फ़्रोम हेल

"From Hell" is another Jack-the-Ripper yarn. This time around Johnny Depp plays Inspector Frederick George Abberline, who is investigating the work of a killer carving up the bodies of prostitutes in Whitechapel, London.

"From Hell" is a borderline horror/thriller. There is a fantastical element to the story as Depp receives visions of the killings, when "chasing the dragon" (or, in simpler terms, when doped up to his eye-balls). These visions are used to make mad-intuitive leaps on Abberline's parts to help push along the story-line, as the bodies begin to pile up. Unfortunately the killer is quite obvious as the script provides "red herrings" which are set up in a manner that you know they're going to be false, so the viewer is "surprised" (or not) when the real killer is revealed. That's a shame as it removes some of the mystery from the movie when you realise you got it right. There's also a rather interesting take on the murderer's reasoning, which is not entirely unwelcome, but does feel somewhat as if they need to pad out the story and distinguish it from other Ripper yarns.

Depp is, as usual, good. His accent appears a bit muddled however - where is he supposed to be from? But, as Hollywood standards go, it's better than average. Robbie Coltrane provides the humour (such as there is) by being Abberline's quipping side-kick, making dry observations of the situations he finds himself in. Coltrane has shown his acting skills in the TV series "Cracker" and he doesn't strain himself here, nor does he outshine himself. The rest of the cast are grand but Heather Graham, as the whore whom Depp falls for, is unconvincing as she looks far too pretty, and well mannered, to be a "lady of the night".

The direction is alright. The Hughes' brothers manage to convey a generally, downbeat and sombre tone to the proceedings. The vision sequences however come across as slightly comic-booky, a reminder of movies of the 60s/70s where they went overboard on filters and camera distortions in order to depict insanity. Far more effective is the bleak visions used in the TV show "Millennium" - here it tends to detract from the seriousness of the moment. Some of the scenes are fairly gory - it features a quite gruesome throat slashing - while other times the violence is seen purely in the reactions of others, without having to expose the viewer to it. Both of these work well. All in all the Hughes' acquit themselves because they fail to actually show a bright, clear image until the very very end of the movie, where the image is accompanied by one of the darkest in the movie. Thus they effectively capture the mood of the city and the times.

"From Hell" suffers from having a lack of tension and a script where characters tend to take on almost caricature tones (some of the prostitutes and the Nickel's gang in particular come across as ham-fisted). Nevertheless there's a mood to the movie, and Depp's performance is convincing enough to keep you watching until the decidedly downbeat end. Recommended for fans of the Victorian thriller/horror genre and those seeking a half-decent movie. 6.4/10

The best thing about an enduring mystery is that people can feel free to take all sorts of liberties with the facts and create interesting "what if" scenarios. FROM HELL is a perfect example. For the record, the theory behind the killings is pretty much right out of JACK THE RIPPER: THE FINAL SOLUTION by Stephen Knight, and it's been pretty well discredited since it first came out twenty years ago, even though it makes a hell of an entertaining piece of fiction.

I completely discount any criticisms of the movie where people say "it didn't happen that way". Of course it didn't; that's why this is a fictional film and not a documentary. It's very loosely based on the Alan Moore graphic novel, and about all it retains of it is the Duke of Clarence theory and the stylish look of the architecture. It's enough to make the film beautiful to watch.

Yes, I know that four of the five victims of Jack the Ripper were women in their late 40's, which on the streets of Victorian London would mean that they would resemble crones in their late 60's or early 70's. Just try to make that fly past a Hollywood studio boss; the casting at least had women who looked fairly human rather than like fallen glamour girls. I've read a couple of comments disparaging the accents. Actually, Cockney accents were the norm in the street because people tried to blend in and often weren't eager to advertise Scottish or Irish origins.

I call special attention to the performance of Jason Flemyng in the role of Netley, the coachman, arguably the most fascinating and believable character in the whole production. Most of his best scenes ended up on the cutting room floor, unfortunately, and yet he still manages to pull the movie together into a cohesive whole just by his presence. (It must have been a heck of a fun role to play!) As well, Sir Ian Holm deserves special mention for stepping in when the original choice for his role, Sir Nigel Hawthorne, tragically became ill and died just before the film went into production. I have never seen Sir Ian in any role that I didn't find completely believable, and that ranges all the way from KING LEAR to his role in ALIEN, for heaven's sake.

