For some unknown reason, the horror film genre is expected to beat itself down until it is dead – no pun intended.
When one convincingly good movie stands out in the low-budget, schlocky mess of mangled bodies, knife-wielding maniacs and creepy little kids looking askance in creepy little ways, the Hollywood industry feels the need to shovel it down the throats of the public until they eventually battle each other and end the misery for a decade or so.
Why are sequels necessary for horror films at all? In the original film, we have already seen the monster, watched him carve up the victims and jumped at each scary moment while others laughed at how stupid it all seemed. So what’s the point? The answer is more than mere marketing.
We love to be scared, and there is no better way than by someone we already know and love. At least that’s the theory. Unfortunately, there are rarely any sequels that live up to the original when it comes to pure scariness.
This year’s newest horror sequel is “The Ring Two,” the follow up to the hugely successful 2002 film “The Ring.”
In the director’s chair this time, however, is Hideo Nakata, who not only directed the original “Ringu” on which the American series is based, but he also directed the original movie’s sequel, “Ringu 2.” This incestuous moviemaking is dizzying, but the choice for Nakata is sound since this film is more subdued and deliberate than its predecessor.
In this film, Rachel (Naomi Watts) and her son Aidan (David Dorfman) have moved down the coast to Astoria, Oregon (also home to those kids from “The Goonies”) and away from the nightmarish videotape that caused so much pain in the first film. However, a murder occurs with circumstances strikingly similar to previous events, and as Rachel investigates, she finds the original tape.
Soon, creepy ghost child Samara (Kelly Stables) begins stalking Aidan, wishing to take over his body and become a real girl again. Rachel must investigate, again, the history of Samara in order to defeat her, coming to terms not only with the supernatural and silly forces around her but also plunging headfirst into that damn well once more.
What made the original film work was its dual nature as a supernatural horror film/murder-mystery story, which retained the audience’s interest longer than would a normal slasher film.
The sequel attempts the same formula but begins it too late and with not nearly enough conflict or suspense as is necessary for it to succeed. About an hour into the film, Rachel investigates the past, but she never really discovers anything too difficult for her to handle.
Sissy Spacek appears as Samara’s crazy birth mother, but her advice is taken to a tee and with no second thoughts, which could have added some depth, intrigue or even meaning to the film.
The film has some good ideas to work with, in particular a plot twist in which Rachel is thought to have post-partum depression, at which point Aidan is taken away from her. But this devolves into merely a plot device to get Rachel into her investigation, and nothing more arises from it. Stop the spread of sequels, and don’t see this one.
Jason Bolte can be reached at [email protected].
Naomi Watts, left, plays Rachel, who tries to forget her past but stumbles on the original tape. Rachel must redefeat the evil Samara (Kelly Stables), right, who tries to take over the body of her son Aidan (David Dorfman). (Dreamworks)
