Jack the Ripper Online

Michael Caine Armand Assante Ray McAnally

Original Title :: Jack the Ripper
Genre :: TV Series / Crime / Drama / Mystery / Romance / Thriller
Cast :: Michael Caine,Armand Assante,Ray McAnally
Budget :: $11,000,000
Type :: TV Series
Time :: 3h 10min
Rating :: 7.7/10

Jack the Ripper Online

During the latter half of 1888, a notorious serial killer nicknamed Jack the Ripper terrorises the East End of London by murdering prostitutes in a terribly violent way. Public outrage follows. Chief Inspector Frederick Abberline is assigned to the case but finds that it is not just a simple murder enquiry. Based on a real life event, this film claims to have had access to top secret Home Office files and believe that their ending is the correct solution to the age old mystery.

Complete series cast summary:
	Michael Caine	-	Inspector Frederick Abberline 2 episodes, 1988

	Armand Assante	-	Richard Mansfield 2 episodes, 1988

	Ray McAnally	-	Sir William Gull 2 episodes, 1988

	Lewis Collins	-	Sergeant George Godley 2 episodes, 1988

	Ken Bones	-	Robert James Lees 2 episodes, 1988

	Susan George	-	Catherine Eddowes 2 episodes, 1988

	Jane Seymour	-	Emma 2 episodes, 1988

	Harry Andrews	-	Coroner Wynne Baxter 2 episodes, 1988

	Lysette Anthony	-	Mary Jane Kelly 2 episodes, 1988

	Roger Ashton-Griffiths	-	Rodman 2 episodes, 1988

	Peter Armitage	-	Sergeant Kerby 2 episodes, 1988

	Desmond Askew	-	Copy Boy 2 episodes, 1988

	Trevor Baxter	-	Lanyon 2 episodes, 1988

	Mike Carnell	-	Newsvendor 2 episodes, 1988

	Ann Castle	-	Lady Gull 2 episodes, 1988

	Deirdre Costello	-	Annie Chapman 2 episodes, 1988

	Jon Croft	-	Mr. Thackeray 2 episodes, 1988

	Angela Crow	-	Liz Stride 2 episodes, 1988

	Kelly Cryer	-	Annette 2 episodes, 1988

	Marc Culwick	-	Prince Albert Victor 2 episodes, 1988

	John Dair	-	Isenschmid 2 episodes, 1988

	Roy Evans	-	Doorkeeper 2 episodes, 1988

	John Fletcher	-	P.C. Watkins 2 episodes, 1988

	Sheridan Forbes	-	Millie 2 episodes, 1988

	Hugh Fraser	-	Sir Charles Warren 2 episodes, 1988

	Martin Friend	-	Newsvendor 2 episodes, 1988

	Christopher Fulford	-	Beggar / - 2 episodes, 1988

	Michael Gothard	-	George Lusk 2 episodes, 1988

	Bruce Green	-	Pizer 2 episodes, 1988

	Ricci Harnett	-	Pickpocket 2 episodes, 1988

	Ronald Hines	-	Henry Matthews 2 episodes, 1988

	Denys Hawthorne	-	Assistant Commissioner 2 episodes, 1988

	Michael Hughes	-	Dr. Llewellyn 2 episodes, 1988

	Peter Hughes	-	Mr. Paulson 2 episodes, 1988

	Frank Jarvis	-	1st Passer by 2 episodes, 1988

	Edward Judd	-	DCS Arnold 2 episodes, 1988

	Gertan Klauber	-	Diemschutz 2 episodes, 1988

	Jon Laurimore	-	Inspector Spratling 2 episodes, 1988

	Mike Lewin	-	Duty Guard 2 episodes, 1988

	Rod Lewis	-	Mortician 2 episodes, 1988

	Gary Love	-	Derek 2 episodes, 1988

	George Malpas	-	Old Man 2 episodes, 1988

	Eric Mason	-	Publican 2 episodes, 1988

	Bernadette Milnes	-	Woman in Doorway 2 episodes, 1988

	Jonathan Moore	-	Benjamin Bates 2 episodes, 1988

	Richard Morant	-	Dr. Acland 2 episodes, 1988

	T.P. McKenna	-	O'Connor 2 episodes, 1988

	John Normington	-	Dresser 2 episodes, 1988

	Ronald Nunnery	-	Davis 2 episodes, 1988

	Sandra Payne	-	Mrs. Acland 2 episodes, 1988

	Neville Phillips	-	Cabinet Secretary 2 episodes, 1988

	Iain Rattray	-	Tough Cop 2 episodes, 1988

	David Ryall	-	Bowyer 2 episodes, 1988

	Gary Shail	-	Pimp 2 episodes, 1988

	Gerald Sim	-	Dr. Bagster Phillips 2 episodes, 1988

	George Sweeney	-	John Netley 2 episodes, 1988

	David Swift	-	Lord Salisbury 2 episodes, 1988

	Norman Warwick	-	Richardson 2 episodes, 1988

	Brian Weske	-	Porter 2 episodes, 1988

After Mary Jane Kelly's murder, there is a scene where Abberline hands Gull a photo of her body. That photo is an actual crime scene photo of the real Mary Jane Kelly.

For dramatic effect, the scene where Richard Mansfield changes on stage shows him transitioning from Jekyll to (the more monstrous) Hyde. In reality, Mansfield's transformation was the opposite, from Hyde to Jekyll (more consistent with the depicted scene in Robert Louis Stevenson's novel), and involved standing beneath theatre lights, which made him sweat enough for his make-up to run off his face. A simple, but effective, illusion that, by all accounts, still startled the late-Victorian audience.

