|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1315
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 19, 2004 - 5:30 pm: |       |
Hi Dave,
Yes, I've heard about that DVD. That would really be a blast to see, especially the part with Stewart P. Evans, who was historical consulant for the movie and I believe he did a great job, in spite of the circumstances.
Yes, I've seen that morgue photo, taken on the same occasion as the known one where she is propped to the wall, but from a slightly different angle.
Unfortunately I belong to those antiquaric people that don't have a DVD-player, I can't afford that kind of stuff at the moment (I thought I'd wait until the recordable ones gets cheaper), but this is one of those occasions I wish I had one.
Yes, a Ripper tour on that DVD would have been a great idea as well.
It is true that Stephen Knight made some important discoveries for modern Ripperology, but unfortunately he became a sell-out along the way. I don't enjoy to speak ill of the dead (God rest his soul) but unfortunately he managed to destroy just as much for Ripperology as he contributed to it; I will never forgive him for pushing his Royal Conspiracy story although he knew it was a fake. He may once have been a very good and brilliant author and researcher, but unfortunately he turned out an intellectual crook and we are still suffering from it.
Johnny Depp is a brilliant actor and from what I've heard a very pleasant guy. I don't think he was right for the Abberline character, though, and I didn't like that they turned Abberline into a drug addict. That was just stupid.
OK, it's fiction, but then I would prefer they had made up a fictional character instead; after all we are talking about people who actually have lived for real.
Yes, from what I've heard Depp is very much into the Ripper and quite read up on the subject.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
David O'Flaherty
Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 252
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 19, 2004 - 5:52 pm: | |
Hi, Glenn
I didn't like Abberline's treatment in the film either, but with a different script, I feel Depp is more than capable of doing Abberline justice. Did you see him in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas? I think Depp playing a plumper and balder Abberline would be something to see. 
Cheers,
Dave |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1316
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 19, 2004 - 6:37 pm: | |
Hi Dave,
Well it was maybe not Depp's fault as such. I agree on that he would be more than capable of tackling Abberline, but maybe with a bit more make-up. I must admit I am a bit sick of the fact, that everytime Hollywood is doing a film on the subject, the lead character must look like 25 and like a pop star (and naturally Abberline must be involved in a love story as well). I would like to see someone having the guts to be real honest about it and portray them as they should be. Actually, during the 19th century, men in general looked at least ten years older than they were, due to moustaches, side-burns and so on. But unfortunately box offices rules.
I really don't think Abberline would do a bad job as an actor; my main objection would be that he is a bit too young for the part -- or looks too young. As I said, he is certainly not a bad actor; his charisma is incredible, and it could be that some make-up could do the trick. So I completely agree with you -- a plumper and balder Abberline (and with side-burns!) could absolutely work. But I wonder if the movie companies would have the guts to pull it off...?
And yes, please... a different script!!
Cheers, Dave
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Paul Jackson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Paulj
Post Number: 67
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, March 19, 2004 - 8:45 pm: | |
Hey Everyone,
I thought the film was cheesy at best. I was entertaining though, even if it was based on the
Royal conspiracy..which I think is a bunch of nonsense. But to each his own.
Chris,
Great Idea about a film with them just following some guy around. Maybe they should do it like the "Blair Witch". That would be kinda cool.
Best Regards.
Paul |
Chris Michetti
Detective Sergeant
Username: Pl4tinum
Post Number: 73
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, March 20, 2004 - 12:25 am: | |
Speaking of getting the names mixed up, it seemed like they mixed up Liz Stride and Kate Eddowes in the movie - Liz looked alot like the real kate (long dark hair, thin face) and Kate looked somewhat like the real Liz, blonde etc.
Paul,
I definitely would pay a nice sum of money to watch a film like that... that would be so darn frightening too. Especially when he is trying to avoid getting caught while carrying a darn kidney or heart...
Chris 
|
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 182
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 20, 2004 - 6:41 am: | |
Can anyone give me the exact location of where this film was made? I know its in Prague somewhere, but where exactly?
Bob |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1317
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 20, 2004 - 7:32 am: | |
Chris,
Just a pointer:
The real Long Liz was hardly blonde, was she? She had dark brown curly hair.
Both Eddowes and Liz had dark hair.
But I agree on that it sometimes looked like they had mixed up some of the women anyway, regarding facial features, bodily constitution etc.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Kevin Braun
Detective Sergeant
Username: Kbraun
Post Number: 98
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 20, 2004 - 2:56 pm: | |
Hi Bob,
Sets were constructed in fields south-west of Prague. I believe several outdoor scenes in the movie were filmed in Prague's "Old Town", including the famous Old Town Square.
Kevin |
Chris Michetti
Detective Sergeant
Username: Pl4tinum
Post Number: 79
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, March 21, 2004 - 12:07 am: | |
Glenn,
Ah, I thought Liz Stride was a blonde - she is a Swede after all, and I thought the mortuary photo looked like she had light hair (though dirtied by mud of course). My mistake.
Either way - the Liz in the movie looked much like Eddowes does. I found it confusing.
Chris
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1321
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 21, 2004 - 4:52 am: | |
Hi Chris,
"...she is a Swede after all"
I knew you were going to say that!
Ah, these misconceptions... We are not a blonde people. That is a myth, like all the other known conceptions about Sweden (like the cold weather).
Yes I agree. When I saw the movie, I would have liked some of the women to change places with each other as well. There was something there that wasn't quite right.
Well, it's hardly a film that will be noticed for its accuracy anyway.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 183
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 21, 2004 - 11:26 am: | |
Dear Kevin,
Many thanks for the info.
Bob |
Pat Hall
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, March 19, 2004 - 5:31 pm: | |
Did anyone notice that in the second special features disc where they discussed the murder of Annie Chapman that they used her coffin picture and then a picture of Catherine Eddowes. I guess they just didn't have any more pictures of Chapman, had a lot of Eddowes, and needed filler??? I thought it was particularly odd since they didn't even look alike.
I'm surprised no one else has commented on this.
|
ReeceAU
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, March 20, 2004 - 4:54 am: | |
Hi guys, I thought From Hell was well done as far as the production is concerned.The Hughes Brothers did try and make there East End set and the murder scenes look as close as the original as possible.I thought that some of the deleated scenes should have been kept though,like the scene in the back yard where Annie was killed.I thought that it had some importance to the actual event. Its still not as good as Jack the Ripper with Michael Caine and Jane Seymour,that was one of the best fictional films on the subject.We seem to have a movie made about the Ripper every 8-10 yrs so lets hope the next one can really knock our socks off!!!!!!!!!! |
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 943
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 6:15 am: | |
Reece,
I agree that the Michael Caine version was better, even though poor old Dr Gull was target once more as Jack the Ripper. I hope they make another film one day that doesn't include ANY traits from the royal conspiracy.
All,
I don't understand all this, mixing the victims up. I recognised who was supposed to be who and the only one I disagreed with was Annie Chapman as I didn't think she had long hair, or if she did I thought it would have been tied up like the others.
I think it's quite hard to determine length though as the women, even prostitutes used to tie their hair up in some way and often wore hats. I know that Mary Kelly apparently didn't wear hats though so at least they made an effort with Mary's appearance.
Glenn,
Kate didn't have dark hair at all. You only need to look at the mortuary photos to see that. It also says she had auburn hair. I used to be that colour and also the nan used to be auburn too and I can tell you now that auburn or even dark auburn would not be classified as properly dark. Auburn is a gingery colour so dark auburn would be more like lightish red.
Sarah |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1330
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 6:43 am: | |
Sarah,
Ah yes, that may be right. Well, it was brownish anyway. But it's true, the records say auburn -- it almost comes out dark on b&w photos.
Anyway, my point was that neither of them was blonde.
Well, I do recall that I reacted quite strongly on that I would have liked to switch some of the women. I don't think Eddowes and Stride looked right. It was not just their looks, but their whole appearance and characters etc.
It didn't ring completely true to me.
Reece,
"The Hughes Brothers did try and make there East End set and the murder scenes look as close as the original as possible."
Yes, and that was the only thing they succeeded in, and that was thanks to their historical consulants. I don't think Mary Kelly's room was completely right, though.
Everybody's talking about that Michael Caine movie. And I haven't seen it! Rats...
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 945
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 6:55 am: | |
Glenn,
Everybody's talking about that Michael Caine movie. And I haven't seen it! Rats...
Pull your finger out and go get it!! It's much better than From Hell.
I agree that Liz and Kate were not blonde. I also don't know why they made Liz into a lesbian. Maybe they did that to show that some prostitutes were as they hated men so much. I did actually hear that somewhere once.
I think Kate was portrayed well though as that is how I would almost imagine her to have been except for the fact that she was a prostitute in it. I don't believe that she was because there was no evidence of her taking up this profession and if you read what John Kelly and others said about her at her inquest then I find it hard to imagine that she was a prostitute, even a part time one. John said that she was back at the lodging house with him about 8 pm - 9 pm every night so how could she have been selling herself.
Sarah |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1334
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 7:18 am: | |
Hi Sarah,
"I also don't know why they made Liz into a lesbian."
Ah! Yes, I forgot about that one. Hehe... That was a nice twist to it.
Most female prostitutes learns to hate men after a while, and that is probably understandable in a way.
Well, Kate being a casual prostitute or not is another thread and another discussion. But I think we will never know which; we can only speculate. I think there are two points that may suggest that she may have been, though:
1) Her presence at Mitre Square durning those hours, when she actually had John Kelly to go home to (and no, I don't believe she had booked a meeting with someone for another purpose).
