Why The Ring Two Isn't As Bad As People Think

gamerant.com:

Sequels are a difficult subject. It's hard not to want to see more from favorite characters, especially when the first film does such a good job, whether the script is hilarious or dramatic. With horror movies, a sequel is an equally tough concept, particularly when the original is such a massive hit. The Ring was released in 2002 and people were drawn into the story of a videotape that could kill people after they saw it.

The Ring Two didn't reach the same popularity with critics not loving it at all. In the second movie, Rachel (Naomi Watts) and her son Aidan (David Dorfman) are still dealing with Samara's influence on their life, and this time, there's a big threat to their lives as people wonder if Rachel is hurting Aidan.

Scream: The Best Fan Theories About The Upcoming Sequel

While the original movie is always going to be the best and most memorable, there are some things that horror fans can appreciate about The Ring Two.

Samara is a unique horror character and also a horror movie villain who can't be killed. While Rachel does defeat her at the end of The Ring Two, Samara takes over Julia's (Matilda Lutz) body at the end of Rings, the third movie in the franchise. The third film is meant to happen right after the first one, so there's a different timeline to consider. The movies manage to make Samara feel evil and impossible to beat while also making her a somewhat easy character to sympathize with since she was treated so horribly. The sequel doesn't just repeat how creepy Samara is in the first film with her long black hair that goes over her eyes and her super slow movements, but the sequel adds to the creep factor, so it feels well-earned.

In The Ring Two, Samara plays a big role in the story in two ways: because