I'm sure it will be shitty, but it looks like i'm going to be seeing it tomorrow.
I've read some pretty shitty things about it so far. My friend told me the review he read said that if you can sit through the first 90 min (which is pretty much the entire film) the last half hour is supposed to be amazing. I dont know how much truth there it to that, so this is why I'm asking.

It's ok. The first was clearly the better. However, I have been trying to think of how someone could make a sequel to a movie like the ring. You already know what the bad guy is so it makes it hard to make it actually scary. They just make you jump. I think the plot is ok. It's nothing that great. Hardly worth the 9.75 I paid for it.

EDIT: The scene in the bathtub is really freaking amazing technically speaking though. On the other hand, the deer are horrible.

My favorite critic hated it, but I know a few people who enjoyed it. It's interesting how Hideo Nakata (maker of both Ringu and Ringu 2) directed this instead of the director from the first Ring, which I enjoyed.

That stuff about the first 90 minutes sucking and the last 1/2 being good is totally backwards. The movie does a good (albeit slow) job of building up and introducing slow, creepy changes in the son's behavior, and then the end just over-explains everything and craps out into an obvious and unsatisfying surprise ending.

I dig Naomi Watts so I'll probably check it out. I actually only saw the first one recently and it was pretty good.

Steve

it was ok. wouldn't go as far to say 'good.'

It can't be good...

i have never been so bored in my life as i was in that movie. the most amazing thing about it was the utter lack of warmth between mother and child long before anything goes wrong. what a stinkbomb. also, it looks like shit, with some sloppy cgi sequences that don't look up to ps2 quality.