From Hell

Rating:
Summary: Important note, this is not a documentary!
Review: My wife and I saw this movie just last night and it was a very effective thriller, which is exactly what it was supposed to be. And let me warn everyone reading this that if you are a Ripper historian you will be dissappointed, you'd be much better off watching a Discovery channel special. The movie does present most of the murders and facts the way they actually happend but it's Hollywood and so they also changed a few things but, as I previously stated this was never supposed to be a documentary, if you can get over the fact that it's just a very well made thriller you should enjoy yourself emensely. Johnny Depp (Whom I didn't even like until I saw "Sleepy Hollow") is superb as Inspector Abeline and the man who plays the Ripper does an equally good job as well. In closing let me say that if all you want from this movie is blood and guts, you're likely to be dissappointed there too, because while there is plenty blood on hand (especially the Rippers) this movie also takes time to build it's plot too. So if you want a good creepy story, I highly recommend seeing this, you won't be dissappointed.

Rating:
Summary: from hell and back, what a ride!
Review: I went and saw this in the theatre over the weekend. I can't say I've heard such a quiet audience, completely enrapured in the screen images. Johnny Depp is an intuitive inspector, assigned to the heinous crimes comitted against the "Unfortunate Women" of a seedy London Neighborhood. To bad about that Heroin addiction that caused him to chase the dragon until the end. Heather Graham plays Mary, one of the last victims of the man who gave birth to the 20th century. I won't include any spoilers, but the last 30 minutes are of course the best. I was swept in the emotion of the moments, and felt pity for the man who caused all of this mayhem. Please DO NOT take your children to see this movie, there are several graphic images. Although they are few and far between, each one is a vignette of bloody tragedy. This is more suspense than it is thriller, and it is sure to be one of those movies you watch on a chilly night, wrapped up close to someone.

Rating:
Summary: From Hell, The story of Jack the Ripper.
Review: I found this movie incredibly disturbing, but no less than excellent. The atmosphere is very good and the actors play their parts well. I have never read the graphic novel, but I am going to buy it. My friend, who came to the movie with me, said that is was pretty true to the novel.

I do not suggest this movie for the squeamish, and some might find the movie offensive. The dialogue can get pretty vulgar, but what do you expect from the prostitutes and the down trodden of that era. It was not very necessary to bring the image of their state to your mind.

The scary thing is that this man did exist and if your interested in wondering what may have drove this man... no, more like creature to these acts. Then this movie if for you.

Could a man truly be a man after such acts of violence? And what drove him to this? This movie asks those questions and gives a very possible answer.

Rating:
Summary: From Hell - Murder By Decree
Review: To clear up a misconception about the title of the film - "From Hell" is a quote from a letter that Jack The Ripper sent to the police. It is the one letter that most experts agree is actually from the Ripper. This is briefly shown in the film as part of the evidence.

The whole idea of the motivation for the killings in this film is not new. There is a film, "Murder By Decree", about Sherlock Holmes going after the Ripper with the same motivation for the killings as in "From Hell". The idea that the women killed by Jack were all witnesses to the Roman Catholic marriage of the Prince and prostitute who then produced a child, is the same in both films. Both of the girls end up in an asylum unable to communicate with the outside world. If it were known by the outside world that there was a Catholic heir to the throne of England, it would have torn the country apart. In both films, the Ripper carrying out orders from higher authority. In both there is also a link to the Masons. Perhaps this is not such a fantastic premise. In one of the many books on the actual Ripper, Abberline, the actual detective on the case, is quoted as saying that they did know who the Ripper was, but could do nothing because of who he was.

Taking all this into consideration, "From Hell" is an excellent film. The atmosphere of Victorian London is extremely well presented. It might, in other production hands, have turned into a slasher film, but the killings are not that sensational. There are very quick glimses of bodies and quick cuts away from them. They are based on the actual autopsy photos of the victims (and there are existing photos of all the bodies). The acting by all the performers is excellent, not one false note from any of them. The most appealing character is Heather Graham as Mary Kelly, the last of the victims. Her romance with Johnny Depp as Abberline (named after the real person, but not at all like the actual man) is extremely well handled.

There are some excellent surprises in the resolution of the story that are extremely plausible leading to a bittersweet ending.

A recommendation is to view both this film and the Sherlock Holmes "Murder By Decree". Both are excellent films and well worth the comparison.

