Tweet
Here is a forum to name your favorite and worst Ripper documentary. Also, if you could, name the reasons why you don't like them
For me, for both, it's a tie:
Best:
1. Secret Identity of Jack the Ripper (1988): a very good long documentary filled with recreations and commentary from well-known British and American crime officials on the case. Well worth watching
2. National geographic's Is it Real: jack the Ripper: Very creepy hour long documentary featuring a good overview of the case and filled with pictures, actors, experts, and theorists (including Cornwell and Ivor Edwards)
Worst:
1. Stephen Knight's Royal Conspiracy documentary: Besides the theory itself being total B.S., the documentary contains numerous factual errors:
A. The map used to show the locations of the bodies in Whitechapel is completely wrong. It makes Whitechapel look like a series of dead ends and the names of the locations are in the wrong spot. I laughed when I saw that.
B. The use the wrong pictures when talking about the victims (For example, they show Catherine Eddowes when talking about Liz Stride, or maybe it is vice-versa)
C. They use Sickert's "Mrs. Barrett" painting as a depiction of Mary Kelly. I mean, come on!!!
2. The MysteryQuest Hisory Channel documentary: Although it was interestign to watch, I kept track of the numerous errors this show had:
A. Although fairly recent, they claim Tumblety (their preferred target) is presented as a "Brand-new" suspect.
B. No mention is made of the murder of Mary Kelly...not even her name or the famous murder scene photo. Could it be because since Tumblety maybe was in prison during the murder, it would have messed up their theory and so chose not to bring it up?
C. They use DNA from a Ripper letter to hypothesize if the Ripper was a woman since the DNA is female. There is no mention that this may be irrelevant since the letters are regarded as hoaxes.
For me, for both, it's a tie:
Best:
1. Secret Identity of Jack the Ripper (1988): a very good long documentary filled with recreations and commentary from well-known British and American crime officials on the case. Well worth watching
2. National geographic's Is it Real: jack the Ripper: Very creepy hour long documentary featuring a good overview of the case and filled with pictures, actors, experts, and theorists (including Cornwell and Ivor Edwards)
Worst:
1. Stephen Knight's Royal Conspiracy documentary: Besides the theory itself being total B.S., the documentary contains numerous factual errors:
A. The map used to show the locations of the bodies in Whitechapel is completely wrong. It makes Whitechapel look like a series of dead ends and the names of the locations are in the wrong spot. I laughed when I saw that.
B. The use the wrong pictures when talking about the victims (For example, they show Catherine Eddowes when talking about Liz Stride, or maybe it is vice-versa)
C. They use Sickert's "Mrs. Barrett" painting as a depiction of Mary Kelly. I mean, come on!!!
2. The MysteryQuest Hisory Channel documentary: Although it was interestign to watch, I kept track of the numerous errors this show had:
A. Although fairly recent, they claim Tumblety (their preferred target) is presented as a "Brand-new" suspect.
B. No mention is made of the murder of Mary Kelly...not even her name or the famous murder scene photo. Could it be because since Tumblety maybe was in prison during the murder, it would have messed up their theory and so chose not to bring it up?
C. They use DNA from a Ripper letter to hypothesize if the Ripper was a woman since the DNA is female. There is no mention that this may be irrelevant since the letters are regarded as hoaxes.
Or, as he is better known nowadays, Michael(Calm down dear, it's only a commercial)Winner!!! 
His commentary is so bad, that it almost becomes good, in a totally unitended sort of a way!!! 
He really should have gone on tour, as the narrator for the Rocky Horror Show!!! 
Comment