 |
From Hell (Widescreen Edition) by Albert Hughes, Allen Hughes
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
DVD detailsActor: Heather Graham, Ian Holm, Ian Richardson, Johnny Depp, Robbie Coltrane Director: Albert Hughes, Allen Hughes Brand: DEPP,JOHNNY Producer: Albert Hughes Producer: Allen Hughes Writer: Alan Moore Writer: Eddie Campbell Writer: Rafael Yglesias Writer: Terry Hayes DVD: Region Code 1 Audio: English (Original Language), Dolby Digital 5.1; French (Original Language), Dolby Digital 2.0 Surround; English (Subtitled); Spanish (Dubbed), Dolby Digital 2.0 Surround Format: Anamorphic, Closed-captioned, Color, DTS Surround Sound, DVD-Video, NTSC, Widescreen Picture Format: 2.35:1 Running Time: 122 minutes DVD Release Date: 2002-10-22 Audience Rating: R (Restricted) Studio: 20th Century Fox
DVD Reviews of From Hell (Widescreen Edition)DVD Review: Johnny Depp rules Summary: 5 StarsI realize a lot of people might not agree.. but I loved this different look at the Jack the Ripper typical movie.. and of course Johnny Depp can do no wrong as far as I am concerned, and I am not a teeny bopper groupy , I am a grandmother, haha..
Joann in Sapulpa Oklahoma
DVD Review: Wicked! Summary: 5 StarsI love this movie!! Thought Johnny was great in it! I would DENITLEY buy buy it. The plot was very good and it's just an all around good movie.
DVD Review: What you see is....what you want to see. Summary: 4 StarsHaving watched this 2001 DVD again the other night, and again reading through several of the myriad published histories of The Ripper crimes of 1888 Victorian London, I thought I'd add one MORE perspective on this variably-received movie, now 8 years past its initial release. As a brief background, I (like so many others) have always been fascinated by the crime story, have read a lot (by no means all) of the critical histories (some good, ie: Philip Sugden's materpiece....some acknowledged to be bogus, though entertaining, ie: "The Diary of Jack the Ripper"), and have seen several of the movie adaptations, of which "From Hell" is the most recent, and arguably the most entertaining (my other choice being the 1988 TV miniseries with Michael Caine, which for some reason is STILL not available for USA DVD's).
After reading a number of the reviews on this site (which are not unexpectedly quite varied, from one to five stars), I thought I'd offer that what you see/like/enjoy/appreciate in "From Hell" is likely mostly what you wanted to see before viewing it- not unlike the Ripper case itself, which still draws a multitude of opinions now 120 years after the fact.
First, for those reviewers who didn't find the storyline of "From Hell" believable: The published critical histories of the Ripper crimes, including the most critically acclaimed work by Sugden, all at least mention the possibility of the Crown Prince/William Gull/government conspiracy theory, as in the movie- including even the Annie Crook/Crown Prince secret marriage. While not generally considered by most serious historians to be the "answer" to the Ripper crimes(Sugden especially provides rather convincing evidence that it is sheer folly), its worth remembering that the real Ripper never was caught, or even close to being conclusively identified (not yet, anyway), so the movie is entitled to its own take, and shouldn't be overly criticized for that alone. It is also rather instructive that the more likely suspects (Montague Druitt, George Chapman, for just two examples) to have been The Ripper (Abberline, in fact, suspected Chapman) wouldn't necessarily make for as entertaining a movie, compared to the always fetching idea that a high government conspiracy is involved. So remember, "From Hell" is not a documentary (it IS based on a graphic novel, after all), nor does it intend to be a critical assessment of the published histories and police facts: it's just meant to be entertaining- and at that, I'd argue it succeeds well enough.
