The greatest movie ever made..!

Sadly Over-hyped

It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

Blistering performances.

Hoping to uncover the motives of Jack the Ripper, a London policeman enlists the help of a prostitute of this fanciful take on the historical murderer whose identity remains a mystery still today. The film is atmospherically shot by the reliable Peter Deming and there are some neat stylistic touches such as time lapse night to day sequence as the police discover one victim's body. Generally speaking though, this is a bit of a lacklustre affair. The film's explanation of the Ripper murders as a part of an elaborate conspiracy to hush local prostitutes never quite rings true. It is almost fascinatingly twisted enough for the lack of credibility not to matter, however, the fact that Johnny Depp's protagonist uncovers the conspiracy through clairvoyance and intuition rather than actual detective work makes it hard to buy into. Imagine if Kevin Costner's character in 'JFK' used his dreams to argue against Lee Harvey Oswald acting alone and you would not be far off. The film is additionally cheapened by a romance developing between Depp and Heather Graham, cast as the prostitute who helps him. Not only does their romance do little to further the tale, the pair have few sparks between them, with each balancing Victorian accents not helping matters in the slightest. Small moments of 'From Hell' certainly work, such as Joseph Merrick making an unexpected appearance and the coins on the eyes myth, but as far as Jack the Ripper stories are concerned, 'Time After Time' and 'Murder by Decree' are far preferable motion pictures.

**** May contain strong spoilers ****Right into the 19th century in the heart of England. The accents, the people and the city gives a breath of the time. Nice little touch with a man giving illegal protection to prostitutes, instead of being the ordinary coupler. Being true to both the age and the country (speaking of the language) raises the bar both for what may come in the movie and also creates the precise and trustworthy frame to "From hell". Joyce Gallie and Sally Osoba has been able to gather true British talent in seeking of the authentic expression; Ian Holm, Ian McNiece and Robbie Coltrane is just a few there.As of many movies that Johnny Depp is both involved in and also acts in, there is an vast theatrical sense going right through the screen in here. Maybe it fits the 19th century as the story is rolling out into, and maybe it fits anyway. It made me wonder, even so. Interesting to watch with those clear and explicit expressions and acting.The way Jack The Ripper is presented shows what way the producers, the writers and the entire team behind the motion picture wanted to go. The criminal killer is embedded in a gentle costume that has a solitude feeling of a sophisticated count, with the black cape, pure white gloves and the black hat. Add the little toolbox by velvet with knifes and such that is treated with a careful hand, being clean, in order and structured... then you have "The Ripper" in here... as a terrifying and hidden monster growing for more... As if being displayed on stage as theatre. Appreciated!Some special effects blended with dark orchestral music creates moments here and there that pushes this film upwards both in entertainment and quality, besides the planning of the mentioned. A picture is taken of the photographer; flash, and a black and white second is being displayed. 28 min and 30 seconds, a blood red sky gives the impression of the pure grit that grips hold of the situation. Astonishing! At 41 minutes, the fast cuts as knifes cuts through the air showing the instruments of dissect, and a filter of strange colour for the screen. The colour of red is recurring here and there, just to underline the stream of blood that is important for the "refined gentleman that has drops of blood in the wine and eats rare steaks", Mr. Ripper himself. A delicate touch of art, there.Underneath all this theatrical undertones, expressed acting and the story itself, there lies a clear social question mark; how far will the human being go for the sake of science? Can it be any good in killing innocent people to receive and get the answer for important breakthroughs in medical and scientific matters? Can it be any good in showing horrible diseases as in the old freak shows and circuses, to get the mentioned breakthroughs? Just look at about 46 minutes into "From hell". Interesting how Joyce Gallie and Sally Osoba gets the whole storyline together, indeed. Raw brutality and effective and close detective work, plus the atmosphere that it all brings into "From hell". In "The Silence Of The Lambs", it's "I ate his liver with a can of beans and a bottle of Chianti". In "From hell"; "I send you half the kidney I took from one woman, preserved for you. The other piece, I fried and ate. It was very nice!". Psychological frightening. And then, the title being mentioned in its fully state: 1 hour and 15 minutes.Sadly, "From hell" only reaches a little above a good movie. To reach for the high and excellent rate, they should have pushed more into the actors, pushed more into the written dialogue both in timing and social expressions as for a more vast and appropriate vocabulary (as some expressions is over used, such as "these unfortunates" and "whores"), more well written screenplay, worked harder for the extras/the figurants to be better, dug deeper for the special effects, pushed harder for the realism and the authentic feeling of the blood and the gore, a more believable and distanced relationship between Abberline and Mary, and created a better soundtrack. Then, "From hell" would have taken a better place in movie history.I really want to give this film a higher rate. And.. again, sadly, I will settle with around 6-7.Over to the movie as a product: - The production : Very well made! Costumes, the era of the century, the society... then some little vague production speaking of let's say the blood. - The actors : Some good, some just above approved. This kind of movie maybe sort the acting out by itself, leaving an experience of art for the viewer. Robbie Coltrane gives a solid touch of the sophisticated yet straightforward English man; nice to see. Heather Grahams attempts to give the character some depth is dearly missed, I might say. They should have gone with some other actress there (to get the innocent prostitute with working moral and social ambition) to grow and be displayed. - Entertainment : Yes. - Age : 15 or maybe even 18. This is due to the grotesque art that the story gives, and also the cruelty, the harsh environment and much nasty gore. Add Jack The Ripper, some horror elements and a mysterious form of script line, and maybe 18.6,5 out of 10. (The final rate is based most on my own entertainment of the movie. Short elucidation of the rating: 6 Nice production. Good movie. 5 Approved.)

