To everyone on here... what was your reaction when you first saw "From Hell"...

[Rubyretro]

Although I'm a huge Johnny Depp fan, I don't like everything that he does, and I resisted this in the Cinema,for fear that it would be 'commercial crap' -which it turned out to be when I saw it on DVD.

It did lead me to the graphic novel though (far superior) and thence to Casebook...

[ianincleveland]

Saw it when it came out at the cinema,and thought,and still do that it was utterly hopeless.The sets were well done but as for the rest of it,and ive watched it twice since,it was total garbage

[Atrain]

its a good flick and Ian Holm makes a creepy Jack, but it can't hold a candle to the graphic novel which is obvious. So as an adaption, not so good....as a stand alone jack flick not bad. I love Gothic horror and the hammer films stuff so it was nice to see this type of film in cinemas.

[Yimmit]

Howdy y'all!

I bought 'From Hell' years ago, purely for the Johnny Depp factor. But this film is actually what got me into the whole Jack the Ripper obsession in the first place, so I can thank it for that. Although now i realise it is riddled by inaccuracies, i actually really enjoy the film. If I watch it just as a film and not constantly compare facts (which I must admit is rather hard), I really like it.
I was wondering if someone could or maybe already has compiled a list comparing what 'From Hell' has and what the facts really are.
I must admit, I did not like the idea of Gull as a suspect, although there was a period where I thought it at least psychologically possible, the obvious facts, i believe, make it improbable (and almost impossible).
I do like the character of Godley, maybe its from being a fan on Coltrane, but i thought he was a bit of light in such a grime time and environment.
Abberline's portrayal for me was very much of a Sherlock Holmes variety. Drugged up and having random and wildly accurate moments of realization and case facts. But despite this, i thought there were some very interesting things in the film, which for people who know nothing about the case of the time in London is very insightful. (ie. the notion of the girls having grapes on their body but they couldn't afford them. Also the investigation styles of the time).
But.....I do LOVE the moment where Jack sits on the edge of MJK's bed and just pauses for a moment before leaping on her! It's fantastic suspense!!

But a comparison list between the facts and what the film make of the facts i think would be very interesting.

[claire]

I'm not sure I thought too much of it at all--and I've only seen it once, despite buying it a couple of years ago to watch again. It's absolute junk, of course, but redeemed by JD (and about a litre of JD, too, actually).
What was far, far, far worse was The Ripper--a bizarre, bizarre Aussie thing I came across on telly the other week, where people walked about a weird and clean set saying things like, ay guvnah, weeyah dya spose me stroids aaahh? The Reepah, ay? Fly-min Choina eef ee ain't troina ava gao wiff da woman ahm avin id off wiff.
It was weird. It made From Hell look beautiful in its conception and execution.

[tnb]

I had been expecting it to be historically inaccurate and was fully prepared to enjoy it simply as a film; but the thing that really struck me and ruined it for me even so was how unoriginally innacruate it was. I haven't read the graphic novel so didn't know quite what to expect - and by the same token I don't know if some of my criticism of the film is more so, or would be better directed as, criticism of the source - but I knew they had picked Gull as their 'Ripper', yet still I assumed the theory underpinning the film (even in impluasible, which doesn't bother me, in a film) would be something new. But it was the same old tired Royal Conspiracy nonsense right from the first scene, practically - and from thereon the repeated innacuracies kept stacking up - from the Old Nichol Gang to many, many more. This wasn't 'poetic licence', it was taking someone else's mistakes as gospel.

As it was, the one that annoyed me the most was the old cliche about the 'group of friends'. That, and the fact that Abberline, Godley and, in a fashion, Anderson appeared to be the only police officers involved in the whole case. Abberline being somehow in charge is of course another 'old' mistake.

I watched it on DVD with my wife who knows very little about the case, and for about the first 30 minutes she was constantly saying 'is that true?' cause even she could tell it was up the wall. Needless to say 99.9% of the time my reply was a flat 'no'; she then even gave up asking.

In summary, I tried my hardest to appreciate it as a film in its own right, but it just seemed sloppy. Stylised, innacurate - I can cope with. But sloppy is something else entirely. The Lusk letter seemed just one symptom of that - there was no need (in the film) to receive it then ,narrative wise - it just seemed like they couldn't be bothered to check the accuracy. Which makes SPE's involvement a little curious! Messing with facts for a reason, stylistic or plot or whatever, is one thing but for no reason is another.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Jonathan!

Yes, I find "The league of extraordinary gentlemen" as the most made-up movie of all time, so to say!

All the best
Jukka

[DarkTaleProductions]

I actually liked Watchmen from beginning to middle and Haley's performance as Rorschach. After the middle, it gets a bit lame. I prefer the graphic novel. Although I'm glad they took out Tales of the Black Freighter in the movie, as that was my only complaint about the GN.

Haven't seen or read League.

I did love V For Vendetta though.

[Jonathan H]

That it was boring, flat, grotesque, and hopelessly inaccurate.

This flop was joined by other subsequent awful adaptations of Alan Moore's work: 'The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen' and the absolute bottom of the barrel: 'Watchmen'.

[DanaeChantel]

The first thing that caught me on this movie is how nasty a place London was back in those days. The second thing I noticed is the fact that Mary Kelly stated, "Ere wha r ya doeng buttons are ard ta come by." It seems funny to those of us of today that buttons were a dear and precious commodity.

The other thing that caught me was when Polly Nichols had sex with a John back in the alley and she was pretending that he was um . . penetrating her, once he realized what she was doing he practically raped her and then threw change on the ground at her feet.

I feel sorry for these poor women as they didn't have much they could do to make money or make ends meet other than working in some dirty factory or being prostitutes.

Anne Crooks looked sexy tossing back her blonde locks during the sex scene.

Johnny Depp was sexy looking as ever.

The movie still scares me to this day. Love it!!!!!!

[DarkTaleProductions]

What bothers me is that they call him "Jack the Ripper" (the scene with Gull whose sick and Abberline is talking to him) before Abberline first reads the Dear Boss letter and Saucy Jacky postcard. I didn't really understand why they had him first read it after the double event for the first time before he reads the From Hell letter.

[Jerry P.]

It's funny with "historical fiction" the things that bother you.

For example, I can accept them making Aberline a psychic drug addict (I don't know why), but the fact that they receive the "From Hell" package PRIOR to the "double event" just drives me nuts.

[Bloofer_Lady]

I wasn't expecting an exact account of the Ripper murders when I saw it since I knew that it was based on a graphic novel. It's a really gorgeous looking movie in my opinion and it still scares the heck out of me even thought I've watched it many times. Sure, historical facts are messed up in the film, but then again Hollywood isn't known for getting those sort of things right are they.

[protohistorian]

expectations

What can one expect from a film that opens with a quote from an unknown and possibly fictional killer? Dave

[Mitch Rowe]

Considering what we are left with concerning "Historical Facts" Im open to just about any interpretation around these events as long as one isnt trying to deliberately change what little "facts" we have left.

I always try to remember everything I know about the case comes to me with very few of what could be considered "Official" Documents.

Of course From Hell is ridiculus but so was Titanic. At least anyone who is really interested can find Casebook and find out what we know. Then do what we do. Let our imagination run wild when we run out of "facts" too.

I think a more entertaining movie would have been JTR as a team effort with Freddy Krueger as Druitt and Leatherface as John Pizer. We would be praising it!