Lots of criticisms of Heather Graham's choice for the role of the Ripper's final (well, maybe) victim, Mary Kelley, as well as her acting performance in the film. Many criticized how beautiful she is in the film, which is out-of-sorts for an East End London prostitute in 1888. True, but it is also worth noting that all of the histories also point out that of the 5 murdered prostitutes commonly attributed to The Ripper, that Kelley was singularly attractive, including the hair. So the movie chooses to embellish her beauty: so what? For me, since I knew I wasn't watching a documentary, that bit didn't ruin the movie for me- I recognized it for what it was: just another plot device to make the movie "more viewable" for most people (though clearly not all). As far as Graham's acting, and so-so accent: again, not deal-breakers for me. It does help to be able to understand the dialogue in a movie, after all- if the cockney accents and slang were taken to the historically accurate extreme, the dialogue might well be nearly unintelligible. So get over it, and enjoy the movie for what it intends to be: entertaining.
Comments about the violence portrayed in "From Hell" seem to also run the gamut from "gratuitous" to "you got off easy" (ie: not enough). Read the actual police accounts of the crimes (and the one memorable still photo of Mary Kelley's mutilated corpse at the scene of the crime), and you'll have to agree that the movie was very circumspect and reserved as far as depictions of the actual violence goes. Any movie about The Ripper has to include some images that convey the extreme violence of the crimes, which most investigators concluded increasingly suggested a murderer rapidly losing his sanity altogether. Indeed, one prevailing opinion at the time for why the crimes abruptly stopped after Kelley's murder was that the Ripper's mind had snapped completely, and that he likely committed suicide (the Druitt hypothesis, especially). For me, this movie did a good job of conveying the horror of the crimes, without bathing the viewer in gratuitous violence: but, to each his own, I suppose.
I thought the acting performances overall were quite good, though not exactly classics in moviemaking. And again, the real Abberline was neither psychic nor an opium addict, nor was he romantically involved with Kelley- anyone who knows even a little about the history ought to recognize all that as just movie-making- whether you like it or not, it's there to make the story more interesting for some. Personally, I didn't think it added much to the entertainment value of the movie- I'd rather have seen more time devoted to the real Abberline's sleuthing in this case.
A lot of comments about the music in "From Hell"- many found it annoying largely because of it's persistence in every scene. I generally pay quite a bit of attention to musical scores in movies, and some of my favorite flicks typically are marked by their memorable scores. In no way would I call the score in "From Hell" memorable, but neither did I find it annoying, as did so many others. To me, it was another non-factor in my enjoyment of this film.
I thought the sets (with modern day Prague simming nicely for Victorian London) were effective at creating an everpresent sense of doom and dread- my wife of 30 years came out of the theatre when we first saw this in 2001 saying that she "never wanted to watch that movie again", mainly because the atmosphere was so evil and foreboding that it made her very uneasy throughout. I call that good movie-making, when it affects someone so much.
When I ask myself why I only give this movie 4 stars (3 1/2, actually), it's because I was wanting something that stuck a little closer to the known facts- not about who the Ripper might have been, mind you (since that's still fair game to this day), but about the principals involved, especially Abberline's character, and perhaps the prostitutes individually. Perhaps I was also wanting a few more of the possible suspects run by me during the film, just to keep me guessing (as was done in the 1988 TV miniseries).
But these are just my hopes/biases before watching "From Hell", and not valid criticisms of the movie as it is offered. When considered that way, it largely succeeds, and is worth viewing.
DVD Review: Slow, it goes nowhere. Summary: 2 StarsFrom Hell starring Johnny Depp is set against the backdrop of the famed killer, Jack the Ripper. Depp is a great actor but even his unique talent can't save this boring, slow-moving train wreck. Who cast Heather Graham?! She is one of the worst female actors ever!! She can't even pull off any kind of accent, her performance is painful to watch. This film tries to be scary and grounbreaking but I lost interest halfway through, snooze...
DVD Review: Feels Like a Retread Summary: 4 Stars"From Hell", the 2005 Jack the Ripper opus from the Hughes Brothers, almost makes the grade as the definitive movie about Victorian England's elusive killer. It's certainly atmospheric enough, with fog-shrouded alleyways and convincingly evocative street scenes brought vividly to life by cinematographer, Peter Deming.
