to say about this.
In the meantime, one of our readers got a peek at the film this week. Here’s “The Keen Guy” with his take on things:
Let me say this first about horror films. It is my opinion that it is usually the worst film genre there is. It's easy to write, because it doesn't have to involved any sort of theme whatsoever. People are getting killed, and you can't say that's not interesting, so that's your movie! My opinion is this, for a horror movie to be interesting, it has to either be tongue-in-cheek (like the EVIL DEAD films) so that it is entertaining, or it has to have characters so interesting that it would make for an interesting film even if it wasn't a horror film (like, say, NEEDFUL THINGS). Oh, and I guess there's a third category for horror films that actually deal with compelling themes (which isn't often), like THE SIXTH SENSE, which not only falls in the second category, but is also a parable for racism. Once you get past how a person looks, once you actually open a line of communication with them, you realize they are basically good! people. THE SIXTH SENSE's message about how ill-communcation is the root of most problems is really interesting, and the horror element is just a way of getting to that.
RING doesn't really have anything like that on its mind. It's only theme could may be "If you do something bad to someone, bad things will continue to happen as a result FOREVER." The "forever" part is pretty illogical, but then, RING is not a movie concerned with logic. It has to be said right away, RING is a SUPERNATURAL movie. Don't expect logical answers to all the questions that are raised throughout the movie. They never come.
This movie reminded me of MOTHMAN PROPHECIES... well, the first half of MOTHMAN PROPHECIES, seeing as I walked out on that film after that. The thing with that film is that it was a lot of spooky things happening that didn't seem to have any connection or relevance, and you had no idea what it was leading up to, and you didn't care. At least in RING, the moment is pregnant...
Rachel (Naomi Watts), a reporter, watches a video tape of very scary images (it could easily be the next Nine Inch Nails music video) and then receives a phone call saying she will die exactly seven days after she watched the video. So she has until then to figure out how to stop it. Her niece already died a week after she saw the video when her heart simply stopped (oh, and she sort of melted too). Turns out, the three friends with whom the niece watched the video also died at exactly the same time as the niece.
Rachel starts researching, figuring out the identities of the people in the video, finding the locations shown. A journalistic friend, Noah (Martin Henderson, reeking of Brad Pitt-iness) helps her out. Apparently, he is the father of Rachel's child... A child who is surprisingly mature (as many children in movies are, since screenwriter's don't want to have to write a character with a voice not exactly like their own) and who seems to have an ability to INTERACT WITH THE DEAD. That's right, this is almost the same character as the children in THE SIXTH SENSE and STIR OF ECHOES.
Let me compare this to MINORITY REPORT for a minute, as they both with have similar problems. There are similar elements about "Can you change fate?" and disconnection between parents and children... and the event that instigates both movies are illogical. In MINORITY REPORT, the whole movie is sprung from the precogs' vision of a murder that would NOT have occurred unless the precogs had predicted it, which they predicted of their own volition. They saw a future that would not have happened unless they saw it, and of course, they would not have seen it unless they wanted to will it to happen. Why did the precogs decide to instigate a murder? There is no logical reason.
Similarly, with RING, we never understand the motivation behind the killing that started it all. And we never understand how the killer video tape got started, why it got started, why it had to be that way, how that way works specifically, how some of the people are killed when they are not near TVs, why there is no sticker on the tape saying "Don't Watch This, but if you do, make a copy or you will die." You walk out of RING confused but not compelled... You are trying to figure out the point of the film, but it is not a point that is going to ever translate to your own life in any sort of literal or metaphorical way... So what's the point of this movie?
The point is just for a few good scares. That does it for some people, the kind of people who like being scared by a movie, you know? And certainly, though this film is a wash on a cerebral level, on a visceral level it is very suspenseful throughout with some fine scares, especially in the big scene near the end... the second end. Some of the scenes could use work, such as the opening scene, with is FAR too reminiscent of SCREAM's infamous opening with Drew Barrymore. There is also a scary horse-related scene on a barge... though the large role that horses play in the movie is never made relevant, never explained. This is simply a movie about scares, not about logic.
The movie has cast virtual unknowns in the leads, which is an interesting choice, even though it is a waste of even their virtually-unknown talent. Naomi Watts is fine in the film (lord knows she has been better in a certain other film). She shows she can carry a female lead perfectly well. And I actually like Martin Henderson a lot, but these are two actors I wish I could actually watch in something more compelling, more ground in reality. And I like Gore Verbinski's work, although he's never had an extraordinary script to work with (THE MEXICAN is still the best thing he's done, and that's only so good). But for now, this is all we've got.
Oh, and once again, this is a film with a bad title. RING. Not only is it bound to cause some confusion with LORD OF THE RINGS, but the "ring" in question has almost no relevance to the movie whatsoever. "Ring" is actually only spoken only once in the movie, I think... so it is certainly a movie that could easily be retitled. Let's see if they do.
This is The Keen Guy.
Thanks, man, and I got your review for THE RECRUIT, another recently retitled film, as well, and will run that later in the weekend. I appreciate it.
"Moriarty" out.