Rating:
Summary: FROM HELL . . . I EXPECTED MORE!
Review: I had high hopes for this film. The case of Jack the Ripper has been one of the most fascinating unsolved mysteries of the 20th century. Having done some research on the subject I eagerly awaited to see the film interpretation of these events. It explored one of the most intriguing theories on the Ripper murders which involved the Royal family and the Masons. It's unfortunate that the Hughes Brothers opted to use all the elements of a standard Hollywood film rather than re-create the actuality of the events.


Johnny Depp plays Inspector Abberline who is assigned the Ripper case because he has visions of the murders before they happen. His visions seem to come to him when he is in a drug induced stupor, which appears to be most of the film. Heather Graham, who plays Mary Kelly, the supposed fifth Ripper victim is OK, but her accent kept fading in and out. The one thing that bothered me was the fact that throughout the film, she was perfectly made up. Whitechapel was a dirty, filthy and rough place to live. Most of the characters in the Whitechapel district were portrayed accurately, being dirty and having bad teeth, but she was absolutely pristine and her hair and makeup were perfect at all times (Not too realistic). Also, why did she have to have technicolor red hair? The real Mary Kelly had blonde hair! Was it because she was Irish? Do we really need to stereotype the Irish as always having red hair?!!! Typical Hollywood!!


There were many historical innacuracies as well, such as the fact that most of the victims were alcoholics and were drunk at the time of their murders. Plus, I was annoyed that the film had all the victims being friends and hanging out together as some type of girls club.


The one thing I did like was how they re-created the Whitechapel district for this film (albeit a rather cleaned up version). The visual shots of the town were stunning and really captured the look and feel of 1888, but mainly without all the grime and filth. I also thought that the class differences among the people was portrayed in a realistic way and the film manages to re-create many of the events that occurred in 1888, but it also hollywoodizes many aspects as well by creating an "almost happy" ending to the film, which to me is ridiculous. They took one of the most fascinating cases in history and made it into a typical hollywood film with romance, gore, suspense and a "suprise" ending which unfortunately I figured out towards the beginning of the film. This is typical hollywood with no real suprises.

Rating:
Summary: A Jack the Ripper film that lays off the really bad stuff
Review: The most important thing you need to know about "From Hell," is that the Hughes Brothers really let you off easy with this one. When you go home after seeing this movie late at night and have trouble getting to sleep, just remember that they could have shown you a lot more, which means you might not have gotten to sleep for a week. I have read Alan Moore and Eddie Campbell's graphic novel "From Hell," and have also spent some time researching the historical record regarding Jack the Ripper, which includes not only autopsy reports but also photographs of the victims. Consequently, I was surprised that the film verion of "From Hell" actually backed off three times from completely grossing out the audience.

First, when the Ripper killed Annie Chapman he draped some of her intestines over her shoulder. The film does not even suggest this happened, beyond the idea that organs have been removed. Second, the night the Ripper claimed two victims, most Ripperologists have surmised that because he was interrupted when he killed Liz Stride, he was really angry when he killed Catherine Eddowes, since he hacked away the bottom half of her face. But when her face is revealed it is just the same as the other victims. Finally, when the doctor begins to describe the final body--usual the very words of the actual report--he stops after having described the position of the corpse. More to the point, he stops before describing what Jack did with her organs. Believe me, you do not need to see this to freak out because just hearing about it would keep you awake all night. Now, to be fair, the dialogue is the same as that scene in the graphic novel; but then Moore and Campbell had already devoted a entire volume to what Jack the Ripper did that night in graphic detail so it did not have to be articulated. But I was all set to hear the one of the biggest audience moans in cinematic history and was somewhat disappointed the Hughes Brothers let everybody off the hook.

Ironically, the Hughes Brothers could legitimately get away with showing us much more blood and guts. After all, the autopsy reports tell us in excruciating detail what the Ripper did to each of his victims and they could simply claim historical accuracy. But instead they pull up short, giving them even more latitude for getting away with what gore they do offer up. However, during Abberline's vision of what will happen to Jack the Ripper's final victim, one of the images that flashes before our eyes is indeed a photograph taken by the police of the mutilated body of Mary Kelly. This only goes to reinforce the great divide that exists between those who have studied the murders of Jack the Ripper and/or read "From Hell" and those who simply know Jack the Ripper killed a bunch of prostitutes in London in the late 19th century and was never caught.

Certainly, the Hughes Brothers do play with us in this film. If you can stomach seeing it a second time, or if you already know who "From Hell" contends is the Ripper, then they are several scenes were Abberline is tantalizingly close to the killer. Of course, they are not alone in such regard; "The Bone Collector" was particularly audacious in offering us a first glimpse of the killer. Moore and Campbell let us know the identity of Jack from before he ever starts his killing spree, but the movie version decides to keep it a mystery and apparently succeeds in surprising those who only know about "From Hell" from the trailer and television commercials.