Most of the performances are first-rate, too, with Johnny Depp a standout as Inspector Frederick Abberline, a real-life detective who, for purposes of the film, is gifted with psychic talents and cursed with a drug problem. Bedraggled and debauched, Depp drags Abberline through the grim proceedings with intelligence and compassion; he's empathetic with the Whitechapel crowd, but wary, as well. He looks on the ill-fated prostitutes as fellow human beings fallen on hard times, but their men are something else, entirely. Vicious, cunning, and altogether amoral, any number of these men rivaled the infamous serial killer in terms of misogyny and violence against women. Robbie Coltrane is also fine as Abberline's nursemaid/assistant. Tough and blunt, Coltrane heaves his hulking bulk after the addled Depp, trailing him from murder scene to opium den with the weary acceptance of a loyal manservant; it is Coltrane who gives the movie its true heart. Ian Holm, as Sir William Gull, physician to the Queen, also gives a finely shaded, elegant performance as a medical man practicing long past his point of retirement. More problematic, I think, is Heather Graham, a uniquely modern, American actress who, here, attempts to assay the role of a 19th Century London prostitute, and none too successfully. I like Graham alright, but she's just not a fit with this film. Her accent isn't convincing, and she just doesn't have the acting chops to carry off the important role of Mary Jane Kelley. The American actress, Susan Clark, fared better as Mary Kelley in the 1979 film, "Murder By Decree", and I think therein lies a big part of the problem that I have with "From Hell". Not Heather Graham's performance, but comparisons with the earlier film.
"Murder By Decree" featured famed fictional sleuth, Sherlock Holmes, and his sidekick, Dr. Watson, frantically chasing around London in an attempt to find, and put a stop to Jack the Ripper's madness. In this film, Christopher Plummer and James Mason excelled in the roles of the dynamic Holmes and Watson, with Genevieve Bujold, David Hemmings, Donald Sutherland, Sir John Gielgud, and Anthony Quayle rounding out the big-name cast. While not perfect, "Murder By Decree" seems to me to be a more cohesive film, and covers much of the same territory that is retread in "From Hell". In fact, except for the detectives, "From Hell" could have been, essentially, a remake.
The same could also be said with regards to the 1988 miniseries, which is perhaps, to date, the definitive Jack the Ripper story. In it, Michael Caine convincingly portrayed an older, wiser Abberline (minus the ESP and drug problem), Armand Assante played a suspect, Jane Seymour and Susan George were among the menaced women, and Ray McAnally was cast as Sir William Gull. The miniseries played out over several nights, giving it time to present a more detailed mystery, and to delve more deeply into the characters of those involved. "From Hell" also seems to borrow liberally from this miniseries, thereby giving it a less-than-fresh feel(although the in-your-face gore is something missing from either of these earlier treatments).
While "From Hell" suffers from comparisons to earlier films, it is still stylish and exciting, with (mostly) good performances, so it should satisfy fans of period thrillers.
Description of From Hell (Widescreen Edition)A clairvoyant police detective must stop the most notorious serial killer in history - Jack the Ripper - before it's too late! Johnny Depp and Heather Graham star in this "engrossing, stylish thriller" (People) that "grips tighter than a chokehold and cut as deep as a knife" (Washington Post) Heavy on atmosphere and light on everything else, From Hell is visually impressive while lacking the depth of the acclaimed graphic novel it's based upon. Making their third feature since 1993's Menace II Society, twins Allen and Albert Hughes approach the Jack the Ripper case with physical precision, re-creating the gritty Whitechapel district of 1888 London in meticulous detail. What they've forgotten is the sheer terror that gripped Whitechapel in the wake of the Ripper's slaying of five prostitutes, investigated here by a Scotland Yard sleuth (Johnny Depp) who uses opium, laudanum, and absinthe to fuel his semiprescient visions of the slayings. Heather Graham attempts a slippery Cockney accent as a would-be victim, while Ian Holm steals the show as a has-been surgeon with devilish delusions of grandeur. Violence is obliquely suggested or briefly graphic, but no matter how you cut it, From Hell is only marginally thrilling as it treads familiar territory. --Jeff Shannon
|
 |