From Hell?

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

I absolutely agree with you, RonnieKray. Well put indeed.

All the best

[Stewart P Evans]

Movie

I never said Ghandi was based on a graphic novel!
Are you really sure dramatic licience was used in the Ghandi movie as you claim to be? Tell us where it deviated. I don't think you are sure at all. Your comments ''assume'' and ''I am sure...'' are a contradiction.
I made the comment that a JRT film should be based on truth not on a novel.

No, but From Hell was unashamedly, and by choice, based on a graphic novel.

I am sure that dramatic licence was employed in the making of Ghandi as I don't know of a film in which it wasn't used. To tell where it deviated you would have to be (a) a leading authority on Ghandi and his history, and (b) totally conversant with the film and its content. I am neither. I stand to be corrected on these points as it is not something I have made a study of, and I don't intend to.

Why should a Jack the Ripper film be based on truth and not a novel? Surely that is the choice of the film maker and those supplying the finances? Now, if the film purports to be the truth that is a different matter.

To make a movie on Jack the Ripper (a totally unknown entity) and the murders (of which no one can positively identify the exact number) showing scenes and actions of which no one has exact knowledge (none of the murders was witnessed) would be virtually impossible without resorting to dramatic licence, supposition and subjective interpretation.

All the Ripper based movies thus far have been presented as entertainment and a couple of the best pit him against the fictional Sherlock Holmes. There is a dearth of solid information on the Ripper and as a subject it is not suitable for factual translation into a movie presented as entertainment. Indeed such a scenario would result in a total box office flop.

[RonnieKray]

I disagree....it could easily be filmed from the perspective of the police and to hell with the Hollywood tradition of supplying a theme where the bad guy gets caught or killed in the end or that we must have a love story or a happy ending.

Why not strike out and let truth win for a change....isn't that why most of us are here because elsewhere we could not find a source as good as this site?

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

The problem is, Stewart, that even if the film makers don't claim that they based their story on the truth, there will always be a large number of people who will see it as truth just because they know Jack the Ripper existed and thus believes anything the film makers will tell you.
As I said, most people are not studying Ripperologists and I've met this naivety among the general public so many times, and it's equally frustrating each time. And this is how lies and fiction transpires into 'truths' and 'facts' - and in a way that they become almost inrepairable.

That aside, I don't in any way consider you as any part in this since i know what your role was in the project and I can imagine the circumstances. I probably would have done the same thing in your shoes (I mean, honestly, who wouldn't want to work with people like Depp and Graham) and it's possible things would have become even worse if you haven't been involved. After all, Hollywood is Hollywood and they don't listen to things they don't want to hear.

All the best

[Stewart P Evans]

Lost

I disagree....it could easily be filmed from the perspective of the police and to hell with the Hollywood tradition of supplying a theme where the bad guy gets caught or killed in the end or that we must have a love story or a happy ending.
Why not strike out and let truth win for a change....isn't that why most of us are here because elsewhere we could not find a source as good as this site?

You've lost me now. You have noble sentiments but just go out and try to find the finance for such a project. As to sources, I bow to your superior knowledge.

[RonnieKray]

Well Okay Stewart....thank you for that! A touch sarcastic but I'll accept your bow with dignity!

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

I actually think such a film could work out.
As in many other cases, reality usually beats fiction and the Ripper case itself is so full of interesting characters and unique events that I have often wondered why film makers bother about turning it into a fairytale in the first place.

After all, we have other films about serial killers that are more close to the truth and that have worked out well. In my view, a Ripper movie based on factual accuracy in the parts we do have information about, would be a rather interesting story and create a lot of artistic possibilities. The part about who the Ripper was, would of course had to be a matter of speculation and artistic license, but the other factual parts would at least be correct and based on the police investigation as it occurred.

All the best

[Stewart P Evans]

Advisory

The problem is, Stewart, that even if the film makers don't claim that they based their story on the truth, there will always be a large number of people who will see it as truth just because they know Jack the Ripper existed and thus believes anything the film makers will tell you.
As I said, most people are not studying Ripperologists and I've met this naivety among the general public so many times, and it's equally frustrating each time. And this is how lies and fiction transpires into 'truths' and 'facts' - and in a way that they become almost inrepairable.
That aside, I don't in any way consider you as any part in this since i know what your role was in the project and I can imagine the circumstances. I probably would have done the same thing in your shoes (I mean, honestly, who wouldn't want to work with people like Depp and Graham) and it's possible things would have become even worse if you haven't been involved. After all, Hollywood is Hollywood and they don't listen to things they don't want to hear.
All the best

I'm afraid that you have to live with the fact that there will always be those who believe everything that they see in a movie or read in a book, that's life and you should not let it affect you personally.

I do not have to apologise for my 'role' in the From Hell project. It was merely advisory (mainly on a legal basis) and to provide access to my material with regard to props. How that was handled was nothing to do with me. I merely advised and provided access which could be taken or declined. I read the first draft of the script and told one of the directors what I thought of it (and that wasn't complimentary).

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

I'm afraid that you have to live with the fact that there will always be those who believe everything that they see in a movie or read in a book, that's life and you should not let it affect you personally).

Well, I'm afraid I do, Stewart, but that's probably the academic historian in me talking.

Besides, I think you deeply underestimate the inpact these films have on the Ripper industry - at least outside Britain where the Ripper is a more unknown phenomenon and the knowledge limited to say the least. We are not talking the occasional individual here but almost 99% of the Swedish national population.
The bright side of this, is, that my book was more needed than I expected it to be.