The Hughes Brothers have described "From Hell" as a "ghetto" film, and certainly the production design stands out in providing a fitting atmosphere for the tale. The events we are watching are not taking place in the London we have come to know from countless Hammer horror films but in what we readily accept as the city's Whitechapel district in the fall of 1888 (with Prague doubling nicely). This is as stylish a slasher flick as you will ever see, with the time-lapse sequence of the discovery of one of the bodies and the revelation of the Masonic meeting beneath the streets of London particularly memorable. Even the lighting works towards the proper atmosphere for the story.

Johnny Depp's performance as Inspector Abberline is nicely understated (the character's psychic visions come from a fake psychic who was in the graphic novel). Unfortunately, Heather Graham is just too darn cute, sticking out from the rest of the totally believable group of prostitutes (Annabelle Apsion, Katrin Cartlidge, Susan Lynch and Lesley Sharp). I had heard that the producers made actually made them shoot a "happy ending" to this film, but fortunately they had the wisdom not to use it. Ripperologists knew going in that this was not going to be the "true" story about Jack, so that additional liberties such as all of the victims hanging out together all the time and the total absence of men in any of their lives, are easily forgivable. What was always impressive about Moore's tale was how he managed to weave so many different elements together into a comprehensive tale, even if it is ultimately suspect. But the film version strips the story down to its essentials and while it is certainly the best Jack the Ripper film made to date, I cannot shake my head and think how much better it could have been by letting the audience glimpse just a little bit more of the true story.

But, oh, boys and girls, "From Hell" could have upset you a whole lot more than it did. If only you can understand how close to the end of the cliff you were on this one...

Rating:
Summary: Plays like an episode of Unsolved Mysteries...
Review: As a film, Alan Moore's From Hell is a beautifully stunning period piece that has carefully reconstructed the gruesome Whitechapel slayings at the notorious hand of "Saucy Jack" with thoroughly researched "precision." Johnny Depp, fresh from his Victorian era performance as Constable Ichabod Crane in Tim Burton's Sleepy Hollow once again portrays a 19th century English Inspector, Frederick Abberline, and delivers a worthy performance to surpass his previously similar role. Heather Graham is aptly cast as the prostitute Mary Kelly and gives a very good performance here although we never actually see her "prostituting" herself, presumably to make the audience sympathize with her as a more respectable "Unfortunate" as they are properly referred to and to which she is quick to correct the Inspector at the slightest inference that she is a whore. There are some brilliant establishing shots of London under a blood red sky that establish the foreboding atmosphere of this meticulously stylish thriller. The Hughes Brothers have successfully delivered what looks like a first-rate epic film on the subject of Jack the Ripper.

The problem then falls, not on the Hughes Brothers themselves, but rather with Alan Moore's story. First, this film is a translation from Moore's epic-sized graphic novel (an adult-oriented comic book novel) and the result is an extravagantly fictitious comic book story that takes many dramatic liberties in plot and characterization while attempting to present the factual evidence of the murders. First of all, Inspector Abberline is an opium addict who has shamanic visions of the murders that help him in his investigation, sort of a pseudo Frank Black profiler from Millenium. While it is true that there were many opium and laudanum addicts at the time, it is used rather incredulously to create some depth to his character and a crutch to assist his unorthodox investigation. We've seen Depp like this before in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and Blow and is really no new material for Depp's repertoire as an actor although he does turn in a decent performance. Secondly, Moore's slant is taken from one of many popular conspiracy theories regarding the "secret society" of Freemasonry. The problem here is that Freemasonry is really not-so-secret but their ideology still remains obscured from those "not-in-the-know" and with good reason. So what happens when you need a scapegoat to show an organization responsible for all of the sinister dark doings of society? You guessed it... let's bring in the Masons! Moore's audaciously dramatic theory does little more than create drama to support a rather slow moving plot and shows his ignorance of what Masonry is really all about. The Masons are portrayed here as mere thugs in Mafia-like fashion to cover-up for the Royal Family's embarrassment of the Prince's affiliation with prostitutes... er, the "Unfortunates" since they are, after all, not of the English aristocracy. Both in this film and the recent summer bomb Tomb Raider, Freemasons are portrayed as the villains who are responsible for the dastardly deeds of society and in both films are completely inaccurate depictions of what true Masonry is really all about. Perhaps if Moore had "enlightened" himself regarding the true rites of Masonry he would probably have omitted this dramatically satisfying but preposterous theory when he first wrote his popular graphic novel.