The story of Jack the Ripper has long been of interest in the horror cinema. Right back in the creaky old days of the silents he made his appearances in the likes of 1926's WAXWORKS and Hitchcock's THE LODGER. An infamous black and white British version of the tale, made in 1959 by a cheap rival to Hammer, has fallen into obscurity but is still best remembered for the final reel, in which the killer is caught beneath a lift and the screen turns to glorious blood red colour for an instant to capture his gory demise. In the 1970s, European horror veteran Jess Franco gave us his typically sleazy variant with 1976's nasty JACK THE RIPPER, with Klaus Kinski in the leading role, whilst Spanish stalwart Paul Naschy made his own variant. In 1988, to mark the centenary of the Ripper murders, a supposedly definitive television miniseries was made in America starring Michael Caine as the investigating policeman. It's a good but flawed telling of the story marred only by the TV-movie level it never rises above. And now, to mark the new millennium, two brothers best known for their gangster rap movies have given the world FROM HELL, which is for a change based on a graphic novel (which I haven't read) of the Ripper story rather than the real-life murder investigation itself.As a horror film, it works. Everything about this film screams style and class. For a change the gory murders and surgical operations that Jack carries out on his deeply unfortunate victims are shown in graphic detail, rather than only being spoken of like in previous versions of the tale, and no expense is spared in giving us graphic, stomach-churning scenes of the cloaked Ripper calmly sawing out the internal organs of his female victims, kneeling above their prone bodies. Entrails are torn out and wrapped around necks and throats are slashed emitting geysers of crimson gore. Police surgeons repeatedly vomit at the sight of the mutilated corpses and quick flash cuts show us all we need to know about the severity of the crimes, so on a visceral level at least FROM HELL offers pure horror, sometimes nausea-inducing and all the more effective for it. Scenes of the victims being stalked at night by the cruel killer are highly suspenseful, heightened by the dark, baroque music that accompanies them and a high class of acting from all concerned.Attention to detail also contributes to this movie's success and I would go so far as to say that this is the most authentic-looking Jack the Ripper film that I've yet to see. Although some of the choice language is a little too modern to be that convincing the rest of the dialogue, the sets, the scenery and the costumes are spot-on. You have to love the brief appearance of the Elephant Man into the thick of the action and the secret society of Freemasons who operate below ground. Characters sport lived-in clothes rather than the off-the-shelf garb of the Caine miniseries and the London setting is brilliantly portrayed as a rancid den of sleaze and open depravity, packed with opium dens, pubs full of drunken angry men, and streets littered with filth and beggars.The cinematography is spot-on and helps to transport you back to 1888, putting you into the realism of the action as we watch drug-induced nightmares of the Ripper slicing up his victims and taking them to pieces. After the initial half hour which bluntly introduces Jack's figure into the depressing London streets the film takes the form of a detective tale as policeman Johnny Depp searches for clues to find the identity of the killer. Once