The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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:
The Ring
The Grudge
The Jap's Eye
All terrible films. Except that last one.
The Grudge
The Jap's Eye
All terrible films. Except that last one.
Mr Snuggly wrote:
> Ah, you know the drill by now.
> [URL]http://www.theshiznit.co.uk/index.php[/URL]
Pfft that first paragraph of the review/rant is complete rubbish,
"the fact that the US version was a damn sight better and went some way to explaining elements that the original conveniently forgot about"
The originals are a complete story when you have watched them all, sure the story is completely different from the books but the originals at least got closer to them that the naf US version, what the funk was the thing about horses, in the remake?
The US version just made stuff up to allow people to follow it easily without them definatly having to do a follow-up to the film.
"Turns out I needn’t have worried too much. For starters, it’s a completely new storyline"
Yeah with quite a few scenes that are almost identical.
I don't really like reading a good book then seening a film made badly about it, but when another film is made badly based on the film based on the book it just gets silly.
-------------------------------
On a side note Ring the game for the dreamcast is about the closest media i have found to the original books apart from maybe the korean version of the film.
-------------------------------
If anyones interested this is one of my housemates websites, he has his dissertation animation up which is a trailer for a fictional Ring game. take a look.
EDIT: forgot to post the link
[URL]http://davidbowlesportfolio.tripod.com/id2.html[/URL]
> Ah, you know the drill by now.
> [URL]http://www.theshiznit.co.uk/index.php[/URL]
Pfft that first paragraph of the review/rant is complete rubbish,
"the fact that the US version was a damn sight better and went some way to explaining elements that the original conveniently forgot about"
The originals are a complete story when you have watched them all, sure the story is completely different from the books but the originals at least got closer to them that the naf US version, what the funk was the thing about horses, in the remake?
The US version just made stuff up to allow people to follow it easily without them definatly having to do a follow-up to the film.
"Turns out I needn’t have worried too much. For starters, it’s a completely new storyline"
Yeah with quite a few scenes that are almost identical.
I don't really like reading a good book then seening a film made badly about it, but when another film is made badly based on the film based on the book it just gets silly.
-------------------------------
On a side note Ring the game for the dreamcast is about the closest media i have found to the original books apart from maybe the korean version of the film.
-------------------------------
If anyones interested this is one of my housemates websites, he has his dissertation animation up which is a trailer for a fictional Ring game. take a look.
EDIT: forgot to post the link
[URL]http://davidbowlesportfolio.tripod.com/id2.html[/URL]
It was like a pop video I saw a while back.
Just watched the original sequel and the trailer for the western sequel suggests it is quite different.
Didnt find the first jap one to be any better than the western one. Maybe it depends upon which you saw first?
Didnt find the first jap one to be any better than the western one. Maybe it depends upon which you saw first?
Hedfix wrote:
> It was the 'climbing the well' bit that broke it for me.
>
> That bit was not scary, but it was naff.
Thats one of the few bits i remember from the second film, memorable.
> It was the 'climbing the well' bit that broke it for me.
>
> That bit was not scary, but it was naff.
Thats one of the few bits i remember from the second film, memorable.
It was the 'climbing the well' bit that broke it for me.
That bit was not scary, but it was naff.
That bit was not scary, but it was naff.
Hedfix wrote:
> The original sequel (hur hur) was just on and it was a real mixed bag.
> Some bits were nice and scary and other bits reeked of dodgy
> stopmotion and claymation rubbish.
I thought it was supposed to be like that, i like Sadako's jerky way of moving.
> The original sequel (hur hur) was just on and it was a real mixed bag.
> Some bits were nice and scary and other bits reeked of dodgy
> stopmotion and claymation rubbish.
I thought it was supposed to be like that, i like Sadako's jerky way of moving.
The original sequel (hur hur) was just on and it was a real mixed bag. Some bits were nice and scary and other bits reeked of dodgy stopmotion and claymation rubbish.
Not bad though.
Not bad though.
Ahh, original number 2 on right now. To hell with this.
Urge to kill... rising...
Page: