Discover Trending Search Saved Menu
Rings
Rings — First you watch it. Then you die.
2017 5 90.1K PG-13 views saved
Active recipe:

Rings

2017 5 90.1K PG-13 views saved
Rings

Julia becomes worried about her boyfriend Holt when he explores the dark urban legend of a mysterious videotape 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.

Countries: US
Languages: English
Content Rating: PG-13
Runtime: 1hrs 42min
Status: Released
Release date: 2017-02-01
Release format: Streaming — Feb 02, 2017
Comments
orlando gutierrez
@orlandojericho1992 8 years ago

It is not that bad, i mean is not a good movie, but it is better than the second one, I didn't like it but i didn't hate it.

2
orlando gutierrez
@orlandojericho1992 8 years ago

It is not that bad, i mean is not a good movie, but it is better than the second one, I didn't like it but i didn't hate it.

2
The Ace Face
@the-ace-face 1 year ago

Really enjoyed this one. The mystery unravels and kept me on the edge of my seat awaiting the outcome. Well worth a watch. 8/10.

1
D.seL
@dsel 4 years ago

Really enjoyed it. Not as creepy as it's predecessors, but fills in a ton of back story.

0
d2freak
@d2freak 7 years ago

Much better than I thought it would be. I didn't expect much though. It has that creepy vibe but it's also kinda interesting. Funny seeing Leonard in it as well.

0
Lorna
@angel1online 5 years ago

It’s ok...watchable, but nothing new or fantastic.

1
Yuri Nunes
@youree 5 years ago

Well, not as bad as I thought it would be, keep your expectations below zero and you'll actually enjoy it and try not compare it to the first one (hard thing to do tho)

1
Jim222001
@jim222001 8 years ago

Tries something different and has a somewhat better plot than the second one. Probably would have been better with Naomi Watts starring though. There's mostly a second rate cast with the exception of Vincent D'Onfrio and Johnny Galecki (The Big Bang Theory).
The movie kept my attention until it totally falls apart by the end.

1
Mounir
@mounirabbas 7 years ago

horrible movie. like the old one.

0
Cocotus
@cocotus 8 years ago

I agree with the people in the comments. If I hadn't seen the original movies of the franchise, it would be an okay horror flick I guess. I remember what a fresh feel the original asian "The Ring": Great acting, good story, great actors. Overall great package. This movie is a remake of the successfull franchise and.. well it failed. Some people say it was good but when you ask them if they have ever seen the original films most haven't. Especially the acting is extremely weak here, as the viewer is given no character you actually care about. A disappointment. :(

0
CinemanicBonkers
@cinemanicbonkers 8 years ago

Knowing the bad ratings, bad reviews and that it topped the budget on most films in the cinema, I went into it with an open mind and came out of it with lots of disappointments, like watching the video and getting the 7 days to live curse so go with the ratings & reviews, you won't be missing anything good but I'll leave that to you to watch the video tape yourself. I got exited for a few years after hearing this film was in development being a fan of the Japanese classic and now I wish it was still in development, re-done, the right cast or some of the same cast, more effort into it, better effects, more action, a lest be creepy, didn't mash the story up or rush it and with the original story without the crap twist on the curse/story that just didn't feel like the Ring to me. I didn't think much of the other American version of 2 but lest they tried to live up to the Japanese versions that hands down were a horror but this was a waste of my time & money and needs to be thrown down the well because it's one ugly piece of work like the spirit herself.

8
Recommendations
two-tone-background No results found! Please adjust your filters or try again.