I wasn't --- I found that movie dreadful. Nice funny visuals but it just didn't have that... that thing that makes a movie special to me.


Mind you, I will get it when I get a WS TV because it is still a movie I would watch (especially with its glorious photography), but it's not going to rank into my top DVD lists.

I really liked this film (bought as a blind purchase). The visuals were very good as was Depp. The funny thing is that the conclusions made were quite possible. In fact, put together the way they were the assumptions add a somewhat new dimension to the entire "Ripper" case.

As for the deleted scenes........I agree that they should have been cut from the film.

Good effort.

This is a flat blind purchase, because it is too clean.

I give the film 6/10.

I was very disappointed from seeing this film, because it had a much larger budget than any of Argento's films and his slasher films are still better even if they are 20 years old. Why do I say this? Well, first of all Heather Graham was way too pale and clean for a person living during this time. I bet she used Aveda to shampoo her hair even while showering under the running water. This was a detail that annoyed me so much, and thinking of the budget that they had they could have hired a make-up artist to make her look a little dirtier. She cut through the screen like a knife that is how clean she was. In addition, she was way to pale for a person of her stature in society, she would have spend more time outside and therefore had a slight tan, not pale like a ghost. Her red hair was beautiful, I mean so beautiful that it would make today's photomodels claw her of envy. O'dear, more dirt please, I blame the art director who was Mark Raggett who also art directed Quills, Portrait of a Lady, and who supervised Shakespear in Love. This was just too clean, and that really took away from the reality feel that was needed in order to feel the terror of Jack the Ripper. (HUGE minus)

Nevertheless, nice cinematography, and good acting. Great cast as well.

Notice, I have not even touched adaptation of Jack the Ripper. I viewed it as a free adaptation, since we still today do not really know. A little sad that we never got to feel the horror that Jack the Ripper spread in London during this time.

Comments please.

DVD SMURF

Other than awkwardly casting Heather Graham as a street whore, I thought From Hell was very well done.


My review

I agree........But then again, I don't think Heather Graham is all that much of an actress no matter what the role

She might not be a world-class thespian, but she's purty...

Yup......Enough so to make her rich too

1) this is London during the industrial revolution.
yes, i agree she should have been much diriter. she was way too much of a beauty to be realistic. her nice set of chompers alone, make her icongrous with her surroundings.
but as far as being pale, like i said, its industrial London, which means, when its not overcast or raining there's probably a thick haze of soot in the air, obscuring the sun. this isn't the French Riveria and being a street walker, she wouldn't be out sunning herself during the day anyway.
pale is proper, clean and beautiful, probably not.

2) i rate the movie a little higher than you did.
for one thing, this film looked absolutely amazing on my dlp. considering all the problems this transfer could have had because of the dark hazy scenes, i was so impressed that i gave short shrift to its drawbacks.
and i have to admit, i loved the speculative answer to the mystery of Jack, and loved the performances of all the supporting characters.
Ian Holm, who played the royal familys doctor, was just fantastic.
i'm appreciating him more and more, every time i see him.
stylish, without being too gimicky, interesting, with some concentrated, visceral gore scenes, and a story that had a good resolution.
add to this a reference quality transfer and soundtrack and it adds up to one of the better blind purchases i've made since i got into this format.

The UV-beams that comes from the sun penerates clouds and the haze you are mentioning. In addition, if the UV-beams did not penetrate the haze and clouds then would the human beings die in larger numbers from multiple illness caused by environmental abuse. Moreover, you are also right about the industrial revolution, however, it was not as industrialized as it is today. However, I did enjoy your reply, it makes me think, which I love.

Cheers,

DVD SMURF

She has red hair - she's light skinned - she's pale. Whether the UV-beams are penerating or penetrating probably doesn't make a whole lot of difference. I think she looks so clean because the UV-beams are reflecting off her red hair thus creating the illusion of cleanliness. This also, of course, has an effect on her teeth. Something to do with the UV-beams, the red hair, and the fact that she has lots of sex. Yeah, yeah that's the ticket.

Heather Graham has the worst English accent I've ever heard.
Johnny Depp's is pretty poor also (And I'm usually a big fan of his)
This movie was slow and boring.

great movie, pick it up!

I just could not get into it.


This blind purchase is going to be traded or sold off.

I agree with you Josh. This DVD was a blind purchase for me and I loved it. A few friends have borrowed it and they gave it a thumbs up too. I also thought the movie was fun (and stylish). And didn't find anything boring about it.