Ripper

In this one, someone is killing students at a college campus using the same techniques as London's very own Jack the Ripper. The students try and catch him. The audience falls asleep.

This is another misogynist fantasy in which several young women are brutalised by a killer with a stainless steel kitchen knife. One of the suspects looks and acts like a young Bobcat Goldthwaite, Bruce Payne proves once again that he's Britain's most embarrassing export since Julian Sands, and Jurgen Prochnow, as a twitchy detective, continues his regrettable career slide. Rubbish.

Oh, and although I'm no expert on the history of serial killers, I think I can safely say that Jack the Ripper never ran any of his victims over in a jeep.

I rented this movie thinking that with a title like "Ripper: Letters from Hell" that it might have something - anything, to do with Jack the Ripper. WRONG! This movie starts off with a young girl surviving a serial killer's attacks, than jumps forward several years to her as a college student studying other serial killers and obsessed with all things Gothic (the girl is obnoxious, so you have no interest in her or anything she's doing here) Then, about 45 minutes into the movie, someone mercifully starts killing off the various assortment of college low life, and the characters seem to think that the killings are reminiscent of Jack the Ripper's killings over a century earlier. This connection is nominal and if you don't pay attention you'll miss it entirely - and the ending of this horrendously overlong movie explains nothing, which is extremely aggravating and anticlimactic.

They figured that if they just automatically set it up for a sequel they could get away with the movie not making any sense, and the gaping holes in the plot, and whoever does a sequel will either have to explain that themselves, or it won't be mentioned at all, and either way the makers of this movie would be off the hook for any resolution to this story.

Indeed, there are more violent and gory movies than this, there are movies with pointless endings like this, but this one somehow manages to beat all of them and take the cake for some reason. This is a loud, boring, obnoxious movie that just goes on forever, not even good for unintentional humour since it takes itself way too seriously for that. There's utterly no redeeming quality or value to this one at all.

This is another one let down by some horrible acting from certain cast members and some clunky script work.

Story wise I really enjoyed it. It's the sort of film that in the right hands would of been great but it got someone elses hands so it was more just ok.

Molly Keller (A. J. Cook), the only survivor of a violent massacre when she was sixteen, is now a student enrolled in a forensic science course at Berkeley. When her fellow classmates start dying at the hands of a mystery killer, who is following the modus operandi of the infamous Jack the Ripper, she suspects that the murderer from her past is back to finish the job.

Molly and the remaining students from her study group pool their profiling talents in an attempt to discover the identity of the maniac.

Director John Eyres directs this slab of stalk 'n slash with both eyes firmly fixed on the teen market, and what may have been a nice addition to the genre becomes an annoying and unwatchable piece of garbage due to its MTV trappings. So obnoxious are the trendy narcissistic teens that make up teacher Marshall Kane's (Bruce Payne) class of wannabe Clarice Starlings, that you'll find yourself rooting for the killer. Main character Molly is perhaps the most annoying character of all; her emotionally troubled, spunky, grunge-chic heroine is carefully designed to appeal to the widest possible teenage demographic; angst-ridden loners, trendy fashion followers, horny guys—she's supposed to appeal to them all. Well I'm not a teenager anymore, and I hated her with a passion! And while I'm having a rant about the students, could someone please explain to me how they all became so damn erudite. From hacking into a police computer undetected, to conducting an autopsy, to fixing a satellite dish, nothing seemed to be beyond their capabilities.

And now onto the death scenes. The first murder is the most impressive—a multiple stabbing followed by defenestration—and it is also the bloodiest. The rest of the killings are relatively gore free and disappointing. The nastiest deaths actually occur by accident, when two characters fall in front of the whirring buzz blades of a sawmill.

Toward the end of this drivel, which at 115 minutes is way too long, I gave up following the ludicrous plot. There was some rubbish about the victims sharing the same initials as those killed by Jack the Ripper, a pointless (non-explicit) sex scene, and various characters were revealed as red herrings. The finale is completely confusing and I ended up unsure as to who the killer really was.

Apparently, the director deliberately wanted the ending to be ambiguous, with the viewer making their own mind up about who was responsible. Well I'm not going to be ambiguous about what I think of this film—it was awful.

When people ask me what are some of the best things in life, I being a horror guru reply, a good direct-to-video horror flick. Straight on the heels of above average (or well above average) direct-to-video horror movie such as, Cube, Ginger Snaps, Cut, and The Truth About Demons, comes the latest DTV installment, Ripper: Letter From Hell. While one may find the premise to be undeniably cliched (it is), the film comes off stylish and ultimately becomes engaging as the body count increases in a most elaborate fashion.

Now for that all-too-familiar premise: Molly Cook, young woman who survives the attack of a sadistic killer now finds herself in a college course studying serial killer theories. When the people around her begin to die, she believes a new serial killer is hunting them down, imitating the slayings of Jack the Ripper.

The killings in Ripper: Letter From Hell, are much more extensive than the average slasher film. Horror fans are used to seeing the killer show up, swing his weapon of choice, and then the scene is cut, going back to the more boring part of the movie. In Ripper, the killer spends more time with his victims, making them scream in agony, stabbing them to death, and then heaving them through a window, or ramming them off a cliff and leaving them to hang onto a rock before finishing them off.

The direction by John Eyers keeps the film moving along at a brisk pace. While the editing tends to be a little MTV-ish at times, it is not overdone. The fast action editing actually works well and adds to the brutality of the killings in the movie. The beginning comes off as a Brothers Grim-like fairy tale with the serial killer's pursuit of Molly through a dark, rainy, forest. The scene in the club where the camera follows the trail of blood from the ceiling and onto the dance floor, is one of the most stylish murder scenes I have seen in a while and dare I say it, reminded me of those elegant murder scenes from the Italian giallos of yesteryear.

There are some major set backs in the film such as a highly unlikeable cast of characters. A.J. Cook (Molly) holds her own and is a convincing lead character. She gets support from veteran actor Bruce Payne. The script has more than a dozen ridiculous lines as one user pointed out, "Shut up!"..."No! You shut up!" However, dialogue in the class lecture scenes about Jack the Ripper are impressive and well researched.

The ending is a grand showdown as the killings become even more graphic and intense. The handful of suspects begin to wind down, and although you may have it figured out who the killer is, you'll be flip-flopping back and forth until the final scene. It's a beautiful scene, without giving anything away, as we are given a glimpse of 1800 London. It's an ending you will either love or hate or just not grasp entirely.

Ripper: Letter From Hell is a stylish, well orchestrated effort and deserves a spot with the recent array of worthy direct-to-video horror movies.