2) If that woman standing in the Church Lane corner, resting her hand on a man's chest, really was Kate (at least she was identified by her clothes), then it is quite obvious to me what that was all about.
But, as I said, we can only speculate.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 952
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 9:37 am: | |
Glenn,
I just don't see how she could have been a prostitute, casual or not. If she was home every night at 8 pm - 9 pm how could she have been? That night she was only released from prison at 1am and may have been putting off going home as she told the police officer upon leaving that "I shall get a damn fine hiding when I get home". I wouldn't blame her for not wanting to go home straight away. Also, she probably had no money left anyway and so would have had to walk about the streets until morning anyway as John Kelly said they had to do when they had no money, so her presence anywhere at that time was probably not unusual.
There is no evidence of her being a prostitute at all. She wasn't listed as one and was not recorded by the police as one either.
Anyway, as you say that's another thread but I just think that the given evidence points away from her being one.
Sarah |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 905
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 11:24 am: | |
Guys,
'From Hell' is based on a comic book story, not the real case.
Monty
Whats the previous of the other victims ? If I can rememeber not many, if any, are listed as prostitutes.
Glenn,
St Boltophs.....St Boltophs.
Our little group has always been and always will until the end... |
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 958
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 11:31 am: | |
Monty,
That may be the case but how do you explain her not staying out late as a rule then? Also the others were all known to the police as prostitutes but Kate wasn't.
Anyway, this is not the thread for that.
So was it the comic book story that wasn't researched that well then?
Sarah |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1348
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 6:43 am: | |
Sarah,
Just to clarify:
No, there is no evidence of anything. But please bear in mind the social conditions; it was an activity that was a necessity for most women living around the Dorset Street--Flower and Dean Street--Thrawl Street area at one time or another in their life, married or not. You make it sound like only a few women did it, as a professional group and registred at the police. That was not the case.
Secondly, did you read what I just said above, regarding "that woman standing in the Church Lane corner, resting her hand on a man's chest [...] identified by her clothes". Unless you don't believe that this was Kate ...
And third, yeah right, like John Kelly would have admitted to the court that she on rare occasions went on the streets. None of the relatives to the other victims were that keen on admitting that either. Don't take his words for everything, Sarah. There is no evidence and no proof, but I know what common sense tells me.
Now, back to the thread,
Get my finger out (!) and get the Michael caine film -- Hmmm, I'll think about it; I have no money and there are actually a couple of books I would like to purchase first. So it's frustrating. But on the other hand, if that as well is based on the Royal conspiracy plot, I feel doubtful. Anyway, I'll think about it. At least, it can't be worse.
What I really would like to see is a Ripper movie made in England, without the obvious Hollywood ingredients (like a mushy love story and the prostitute women looking like taken out of a swim suit catalogue), and hopefully NOT based on the Royal Conspiracy Story.
My suggestion for a good result would be the Granada Television Company, that made the excellent Sherlock Holmes series with Jeremy Brett. Talk about quality!
I am not sure either which comic book Monty refers to; it must have been one of those Donald Duck stories I yet haven't read. But I must say I prefer Walt Disney and Carl Barks to the Hughes Brothers.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Alan Sharp
Chief Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 538
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 9:06 am: | |
Actually it was based on a "graphic novel". This is important to remember. People who read "graphic novels" get very very serious about it and start to shout a lot if you ever refer to them as "comic books". Which of course is great fun. |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 915
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 11:52 am: | |
Alan,
yeah, like I said, a comic book...
...."best fiction EVER" says Monty in a Comic Book Store Guy off the Simpsons kinda voice.
Monty
Our little group has always been and always will until the end... |
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 975
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 12:05 pm: | |
Glenn,
Well we will obviously agree to disagree about Kate. I still say she wasn't a prostitute.
Anyway, yes pull that finger out (I don't need to know where it was!!) and go buy it. It's not really the Royal Conspiracy, it just has an element of it but only one detail really, even though it does point at other options which are more in the conspiracy theory they aren't that involved in it (phew, hope that made sense).
Although I wish that a British film could be made too (no more American's doing dodgy english accents of how they think we sound) and that the royal conspiracy didn't play a role in it at all.
Sarah
P.S. I apologise to all the Americans on this board but I am sure that the ones on here do not think we all sound like stuck up snobs or strange cockney types. |
ReeceAU
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 7:34 am: | |
Hi again guys!!!!
Thanks for ya reply! Glenn you are right about the Hughes Bros not creating Marys room properly.On the 2nd dvd on the special edition of FH,the Hughes Bros did say that the placed Marys bed on the opposite side of the room,rarther than to the right as you enter the room behind the door,because it was an easier way to film.
Ive yet to see any film on the Ripper where they actually get Marys Murder scene correct,even my beloved Michael Caine version didnt get it right!!!Grrrr!!!
Sarah, I agree that they do need to make a film that doesnt involve the Royal conspiracy. Its been well worn,has it not????!!!! |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
