The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

It is very rarely that I rate something 10/10. However, after watching the DVD for the zillionith time today I can't describe how much I enjoy this production. Putting aside who you think Jack the Ripper was, 'Jack The Ripper' is lavish, colourful and lively, and easily beats some of the cinema's Jack The Ripper Films.Michael Caine is great as lead Detective, Abberline. Being from London himself he slipped easily into the role of the main Detetctive. I also like that it's hinted that he is a alcoholic. It's good to see in some scenes that he beats the temptation to dive into the bottle, even when the case gets really rough. Lewis Collins, as his sidekick, Godley was marvellous also and I don't know if the men got on in real life, but they certainly gelled together extremely well on the screen and their characters were close too. Lysette Anthony was a gem as Mary Kelly, and Susan George played Kathy Eddows with consideration and sensitivity.The Whitechapel set is brilliant and I love how they don't go OTT on the famous misty appearance as on none of the nights of the real murders was London covered in fog. It's very convincing and in fact, is superior to the set used for 'From Hell'. The costumes were accurate a joy to watch.I liked how the murders were treated with sensitivity, and the murder scenes were not over the top in gore.One aspect of the film that did not work well and which slowed the production down was the affair between Abberline and Emma Prentice (Jane Seymour) the official artists for the newspaper that was in the film, 'The Star'. I found the scenes not always unnecessary but it slowed the film down to a plod and it's hard to believe that a woman from the upper class such as Emma would even mix with someone like Abberline, let alone bed him which she did in the film, although thankfully it was only shown briefly.The whole drama was full of suspense and the ending, where a fake murder was set up was high in tension and on first viewing was excellent. You get a choice of four or five men who, just before this fake murder is due to happen, all leave their places of work dressed in dark clothes carrying parcels which could be the famous Gladstone bag that the Ripper supposedly kept his knives in. Each man is a potential Ripper, but when you see who the Ripper is, it's cleverly filmed so that you realise it was none of the men put forward as suspects.I would highly recommend this drama. It's four hours long or thereabouts but is very enjoyable. You can get two versions in the UK on DVD. A normal straight forward version, and one with extra's on. I'd go for the latter as it has a great lot of footage showing the production before Micheal Caine was hired when Barry Foster was Abberline.Over all a good, historical piece of drama. In my mind it far outweighs 'From Hell' which follows the same story line. If I had the choice of the two, (dispite Johnny Depp being in 'From Hell'), I'd choose Jack the Ripper every time.

Just great!This is the best TV-production I have ever seen.First time I saw it at the age of 8, it was awesome. But I could hardly remind.I have just known that it was a well done movie with a great Atmospher and thrilling suspense.I bought the film and my expectations were exceeded.A movie which can take it on with Jack the ripper is "The count of monte christo" with gerade depardieu. It's a trilogy which is also god work.

This is easily my favourite Jack the Ripper film. I was disappointed with the ending which I guessed near to the start of the film as I have read the Stephen Knight book. The Richard Mansfield bits were good but unnecessary. This version is far from perfect but is certainly does it's best to be accurate. It gets the locations right, the order of the crimes correct and uses real Police Officers to investigate. I found all the acting to be good. Whatever happened to Lewis Collins ? I agree with others that the prostitutes, apart from Mary Kelly were too good looking for the times. When I read the Stephen Knight book, it certainly appeared plausible but now I haven't a clue who the actual ripper was.

When I first saw this telemovie back in the late 1980s, I found myself wondering if the film makers actually believed the theory they were peddling. The DVD commentary makes it clear that they take it very seriously indeed, which somehow reduces the impact of the piece.Taken as a blood and thunder melodrama, this is good fun. But as a recreation of London's East End in the 1880s, it leaves a great deal deal to be desired. The depiction of prostitution is particularly inaccurate. The Ripper's victims were not, on the whole, the good hearted floozies depicted here. They were alcoholic, washed out drabs, homeless and aimless. And the depiction of George Lusk as a left wing agitator is way off base.No matter, its diverting entertainment. But its only real historical value lies in its depiction of the hysteria that the Ripper murders engendered in the population. If you believe the denouement, and the explanation of the Ripper's identity, drop me a line. I'd like to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge.