Why was the ghost girl (Natasha) from Dark Water so evil and cruel?

I wouldn't mind hearing some elaboration on that. I can see why someone might prefer the original but it seems similar enough that I don't understand how it could be vastly inferior, unless it removes some crucial storytelling beat that I'm not aware of.

Probably necessary to specify, in any case, which was seen first, as I think that tends to have an outsized effect.

I think hijacking this thread is maybe a little okay since I think the OP's original question/issue has been mostly addressed.

I've seen the Japanese versions first for all the major J-horrors. That probably has something to do with it, but I don't think it's that important factor.

It's kind of difficult to elaborate on this that much. I think it's mostly about the general feel and cultural differences in portraying horror; as far as I understand Ringu is at its core very traditional Japanese ghost story (the book isn't, by the way, and this is one of the few cases where I heavily favor the movie - also The Ring is clearly a remake of the movie, not a filming of the book). I don't think that The Ring managed to transfer that into the West that well. I think the remake is at its best when it tries to build Samara into a more Western monster (the newly paced hospital tape at the end is my favorite scene of the film), but too often it just feels like a watered-down version of a story that doesn't translate to its environment.

For whatever reason, Ringu feels suspenseful and "scary" even after multiple viewings, but I never felt anything like that with The Ring. That's the best I can do without rewatching both films with this question in mind (something I'm not likely to do any time soon).

__________________

Exactly. That's why I usually can't bring myself to hate entities like that, even if they are behaving like evil. Many of them (though certainly not all) are of questionable sentience and cannot be held accountable.

It's like blaming a shark for eating cute marine mammals.

__________________
How am I supposed to find someone willing to go into that musty old claptrap?

Ring got me so hyped up for J Horror many years ago. I wouldn’t watch anything other than Asian Horror. The original Ring, American remake and Korean remake (Ring Virus) all have their differences and are worth checking out. I think it’s when you get into sequel territory they start to disappoint.

Just one more question: Why does Dahlia have to stay with Natasha forever? What I mean is, why does her surrogacy have to last all of eternity? Why don't they just cross over into the afterlife?

Yeah, I dunno. Maybe someone else who knows the film better or has seen it recently can help with that.

Mr. Badvibes, do you know why Dahlia's mothering of Natasha has to last for all eternity? Why don't they cross over into the afterlife in true everlasting peace?

Nevermind, I think I know exactly why now.....

Dahlia's mothering of Natasha will last forever for AT LEAST 4 reasons:

1. The human soul is, by nature, eternal.

The human soul, being noncorporeal and thus, completely metaphysical by nature, cannot be destroyed by any conceivable thing within the physical realm. Since in death, the soul is completely metaphysical by nature, it exists in a higher order of existence and has transcended the boundaries of the physical realm, therefore the very concepts of death, destruction, aging and even harm itself do not apply. Those that enter the spirit world are no longer subject to death as they are no longer bond by their corporeal forms.

2. The afterlife exists in eternity.

Those that transcend into the spirit world transcend into a higher order of reality in which restrictions such as time and space itself in the physical universe do not exist. When they perish, they enter eternity, or a plane of existence in which time does not exist. Since time does not exist, souls that are already eternal by nature, do not age.

3. Human/Mortal love is never enough to satisfy such a hungry spirit.

Man, being flawed and fallible by nature, will never and can never deliver the most perfect, flawless love enough to fully satisfy another human soul to where they will cross over. And the human soul, being eternal in nature, requires a powerful, eternal, everlasting love from a Higher power to satiate it wholly. Man, being mortal and fallible, can do nothing to fully placate or satisfy a spirit enough to banish it to the netherrealm or deliver it to the afterlife.