I did a thesis paper for my college psychology class on Jack the Ripper and was far more interested in what motivated such a man to commit these brutal and sadistic murders. My primary source was a book by Donald Rumbelow entitled Jack the Ripper: the Complete Casebook which is unfortunately now out-of-print. It is an excellent source documenting all of the facts surrounding the murder and the author presents many suspects and their possible motives which he had investigated nearly 100 years after the actually murders as though he were investigating them today. The result was a very subjective, unbiased look into the pathology of Jack the Ripper, i.e. the man who inaugurated the age of the Serial Killer. I highly recommend this book to anyone even remotely interested in Ripperology. Granted any Hollywood film on the subject will never accurately recreate these events on screen and is inevitably fictionalized as it is in From Hell, but a more straight-forward suspense thriller would have made a more appropriate film than delving into the whole "100 Greatest Conspiracy Theories Of All Time" list which seems like a cheap ploy to inject suspense into a fairly slow-paced plot.

Rating:
Summary: Plays like an episode of Unsolved Mysteries...
Review: As a film, Alan Moore's From Hell is a beautifully stunning period piece that has carefully reconstructed the gruesome Whitechapel slayings at the notorious hand of "Saucy Jack" with thoroughly researched "precision." Johnny Depp, fresh from his Victorian era performance as Constable Ichabod Crane in Tim Burton's Sleepy Hollow once again portrays a 19th century English Inspector, Frederick Abberline, and delivers a worthy performance to surpass his previously similar role. Heather Graham is aptly cast as the prostitute Mary Kelly and gives a very good performance here although we never actually see her "prostituting" herself, presumably to make the audience sympathize with her as a more respectable "Unfortunate" as they are properly referred to and to which she is quick to correct the Inspector at the slightest inference that she is a whore. There are some brilliant establishing shots of London under a blood red sky that establish the foreboding atmosphere of this meticulously stylish thriller. The Hughes Brothers have successfully delivered what looks like a first-rate epic film on the subject of Jack the Ripper.

The problem then falls, not on the Hughes Brothers themselves, but rather with Alan Moore's story. First, this film is a translation from Moore's epic-sized graphic novel (an adult-oriented comic book novel) and the result is an extravagantly fictitious comic book story that takes many dramatic liberties in plot and characterization while attempting to present the factual evidence of the murders. First of all, Inspector Abberline is an opium addict who has shamanic visions of the murders that help him in his investigation, sort of a pseudo Frank Black profiler from Millenium. While it is true that there were many opium and laudanum addicts at the time, it is used rather incredulously to create some depth to his character and a crutch to assist his unorthodox investigation. We've seen Depp like this before in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and Blow and is really no new material for Depp's repertoire as an actor although he does turn in a decent performance. Secondly, Moore's slant is taken from one of many popular conspiracy theories regarding the "secret society" of Freemasonry. The problem here is that Freemasonry is really not-so-secret but their ideology still remains obscured from those "not-in-the-know" and with good reason. So what happens when you need a scapegoat to show an organization responsible for all of the sinister dark doings of society? You guessed it... let's bring in the Masons! Moore's audaciously dramatic theory does little more than create drama to support a rather slow moving plot and shows his ignorance of what Masonry is really all about. The Masons are portrayed here as mere thugs in Mafia-like fashion to cover-up for the Royal Family's embarrassment of the Prince's affiliation with prostitutes... er, the "Unfortunates" since they are, after all, not of the English aristocracy. Both in this film and the recent summer bomb Tomb Raider, Freemasons are portrayed as the villains who are responsible for the dastardly deeds of society and in both films are completely inaccurate depictions of what true Masonry is really all about. Perhaps if Moore had "enlightened" himself regarding the true rites of Masonry he would probably have omitted this dramatically satisfying but preposterous theory when he first wrote his popular graphic novel. (...)

Rating:
Summary: Gratuitous violence
Review: The premise for this movie is facinating, and it could have been outstanding. The violence was excessive and really detracted from the suspense because of its overwhelming nature. Johnny Depp is a very good actor--it's a shame his talent is wasted by the director's poor vision of what a good mystery should be.

Rating:
Summary: Tense and richly thematic.
Review: We went to see "From Hell" yesterday, and it is chilling, lovely, and full of suspense. I didn't know what to expect from the Hughes Brothers with this genre - it's very well done. It's graphic, but not grotesque. It gives you glimpses into every dark corner of the Victorian age. Johnny Depp is very good, and his character manages to be both tragic and brilliant. If you haven't read the graphic novel, hold off until you've seen it - they do a wonderful job of dropping clues you don't put together until just the right moment.
Highly recommended.