Did this movie just age really poorly?

I just watched it for the first time and thought both the original and remake had their strong and weak points. But I have to say what and who's she's willing to sacrifice in the original makes that ending far more sinister than in ours.

Similar thoughts, I do not think it aged poorly, just fast. It was fast Nosferatu effect, It started a popular genre, but, the body count is 2. And there is nothing scary about the way they get killed. I loved the way she comes out of the T.V. but that is about it. The remake was better in my opinion because it was a very original slasher at the time, and much faster paced with much more things going on and a higher body count, at least much more entertaining and even scarier to me.

I think it aged fantastically. I saw it recently for the first time after seeing the remake and loved it. I thought the tape was actually scarier as it felt more subdued and creepy on a psycological level. Samara's scenes already gave me chills, but Sadako's drained all the blood from my veins. The pacing never bothered me either. The scenes were eerily subdued which I liked, but they never overstayed their welcome.

It`s finely shot and the director really seems to have had a sensitive hand getting down the creepy, sinister parts. Some genuinely unsettling imagery there; a sense of unease induced by nothing more than the camera lingering on the waves, the heavy rain... not to mention a bloody TV screen so dark it seems to threaten to swallow one up. It works quite well, all in all.



"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

I thought the remake had more of a haunting atmosphere, but the original made a lot more sense. I'll compare the two. (for reference, I saw The Ring before Ringu)

-The Ring had a longer video tape, which was a lot scarier, but the original Ringu tape was to the point and every scene contained a clue of some sort. The Ring's video tape added shots and made the clues harder to find, which definitely made it spookier, but the original tape idea made a bit more sense.

-Ryuji was a psychic, and I remember no reference to that being made in The Ring at all. When I saw Ringu and realized that, it helped explain a lot of things I was confused about

-The scene with Sadako in the room. I don't remember exactly what that scene did for The Ring, since it has been a while since I last saw it, but that scene wasn't in Ringu, and I thought it worked out nicely. Of course, it did make The Ring spookier.

Overall, I think I enjoy Ringu more, but The Ring did improve on it in some ways. The ring had more of a spooky horror atmosphere than Ringu, which I felt played out more like a drama than horror, but I didn't find either film to be scary, so I prefer the tighter storytelling in Ringu to the added atmosphere of The Ring. They both have their merits though.

What do you consider a scary movie? Honest question, not an attack. List some movies you find scary. Just out of curiosity.

Personally I don't find it outright "scary" as such but I think it has a nice creepy atmosphere and story. I like it better than the remake. I prefer movies like this to the kind of in-your-face stuff that seems to be more popular in the horror genre right now.

"The comfort of the rich depends upon an abundant supply of the poor."
- Voltaire