4. Natasha's rage/vengeance/sorrow/anguish lasts forever.

Lastly, the fourth and most important reason why Dahlia will need to appease Natasha forever is due to the irrevocably damaged state of Natasha's soul. The little girl died in such a tragic and unexpected way in having no knowledge as to why her mother abandoned her as well as living her entire life neglected by both her mother and the father who didn't protect her, that it gave birth to a powerful rage/sorrow, creating a malevolent spirit from an otherwise innocent child. Once Natasha's soul became corrupted by such powerful negative emotions and circumstances, it not only binded her soul to the physical world, but completely changed her into something else--a monster. And as it is well known in Japanese Mythology that a spirit will not and cannot rest so long as the very emotions that binded them to the realm of Man in first place upon death persist, Natasha will not and cannot cross over because of her anger/sorrow. Short of appeasement from a motherly figure (who herself is also cursed as a result of the sacrifice), Natasha's wrath persists forever. Even after having gained Dahlia's love, the state of her damaged spirit does not change. She remains a potentially vengeful and dangerous spirit. And since the potentiality for causing harm to the living will always be there, her being trapped in limbo will always be. Natasha's wrath lasts for eternity, therefore Dahlia's surrogacy will last forever.


To fully placate/appease Natasha to where she would finally cross over into an existence of true everlasting peace and happiness would require absolute perfect, flawless and infallible love, as well as the complete and utter eternal relinquishment of the negative emotions that bind her soul to the physical world.

Well, I have to tell you. The Villains wiki website says that she DOES have free will and that she chose to do everything that she did.

I'm not sure why a random wiki would be treated as definitive. What's the source for the claim? If it's not the writer or director of the film, then it's just another person's opinion.

I'm not sure this contradicts what I'm saying, anyway. When I say that many of these characters are forces, or personifications of guilt, or warnings about the dangers of prioritizing one thing at the expense of all others, that doesn't require that they be unable to make choices, just that those choices be relatively single-minded.

The broader answer, though, as I've already alluded to, is that you're not supposed to be able to really rationalize it, and it's supposed to upset you. That's what horror films do: they are disturbing and (sometimes) cathartic. If the ghost seems spiteful and horrifying and awful to you, it was probably supposed to. Asking why it had to be that way is asking why Freddie Kruger loves scaring kids so much.

So she still doesn't necessarily qualify as a rationally-thinking being like, say, a living child her age would be, correct?

I don't think we have any way of knowing that. She's definitely different than a living child her age in some ways. I'm not sure what meaningful conclusion we could draw from the answer either way, though.

The main point here is that it doesn't make sense to expect a fictional ghost to behave reasonably (or like a real person, even when fictional). They are often used to dramatize feelings like guilt or vengeance and their irrationality or single-mindedness is often the point.

One of the Raimi Rules of Horror is that "the innocent must suffer." This means that what happens is not justified and could prompt us to ask, "Why punish this person?". The terror is that one could be good and still be captured by the darkness.

Indeed, I almost want to see a horror film where a sweet happy grandma who was content in life and sweet in disposition returns to terrorize her family after death for no apparent reason.

Yeah. It makes perfect sense what you're saying.

Just what reason does Natasha have for hating Cecilia for a mother that wasn't even hers to begin with, harassing, abusing and attempting to murder her and plunge her mother Dahlia into an eternity of the same limbo hell she herself is in, anyway?

Natasha displayed NO antisocial/criminal tendencies whatsoever while alive, yet somehow, in death, become a cold-blooded, psychopathic child ghost with a killer instinct. There seems to be a great likelihood that she chose to do all of this of her own free will, but it's almost absurd. Natasha was perfectly innocent in life, no malevolent intentions or malice in her heart whatsoever, as one wiki described her as "nice and welcoming" but abandoned by her two-bit parents. Even with everything she suffered, the likelihood of a child who was good in life yet becoming a malevolent, borderline demonic supernatural force purely by their own conscious, free will decision, for whatever reason, is extremely remote.

So it's not just the story itself that's fictional, but the entire concept behind it is mythological and overexaggerated. Who would CHOOSE THIS in real-life?