The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Ah, you know the drill by now.
[URL]http://www.theshiznit.co.uk/index.php[/URL]
Damn, that little kid was eerie. And extremely ugly. Almost distractingly so. Not that I should be finding young boys attractive, but you get the drift.
[URL]http://www.theshiznit.co.uk/index.php[/URL]
Damn, that little kid was eerie. And extremely ugly. Almost distractingly so. Not that I should be finding young boys attractive, but you get the drift.
Page:
She was investigating how ryugi died, so she follows the same trail that the characters in the first film take.
Quite a few elements are from the original story but arn't explained too well, they make the copy because in the original story it's a virus not a curse.
The point is that the curse can never be stopped, they never get rid of her.
--------------
Thinking about it though if you watch the 3rd film you might be left with more questions.
Quite a few elements are from the original story but arn't explained too well, they make the copy because in the original story it's a virus not a curse.
The point is that the curse can never be stopped, they never get rid of her.
--------------
Thinking about it though if you watch the 3rd film you might be left with more questions.
Yes. I like films that make sense and have a storyline which has had atleast some thought put into it.
The characters just seem to figure things out, then go and do their thing, hardly ever explaining what the hell they're doing.
Hugging Sadako to break the curse, then, oh noes, not really, I just realised, you have to show the video to someone else, of course!
--
How ever shall we get rid of Sadako this time.... Ermm.. How about lots of wires, a TV and a swimming pool, yes, that sounds about right!
What was the main character actually supposed to be doing in the second film? I never quite got that, it just seemed like she had a good idea to find Yoichi, then run around for a bit.
The characters just seem to figure things out, then go and do their thing, hardly ever explaining what the hell they're doing.
Hugging Sadako to break the curse, then, oh noes, not really, I just realised, you have to show the video to someone else, of course!
--
How ever shall we get rid of Sadako this time.... Ermm.. How about lots of wires, a TV and a swimming pool, yes, that sounds about right!
What was the main character actually supposed to be doing in the second film? I never quite got that, it just seemed like she had a good idea to find Yoichi, then run around for a bit.
Emitime wrote:
> I've seen two.
>
> I don't really see how seeing a movie improves another two.
The point of seeing all 3 would to get a more complete story.
The 3rd one is before sadako dies and basically her life before her trip down he Well.
I enjoy them mostly because before i saw them a few years ago i had only really seen these crappy jumpy films that everyone likes to make.
If you don' like these types of films fair enough everyone has different tastes.
> I've seen two.
>
> I don't really see how seeing a movie improves another two.
The point of seeing all 3 would to get a more complete story.
The 3rd one is before sadako dies and basically her life before her trip down he Well.
I enjoy them mostly because before i saw them a few years ago i had only really seen these crappy jumpy films that everyone likes to make.
If you don' like these types of films fair enough everyone has different tastes.
Chippxero wrote:
> Emitime wrote:
> This all reffering to the originals by the way.
>
> Chippxero... You're wrong. They're terrible.
>
> If you've seen all 3 and thats your opinion fair enough,
I've seen two.
I don't really see how seeing a movie improves another two.
> Emitime wrote:
> This all reffering to the originals by the way.
>
> Chippxero... You're wrong. They're terrible.
>
> If you've seen all 3 and thats your opinion fair enough,
I've seen two.
I don't really see how seeing a movie improves another two.
Emitime wrote:
> This all reffering to the originals by the way.
>
> Chippxero... You're wrong. They're terrible.
If you've seen all 3 and thats your opinion fair enough,
> This all reffering to the originals by the way.
>
> Chippxero... You're wrong. They're terrible.
If you've seen all 3 and thats your opinion fair enough,
Mr Snuggly wrote:
> Ah, you know the drill by now.
> [URL]http://www.theshiznit.co.uk/index.php[/URL]
"He’s one fugly kid and is often just as scary as the soggy Samara, who, sadly, is mostly rendered in CGI this time around."
I swear it said on an MTV2 'making of' thingy yesterday that they never used a single bit of CGI on her.
> Ah, you know the drill by now.
> [URL]http://www.theshiznit.co.uk/index.php[/URL]
"He’s one fugly kid and is often just as scary as the soggy Samara, who, sadly, is mostly rendered in CGI this time around."
I swear it said on an MTV2 'making of' thingy yesterday that they never used a single bit of CGI on her.
Emitime wrote:
> Oh dear. How can you call these movies good... In the slightest. This
> was far better than the first though, that doesn't make it good
> though.
>
> I think it had a storyline. I couldn't really tell though.
>
> Actually. Thinking about it. What the hell happend?
This all reffering to the originals by the way.
Chippxero... You're wrong. They're terrible.
> Oh dear. How can you call these movies good... In the slightest. This
> was far better than the first though, that doesn't make it good
> though.
>
> I think it had a storyline. I couldn't really tell though.
>
> Actually. Thinking about it. What the hell happend?
This all reffering to the originals by the way.
Chippxero... You're wrong. They're terrible.
It'll be crap...
EDIT: And yes, how UGLY is that kid!?
EDIT: And yes, how UGLY is that kid!?
Rachel is the boy's mother?! Why the hell doesn't he call her 'mum' then?
It's apparantly more arthouse than most horror flicks. Watching it tonight.
Page: