The Ripper

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

Ripper, The (1985)

* 1/2 (out of 4)

This here was one of the first movies to be produced in order to go straight to video with the director's Blood Cult being considered the very first. The film tells the story of a professor (Tom Schreier) who buys the ring of Jack the Ripper and soon afterwards women start turning up with their throats slashed and guts ripped out. This was a very popular and rather infamous rental back in the day but it's pretty much been forgotten since then. I hadn't seen the film in nearly twenty-years and my memories of it were pretty bad but this viewing really didn't come off as bad as I thought it would. There's no question that the film is bad but I was rather shocked to see how well it actually is considering there really wasn't anything for the director to work off of. In other words, I've seen countless direct to VHS (or now DVD) titles that were cheap and poor but it's rather neat seeing such an early example and notice that it's better than a lot of what followed. The biggest problem is that the film runs 104-minutes, which is at least twenty-minutes too long. The actual story is an interesting one and one that could work but not at the long running time. Another problem is that the film spends way too much time with one of the professor's students and his girlfriend. Both of the actors are very bad so why so much time was spent with them is beyond me. Gore master Tom Savini gets top billing but he only appears in one scene playing the spirit of Jack the Ripper.

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.

OK, I like some of Tom Savini's work, but this was by far, one of his worst. First of all, you can tell that this was a shot-on-video film because of the cheesy camerawork. And second, the gory special effects almost made my throw up. Well, OK, I was 10 at the time but I was seeing with my parents and I was a huge horror fan at the time. But this was one of the worst!!! Avoid it all costs!!!!