I read the first draft of the script and told one of the directors what I thought of it (and that wasn't complimentary).

I can imagine.

And no, you shouldn't in any way apologise for your involvement in it and no one has said that you should. If that was how it came out, I apologise.

All the best

[Howard Brown]

I used to have this purist attitude at one time...not for long...that Ripper films should be made from the actual case evidence and not the imagination of a scriptwriter...

I see it differently now. Its like this with me:

Anyone with a minimal amount of interest in the Case who watches "From Hell" ( Depp was interviewed last year by my step-daughter on the site of a film project he was working on in Ohio and damn,if I didn't forget to ask her to give him "5 Questions"!) or any of the other films on the Ripper,even some documentaries...could be intrigued enough to devote time in researching the Case as a result of the initial attraction which was based on their viewing said visual media.

Thats great.

They come here or purchase the Ultimate or The Facts. Just imagine the wonder they experience at finding out that most of the premises ( Three man Masonic team...Abberline an alcoholic, unmarried, drug slugger...etc..) are all Hollywood creations based on myths or imagined scenarios. Its like discovering the center of the Earth or the perfect cheesesteak.

Of course, if one comes to Casebook first or reads "Scotland Yard Investigates", its somewhat different. In fact, its the reason why so many of us are critical of films which are devoted to presenting the WM to the civilian world. We're a bit smug about what we know or think we know as opposed to the wonder and astonishment some, hopefully many, have upon discovering that they ain't in Kansas anymore.

[Stewart P Evans]

The Point

I actually think such a film could work out.
As in many other cases, reality usually beats fiction and the Ripper case itself is so full of interesting characters and unique events that I have often wondered why film makers bother about turning it into a fairytale in the first place.
After all, we have other films about serial killers that are more close to the truth and that have worked out well. In my view, a Ripper movie based on factual accuracy in the parts we do have information about, would be a rather interesting story and create a lot of artistic possibilities. The part about who the Ripper was, would of course had to be a matter of speculation and artistic license, but the other factual parts would at least be correct and based on the police investigation as it occurred.
All the best

But that's not the point here. The debate was specifically about the From Hell movie, which you either like or don't. Despite the good intentions of some of the team it left much to be desired from a factual standpoint. But there are many considerations involved, many of which you would not even be aware of.

An early suggestion that we made was that the script would be much better if it had a better factual basis, such as a viable theory, and was not based on the usual Royal/Masonic nonsense. Our suggestion was rejected. The movie was to be based on the highly successful Alan Moore graphic novel and that was that. At the end of the day, I believe, even Alan Moore was not happy with it. The film actually has to be judged on its entertainment value and on that basis you either like it or you don't.

The sort of movie you envisage is all very well and great if the financial backing could be raised. But I doubt that it could. Why don't you try your hand at scriptwriting? To my mind one of the best dramatisations of the story I have seen was the 1973 Barlow/Watt BBC production which stuck pretty well to the facts. It was a pity that it also introduced Joe 'Sickert' and his nonsensical tale of the Freemasons. What influence that has wielded over the years.

[John Bennett]

Just a quick thought here before lunch...

I suppose the problem with JTR films is that they are trying to depict something that really happened in a way that has to be entertaining, yet is often drawn from a whole myriad of myths and baloney that has built up over 100 years or so. When a film like 'From Hell' attempts to depict the East End as it was (right down to the locations being quite accurately reproduced), we suddenly have facts mixing incongruently with fiction. And I suppose that either gets people thinking it's correct or just gets their backs up.

The recent 'Whitechapel' series was rather successful in that to some degree it tended to separate the fiction (the ongoing modern-day drama) from the facts (information from the tour guide etc). It was therefore easier, in my opinion, to enjoy it for what it was.

I suspect the original 'From Hell' graphic novel gets off lightly as, although it mixes fact with fiction and plenty of other interesting concepts, it was essentially a comic - but I don't mean that in a derogatory way. That particular graphic medium, not matter how erudite, is given a lot more leeway in terms of criticism.

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Well, since other films about serial killers - rather close to the truth as a whole - has managed to find financiaries and become reality, it is my belief such a film would be possible to achive also in the Ripper context. It may not be a box office hit, but if others can spend money on making films about serial killers that are more factually based, why can't others do the same in the case of the Ripper?
But of course, if the intention is to make the biggest box office in history, then there naturally will be difficulties. Still, that doesn't appear to have been the case with some other films in the genre (like films about the Zodiac, Bundy or BTK) and they nonetheless have managed to collect enough money to do them and construct a resonable script.

I think one important thing would be to stay out of Hollywood altogether and possibly either turn to American independent film makers or simply give this opportunity to film makers in England - after all, English film makers have a better sense of describing the period and its people - and with plenty of accuracy - than Hollywood.

All the best

[RonnieKray]

Judgeing it on entertainment level then....even the lead actor had an dodgy english accent! Everything about is a miserbale fake!

[Stewart P Evans]

A Subjective Question

Judgeing it on entertainment level then....even the lead actor had an dodgy english accent! Everything about is a miserbale fake!

Whether or not it entertained is, surely, a subjective question. It certainly was not a runaway success despite the fact, I believe, that it grossed $11,000,000 dollars on initial release. It must have dropped off fairly quickly as it soon went onto DVD. The film was certainly not my cup of tea. As for the lead actor, I found him to be well read, highly intelligent and very friendly and I greatly admire his acting skills.