My interest in the whole Jack the Ripper case has been reawakened thanks to this movie, and I'm trying to hunt down a copy of Alan Moore's graphic novel (which is very difficult to find). No, it's not even close to an approximation of what really happened; nobody will ever know the truth, Patricia Cornwell's arrogant claims notwithstanding. It's still worth renting, if only for the beautifully ominous score and the fascinating transformation of Prague into Victorian London. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

An interesting, if not totally successful variation on the Jack The Ripper story, blighted by Hollywood yet again assuming that anyone in London says "cor blimey" a lot, and speaks in the same exaggerated "cock-er-ney" manner. This is a shame, as the film actually has a lot of good things going for it. Some genuinely chilling set pieces and a suitably grim visual style make for some scary moments. Sadly, particularly in the first half of the film, the Hughes Brothers (directing) seem to spend too much time trying to be visually clever when they should be putting more effort into getting on with the story. When they dispense with the visual gimmickry and the action is allowed to take off, the film is extremely gripping. On another level, the ending is particularly moving. A previous reviewer referred to the film's historical inaccuracies in depth, so I won't retread the same ground, but suffice to say that anyone familiar with the events will be distracted by these, although anyone new to the story wouldn't be affected. Performances are generally good, if not quite the principal performers' best work - in my book, the honours go to the ever reliable Ian Holm and Robbie Coltrane. Overall, this film is well worth a couple of hours of your time, but it could have been so much more...

A dark and meticulous tale, based around the murders of Jack the Ripper in Whitechapel, London. The films look is no more than what you would expect from a one based on Jack the Ripper. Dark shadows loom over the characters as the satanic nature of The Ripper is emphasised. It's such an intriguing story and character that every time I watch a film based on this story I come away slightly disappointed. This time was no exception. While the acting was good (minus some quite unconvincing cockney accents - Heather Graham and Johnny Depp, I'm talking to you) and the direction assured, the script seemed a little reserved. There was no great insight into any of the characters, and much of it played out like a simple murder mystery. But this didn't stop me from enjoying the 120 or so minutes.

Why did I enjoy this film, I hear you ask? For a start, the direction was superb - the streets of London looked grimy, while the `unfortunates' (i.e., prostitutes) wandered around in squalor awaiting their fate. This produced a wonderful atmosphere, creating murder scenes that were much more terrifying and shocking (and very gruesome). Johnny Depp's performance (as the detective Abberline), as always, was hugely enjoyable to watch. He played his character in a very subtle way - halfway between comic and serious. He portrays a desperate man, constantly resorting to drugs so he can pass through the day. Depp and the filmmakers see him as a version of Sherlock Holmes, constantly finding clues that other police officers have overlooked (cliched, yes, but somehow Depp provides a little bit of originality). Abberline even suggests that the killer must be a learned man! How could this be?! While dismissed by all the other characters in the film (for a learned man would never commit acts of such debauchery), we as an audience know better not to trust a detective like this - their preposterous ideas are usually right. Another actor to praise in this is the wonderful Ian Holm. He plays his character with a wry little smile, seemingly enjoying every line he says. His interactions with Depp are great to watch.

While the film provides little to ponder on once the credits have rolled, you can leave satisfied that you have seen a stylish and enjoyable film. The Hughes brothers seem to be a talented pair of directors.

For those that care I gave this film 7/10

The critics, nit-pickers and historical pedants who've trashed this superb piece of truly cinematic movie-making have totally missed the point.

So what if Johnny Depp's English accent isn't exactly "right" for his character? (English accents have always been problematic for all but the most skilled of American actors: Depp pulls it off entirely passably, way way better than - say - Keanu Reeves, risible in Coppola's Dracula. Think of Kevin Costner, who didn't even bother trying in Robin Hood Prince of Thieves.) I'm a Londoner by birth, and for me the accent in no way detracted from Depp's excellent performance.

As for history, again, who cares if the filmmakers have employed a degree of dramatic licence? This is a movie, not a documentary. Nobody knows for sure who Jack the Ripper was, and in order to make the film interesting and enjoyable the writers have speculated a little. Fine by me.

OK, so Heather Graham was impossibly glamorous, but movies with big budgets need a little bit of star appeal. The notion of the "tart with a heart" is a cliché, sure, but nevertheless her character works in the context of the film. (Contrast the depiction of prostitution generally in this film with the utter garbage that is Pretty Woman.)

What's so great about this film? The quirky, literate script; the performances (all, with the possible exception of Graham, excellent); the wonderful photography and production design; the depiction of the murders themselves - elliptical, shocking, mesmerising; and above all the aura of brooding menace, gloom, cruelty, darkness, melancholy and downright despair running through it as deeply as the veins through a block of marble. This is marvellously thoughtful, evocative film-making, very bold and brave. No happy Hollywood ending, no phoney saccharine or cheap laughs to satisfy the popcorn brigade. This is a proper grown-ups movie that probes some of the darkest regions of the human psyche, places mainstream filmmakers like Lucas, Spielberg, James Cameron and their ilk don't dare to go, or couldn't go even if they wanted to. To me it appeals almost on a subconscious level, forcing us to confront our deepest fears and taboos - death, pain, suffering, human wickedness. I can't think of a recent major release that is so relentlessly downbeat.

Don't let the detractors put you off. It's hardly surprising a generation weened on MTV - folk with the the attention span of a gnat and the emotional depth of a paper cup - didn't like it. They've got their Screams and their Scary Movies, and they're welcome to them. This is super stuff, and the Hughes brothers and their collaborators should be heartily congratulated for it.

A classic, not so much for the plot, which is a little contrived, but for its sure command of cinema as a visual storytelling medium.