-

short answer- no.

it's a non conan doyle sherlock holmes adventure, where he 'solves' the mystery of jack the ripper.

there are similarities in the 'theory' about the true identity of jack, between the two films.
i believe at the time of Decree, there were probably some books postulating these theories.

i had thought Alan Moore came up with this on his own, but obviously he didn't.

it's a good film, especially if you like SH, but i actually liked FH better.

both discs are very nice though.

Moving to DVD Talk Forum.

- David Stein

The theory used in both films is based on "Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution" by Stephen Knight. Although the theory and the "evidence" supporting it are considered to be unsound or just plain ridiculous, the idea of a "royal conspiracy" is absolutely fascinating, so many have refused to let it die.

"Murder By Decree" is an enjoyable film, but (in my opinion) nothing too spectacular. The cast is (mostly) first-rate and fans of Sherlock Holmes should definitely give it a try. I've got an old VHS copy, but I'm not sure that I really feel the need to upgrade to the DVD. (I believe the DVD does have a commentary, though. If so, I would have to rent it just to hear the director's thought on the Ripper case. Us amateur Ripperologists can't get enough of wild theories and conjecture.)

"From Hell", on the other hand, is anything but enjoyable...at least to someone familiar with Alan Moore's brilliant graphic novel. Of course, this is, once again, just my opinion.

My advice....
Rent "Murder By Decree"
Skip the film version of "From Hell"
Buy the collected edition of Alan Moore and Eddie Campbell's "From Hell".

jim

I think "unsound or just plain ridiculous" is way off base. There is quite a bit of evidence that says that the prince was Jack the Ripper. It's just that nobody wants to believe that there could have been a royal cover-up.

With all the evidence that they collected about Jack the Ripper, do you really believe that they couldn't find out who it was? Why have the case books mysteriously disappear? Why was the prince put in a sanitarium at th same time? Why did the murders stop after he was comitted?

Trust me. I want to believe it. I just can't. Do enough reading on the subject and you'll find that most experts agree that Knight's theory simply is not true.

Got a bit of a headache right now, so I'm not going to look up any info at this time. However, you'll probably find a lot of stuff at www.casebook.org

jim

Right, and who killed OJ's wife? Who shot JFK? Why's there a face on Mars? Why does Italy look like a boot?

Putting aside the credibility (or lack thereof) of the film's Ripper postulations, Murder by Decree is pretty wonderful, let down only by a tedious and unnecessary final act.
The film was the third Horror tour de force from director Bob Clark in the '70s before he went mainstream. He invested it with his usual expertise for suspense, and his stable of regular cinematographers and composers gave the film Clark's unique look and sound. Moreover, Christopher Plummer and James Mason made a duo of great chemistry. Jeremy Brett may have been the ultimate Holmes, but Plummer isn't far behind.

One scene that stands out as being particularly frightening occurs near the end: