Utterly spiritless: Rings review by Rashid Irani
The film maintains a glacial pace throughout, with false scares and artsy imagery that totally fail to scare.Updated: Feb 10, 2017 16:59 IST
Direction: F Javier Gutierrez
Actors: Matilda Lutz, Alex Roe
Rating: 0.5 / 5
It started back in 1998 with a smart Japanese supernatural thriller called Ringu. Sensing its crossover potential, Hollywood subsequently produced an English-language remake.
While the 2002 American interpretation, The Ring, was effective, its sequel, The Ring Two (2005), was a damp squib.
Hoping in vain to cash in on the original film’s allure, this redundant US threequel belatedly circulates the cursed videotape all over again.
This time around, it’s a teenager (Italian model Matilda Lutz, somnambulistic) and her hunky college boyfriend (Alex Roe) who are the unsuspecting victims. Having viewed the now-digitised VHS footage, they are marked for death within seven days.
Following not one but two inept prologues — the script, by the way, is attributed to five writers — the duo-in-distress attempts to get to the heart of the mystery of the vengeful spirit.
Director F Javier Gutierrez maintains a glacial pace throughout. He resorts to false scares and the sort of artsy imagery that is indicative of the desperation of the enterprise.
The aim of Rings may have been to revive a long-dormant horror franchise, but the outcome is likely to be forgotten even before all the end credits have rolled.
Watch trailer for Rings here
First Published: Feb 10, 2017 16:59 IST