Me and my girlfriend went to see this together, expecting it to be bad.We are both big horror movie fans. I loved Friday the 13th, Hellraiser,and I seriously enjoyed the new Ouija movie also. (so did mygirlfriend) anyway we went to the theater expecting a "meh" and mostlybad movie, but this was just HORRIBLE. The acting was beyond cringe,and we had more fun laughing and making fun of the movie then we didactually watching the movie. Nothing made sense and it felt like theywere making it up as they went. It was not even slightly scary, longand boring, bad acting, horrible plot, and pointless things happeningthat had no connection. It also basically just re told the first storyas well. I do not recommend wasting your money on this horrible movie.
Rings (2017) 720p YIFY Movie
A young woman finds herself on the receiving end of a terrifying curse that threatens to take her life in seven days.
IMDB: 4.516 Likes
The Synopsis for Rings (2017) 720p
Julia becomes worried about her boyfriend, Holt, when he explores the dark urban legend of a mysterious video said to kill the watcher seven days after viewing. She sacrifices herself to save her boyfriend and in doing so makes a horrifying discovery: there is a "movie within the movie" that no one has ever seen before.
The Director and Players for Rings (2017) 720p
The Reviews for Rings (2017) 720p
Reviewed byHunter AvalloneVote: 1/10/10
Sequels are watched based upon the strength of their predecessors. Itis known that most sequels aren't as good but sometimes the firstinstallment was so good that the sequel can never live up to it and nordoes it have to to be appreciated. The Ring was the scariest movie I'dseen in 20 years. I remember being genuinely spooked when watching thatmovie. Part two wasn't as good but it was watchable. Rings, on theother hand, was trash.
We all know the premise by now: watch the video, get a phone call andthen you have seven days to live. We all know who Samara is and we allknow what she does to her victims, so that avenue is cutoff as far asgenerating scares. Where do you go from there then if you want to tryto cash in on the Samara craze one more time?
In Rings a professor discovers the Samara video and watches it. He alsofinds out that in order to stop the impending death all he has to do isrecord it and have someone else watch it. He then decides to turn thisinto an experiment in order to answer some elusive metaphysicalquestions. He ensures that all of his subjects are able to shake theSamara curse by recording the video and having another person watch it.Of course this would be a never ending chain of video watching butwhatever. In steps the main characters, two lovebirds that are primescary movie age (18-25).
The writers completely mailed this one in. There was no real thoughtgiven to how they would revive the Samara story. There was nolegitimate path for the main character, Julia (Matilda Lutz), to beinserted into this movie yet the writers clumsily shoe horned her inthere; which meant I had to be assaulted by her poor acting the entiremovie. In fact, I'd say that was the scariest thing: her acting.
With no fresh and innovative means to scare its audience the directorrelied on cheap jump scares: suddenly opening umbrella, barking dog,truck horn, breaking glass, etc. Not one of these lousy attempts atspooking the viewer even managed to register a single uptick in heartrate. This movie was lame from the word "go".
They did attempt to legitimize the movie by casting actors such as TheBig Bang Theory's Johnny Galecki and veteran actor Vincent D'Onofriobut their talents were wasted. This movie was an abysmal failure andeven though Samara may not be dead and gone this franchise certainlyis.
You may be aware that the release of 2017's "Rings" (PG-13, 1:57) camea dozen years after the previous American sequel in the "Ring"franchise, or even that the very first "Ring" film was Japanese, butmost people aren't aware of how the story began and how far-reaching ithas become. The story of people dying seven days after watching thestrange images on a mysterious videotape was first told in a trilogy ofbooks by Japanese author Koji Suzuki in the 1990s. The first novel in"The Ring Trilogy" was simply titled "Rings" and was published in 1991.In Japan, it inspired two manga adaptations, a 1995 film ("Ring:Kanzenban"), a TV series ("Ring: The Final Chapter"), another movieversion (1998's "Ring", also known as "Ringu") and a sequel (1999's"Ringu 2"), followed by two remakes of the 1998 film, one from SouthKorea ("The Ring Virus" in 1999) and the other from the U.S. ("TheRing" in 2002). The American version made over five times what it costso, naturally, there was a sequel. The profits for "The Ring Two"(released in 2005) "only" tripled its budget and was also rated muchlower than the previous film by both critics and audiences. The successof "The Ring" led to the American remakes of other Japanese horrorfilms such as "The Grudge" (and its sequel), "Dark Water" and "Pulse",but the diminishing "Ring" returns and reviews probably contributed tothe 12 year gap between "The Ring Two" and "Rings".
Updating the story for a new decade means that, rather on VHS tape, thedeadly video at the center of the story is now being stored as adigital file and is viewable on a variety of devices, making the clipall the more ubiquitous and dangerous. Remaining the same, however,is the origin of the video (a murdered girl named Samara reaching outfor vengeance from beyond the grave) plus the way in which the video'scurse is carried forward (the viewer receiving a phone call with acreepy female voice on the other end seeing strange things that are notthere and then dying exactly seven days after watching the video,unless he or she copies the video and dupes some other poor schmuckinto watching it before the week is out). We see the culmination ofthis pattern play out in the first scene on an airplane flight duringwhich a handsome young man explains his nervousness to an incredulousfemale passenger by explaining, just as the plane is about to land,that he only has to "make it" through a few more minutes.
Julia and Holt (Matilda Lutz and Alex Roe) are just two teenagers inlove who are about to find themselves deep in a well of malevolence.Holt is heading off to college, while Julia stays back in theirhometown to take care of her ailing mother. Texts, phone calls andSkype sessions keep the relationship going until Holt suddenly andinexplicably stops answering Julia's calls. Desperate, Julia jumps inher car and drives to Holt's college where he is nowhere to be foundand where those who know him either don't know where he is or won'tsay. Julia knows that Holt has been getting extra credit by working ona project for Gabriel, his biology professor (Johnny Galecki), but theprof denies knowing who Holt is, so Julia follows him to another floorof the classroom building to see what's up. She finds herself in a roomfull of students, video screens and digital clocks which are labeledwith various students' names and which are counting down from variouspoints in time. Julia follows a panicked student named Skye (AimeeTeegarden). Skye admits that she knows where Holt is but, beforeexplaining further says, "I have to show you something first". Skyetakes Julia home and Julia sees texts from Holt on Skye's phone. Julialearns about the cursed video and that Holt watched it almost exactlyseven full days earlier so she watches it in order to save Holt,which starts her own proverbial clock ticking. But the video Julia seesis a little different from the previous versions. There are even moredisturbing, surreal and seemingly random images in Julia's video andher experience is different from everyone else's. With Holt's help,Julia follows the clues in her video and the visions that she startsseeing so she can unravel the mystery, save her own life and maybefinally give Samara's spirit some peace. This quest ends up in a smalltown, where they meet a secretive B&B owner (Jill Jane Clements) andthe caretaker (Vincent D'Onofrio) of the grounds of a former church, asthey learn of the disappearance of another young girl 30 years earlier,all of which adds background to the version of this saga that began in"The Ring".
"Rings" is both enjoyable and frustrating. Updating the technologyinvolved with watching, copying and sharing the infamous Samara videoopens up more possibilities for story-telling, while delving deeperinto Samara's sad history adds interesting background and also takesthe tale of the tape in some cool new directions. On the other hand,the script's lack of exposition makes the movie hard to follow and theacting is somewhat lacking. The ending brings most of it together well,but getting there will put you through the wringer. "B"