again the film takes the well-worn conspiracy route of there being a royal connection to the killer, so whilst it lacks the element of surprise (aside from those who are complete Ripper novices) the final unmasking of the villain is still a fine piece of shock cinema and the last reel very exciting, incorporating a violent cab ride and the most gruesome murder saved for last into the proceedings.The cast is bolstered by a host of familiar British faces like Ian Richardson who bring a touch of class to the production although ironically the two leads are American (though you wouldn't guess it, as they do sport impeccable accents as is the norm these days). Johnny Depp once again proves he can do no wrong and it's fair to say that he's become a mini-horror star in recent years with all the genre productions he keeps making. Depp's opium-addicted young policeman makes a nice change from the decent, elder investigators (like Michael Caine in the 1988 miniseries) and he plays a charming, interesting central figure and one which the audience can thankfully emphasise with. Robbie Coltrane plays it tough as Depp's sergeant and basically acts as the comic relief of the production (and boy, does this horrific outing need it). Heather Graham (BOOGIE NIGHTS) is also delightful as Mary Kelly, a would-be victim of the Ripper, and as well as looking spot-on in the role, all flowing red locks and heaving bosoms just like in one of the old Hammer films, plays her part with some skill.I don't have an unpleasant word to say about anyone else, but special kudos goes to Ian Holm who plays a kindly retired surgeon in one of his last major roles. Subtle use of black contact lenses turn the killer into a deeply scary-looking man and the actor playing Jack really does deserve an Oscar for his role here - the final murder in which he believes he is teaching a class is magnificently-evoked stuff and very clever indeed. FROM HELL is a quality production and one of the better versions of the tale and it will certainly take some doing to better this in the future; for now be content in watching what is a well-paced, scary, sometimes disturbing modern horror yarn.

From Hell (2001): Dir: Albert Hughes, Allen Hughes / Cast: Johnny Depp, Heather Graham, Ian Holm, Robbie Coltrane, Ian Richardson: Based upon the legend of Jack the Ripper and couldn't be any more dull than if it was read in history class. And what the title means is a mystery since the villain is human. It opens in the late 1800's London where prostitutes are murdered with slashed throats and grape stems in their hands. Perhaps if Mr. Ripper was more flamboyant he could have left an entire fruit salad and a glass of wine with lemon wedged on the edge. Johnny Depp is brought in as an inspector and the rest is a bloody mess right up to its stupid climax. Directed by Albert and Allen Hughes with repetitious storytelling. They previous made Menace to Society. Here they present a complete menace to one's intelligence. Depp is reciting Sleepy Hallow and despite that film's appeal, his role lacks ambition here. Heather Graham plays one of the brainless prostitutes. These hookers are warned not to venture out after dark but that doesn't seem to sink in. Also with Ian Holm, Ian Richardson and Robbie Coltrane who have both done far better films than this. For a scarier film starring Depp, I recommend Tim Burton's ravishing version of Sleepy Hollow. As for this film, it has superb art direction but blood and guts are strewn with the sound of swishing blades. Score: 2 / 10