The Ripper

My review was written in February 1986 after watching the program on United Home Video cassette.

"The Ripper" is an ambitious but off-putting videotaped horror feature from the makers of last year's "Blood Cult" home video entry. Excessive gore and a very slow-paced storyline should turn off prospective fans.

Familiar gimmick has a n outbreak of local slasher murders (pic was filmed in Tulsa) coinciding with a new college course on crimes depicted in feature films, with particular focus on the Whitechapel murders in 1888. Student Steve (Wade Towers) suspects that Prof. Harwell (Tom Schreier) is the new murderer, slitting women's throats from ear to ear and then disemboweling them (shown in closeups for the same type of gore introduced on-screen over two decades ago in H. G. Lewis' "Blood Feast").

Pic dawdles frequently en route to its supernatural climax. Silliest gimmick has Harwell's teacher/girlfriend Carol (Mon VanPernis) leading an aerobics class, which momentarily gives the tape a combo of all the made-for home video genres currently selling well: horror, exercise and music video. Gore is the feature's goal, and the murders are depicted with repetitious cutting of latex throats and torsos, blood spurting and fake entrails pulled out.

Touted star Tom Savini (makeup specialist who wears his acting hat here only) doesn't show up until the finale, and aided by eerie contact lenses, does a nice job as the Ripper, bug brevity of his appearance will disappoint his fans. Technical quality of the video technique is variable, with some blurriness in long shots and unfortunate lens flares in night shots.

A college professor stumbles across a ring that belongs to Jack the Ripper and goes on a murderous rampage. This gory garbage plays like a cheap early 80s music video. How did special effects genius Tom Savini end up in this loser? Avoid this crap at all costs. My evaluation: (no stars).

Granted, while I had never heard about the 1985 slasher horror movie "The Ripper", from writer Bill Groves and director Christopher Lewis, I still opted to watch it as I had the opportunity here in 2025. I didn't know what I was in for, so I harbored no expectations to the movie. So I suppose the writer and director had every opportunity to entertain me.

The script in the movie was okay. I mean, it was an adequate enough slasher story, though you're not in for anything extraordinary or particularly memorable.

Of the entire cast ensemble, I was only familiar with actor Tom Savini. The acting performances in the movie were actually fair enough.

The effects in the movie were okay, and I assume that Tom Savini himself was working on the special effects aside from just only acting in the movie.

"The Ripper" is suitable for a single viewing, but that is about it. There is no replay value to be found in the movie.

My rating of the 1985 slasher horror movie "The Ripper" lands on a four out of ten stars.

THE RIPPER (VIDEO 1985) Not bad... For a high school student film 2.5 out of 10 stars Time to Read:

BASIC PLOT: Jack the Ripper's ring is found in an antique shop, and bought by Richard Harwell (Tom Schreier) a college professor. A string of ripper-like killings begin, and Steve (Wade Tower), one of Richard's students begins to suspect his teacher is the new ripper.

WHAT WORKS: *CINEMATOGRAPHY IS OK For the most part, I didn't have a lot of problems with the blocking, setups, framing etc. It's decent for a student film, which is what it seems to be.

*ORIGINAL SCRIPT OR TREATMENT (NOT EXECUTED SCRIPT) ISN'T BAD I can see the writer's intent, and it wasn't bad. What they did to his vision is the real bloodbath.

*SEVERAL PLOT DEVICES AND CHARACTERS AREN'T USED CORRECTLY Fred (Randall White) for instance, the flock of seagulls nerd who knows about "Star Trek", and brings his dog to class with him, is a great character. Push him into knowing about the occult, make him team up with Steve & Carol, and there's a workable plot device about how they all discover what the ring is doing to Richard. It's a more enjoyable path as well, instead of haphazardly jumping from scene to scene, with no explanation as to how we got here.

WHAT DOESN'T WORK: *THE ENGLISH ACCENTS ARE LAUGHABLE The English accents in the opening scene are so bad they are laughable.

*NO BREASTS In this type of movie, if you're going to include a five minute make out scene, there needs to be breasts.

*WHY DID THE MOTORCYCLE EXPLODE? There's a scene where a motorcycle rider lays down his bike, and then in the distance, we see an explosion. WTH?

*ACTING IS WOODEN Acting is beyond flat. It reminds me of a high school student film, where there's no budget, no rehearsals, and made by people who are still learning.

*WHY IS JACK THE RIPPER DRESSED LIKE A VAMPIRE? It doesn't make sense.

*NO SUSPENSE, NO BUILDUP TO VIOLENCE This is the biggest problem, because it robs the viewer of the fear factor. It instead leaves the ultra violence feeling cartoony, and lackluster. It doesn't help that they continually mention films that are full of suspense and terror.

TO RECOMMEND, OR NOT TO RECOMMEND, THAT IS THE QUESTION: *I cannot recommend this to anyone but aspiring screenwriters, and as a cautionary tale of what NOT to let happen to your work.

(rw2499279)

CLOSING NOTES: *THIS IS A STRAIGHT TO VIDEO MOVIE, please keep that in mind before you watch/rate it. Straight to video movies have a much lower budget, and so your expectations should be adjusted.

*I HAVE NO CONNECTION TO THE FILM, or production in ANY way. This review was NOT written in full, or in part, by a bot. I am just an honest viewer, who wishes for more straight forward reviews (less trolls and fanboys), and better entertainment. Hope I helped you out.

The last time I saw such a cheesy movie with laughable acting and script it was rated XXX ! the parts that kept my attention were so bad I felt my mind freezing over. *** WARNING *** this movie contains a bad 80's group dancing sequence that is more sickening than the stabbings and gut ripping. AVOID -2/10