Hugh Fraser wore clothes that his character Sir Charles Warren had actually worn.

Michael Caine was persuaded to return to TV for the first time in nearly 20 years because of David Wickes's powerful script. Caine later described Wickes as "the nicest, fastest director I've worked for, and the master of filming Victorian London."

Ripper victim Elizabeth "Long Liz" Stride was Swedish and would have spoken with a Swedish accent.

In real life George Lusk was a mild mannered, community spirited man who sought to assist the police in catching the murderer.

When Michael Caine's casting was announced, Thames TV's share price broke through the £5 barrier for the first time.

The film premiered on American television on the exact same day that the film Genie und Schnauze (1988) was released: October 21, 1988. Both productions feature Michael Caine, Lysette Anthony and George Sweeney and are set in Victorian London, and were shot by cinematographer Alun Hume.

Armand Assante's stand-in died during shooting.

Inspector Frederick Abberline's name is pronounced incorrectly by everyone in this production - it should be pronounced 'Abber-lyne', not 'Abber-leen'. There is also no evidence that he had any kind of drinking problem in real life.

One of the final filmed productions of actor Edward Judd.

One of the final filmed productions of actor Harry Andrews.

In the commentary David Wickes says that when Lewis Collins attacks Ray McAnally in one scene it was thought that the latter had died for some moments because recently before filming Ray McAnally had undergone a major operation.

Much is made about the parallel between Richard Mansfield's West End version of "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" and the psyche of the Ripper. The melody of the anonymously composed song "Champagne Ivy," which was sung twice by Miriam Hopkins in Dr. Jekyll und Mr. Hyde (1931), is heard in an instrumental version, probably as an homage to the Rouben Mamoulian film about a prostitute who is murdered.

The unnamed Prime Minister was actually Conservative Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, Third Marquess of Salisbury, who served from 1886 to 1892 and 1895 to 1902.

One of two productions, that debuted in 1988, that starred Michael Caine, and were set in Victorian England. The other was the Sherlock Holmes theatrical feature film comedy Genie und Schnauze (1988).

"The Juwes are not the men that will be blamed for nothing", the phrase of writing on a wall seen in this filmed production, is a real life clue in the late 1880s Whitechapel murders in London, and is officially known as "The Goulston Street Graffito". However, there are a number of different versions of the phrase, such as: "The Juwes are the men that will not be blamed for nothing" ; "The Juws are not the men To be blamed for nothing" ; "The Juwes are not the men who will be blamed for nothing" ; "The Juwes are not the men who will be blamed for nothing" ; and "The Jewes are not the men to be blamed for nothing".

Ken Bones, George Sweeney and Edward Judd all played the same parts in the unfinished Barry Foster/David Wickes Thames TV drama.

The opening prologue states: "For over 100 years the murders in Whitechapel committed by Jack the Ripper have baffled the world. What you are about to see is a dramatization of those events. Our story is based on extensive research, including a review of the official files by special permission of the Home Office and interviews with leading criminologists and Scotland Yard officials." However, this mini series was release exactly 100 years after the events depicted.

The film's opening credits disclaimer states: "This motion picture is a fictional dramatization based on recent theories concerning the infamous crimes committed by the alleged 'Jack the Ripper'."

Inspector Abberline was 45 at the time of the Ripper murders. Michael Caine was 10 years older than his character.

In spite of the popularity regarding this mini series, Jack the Ripper historians have generally agreed that the series was far from accurate.

In spite of the opening voiceover that describes the production as being based upon real events, the TV mini series is mainly fiction. Various characters are incorrectly depicted, as well as the conclusion.

Michael Caine and Edward Judd had been acquainted with one another back in the days when they were struggling actors.

Four different endings were originally filmed to throw cast, crew and - most importantly - the world's press off the scent of the real Ripper. In the final broadcast, Sir William Gull was revealed to be the Ripper. In the three unused alternate endings, George Lusk, Inspector John Spratling, and Prince Albert Victor were revealed to be the Ripper.

The closing epilogue reads: "In the strange case of Jack the Ripper, there was no trial and no signed confession. In 1888, neither fingerprinting nor bloodtyping was in use and no conclusive forensic, documentary or eye-witness testimony was available. Thus, positive proof of the Ripper's identity is not available. We have come to our conclusions after careful study and painstaking deduction. Other researchers, criminologists and writers may take a different view. We believe are conclusions to be true."

This was produced to air on the centennial of the actual Whitechapel killings. In 1988, many scholars of the crimes considered royal physician Sir William Gull as one of the prime suspects. In the following 30 years, a new suspect, American doctor Francis Tumblety, became the prime suspect. He was known to show his guests preserved human organs. He would later escape to France and then to New York where records show that, for reasons unknown, he was under surveillance. He would flee to the Caribbean where a similar series of killings occurred in Kingston and then to Central American where another series of killings occurred in Managua . He would later return to the United States where he would pass away.

User reviews

Waiso

....When it achieves such perfection :lavish costumes,splendid settings,excellent performances (a topflight cast,with a wonderful Caine as the lead ,the beautiful Jane Seymour and all the others providing adequate support).It really brings us back in Victorian London and the screenplay features very clever ideas such as the introduction of Stevenson's "Doctor Jekill and Mr Hyde" (the scene on the stage is mind-boggling).If the telly made such gems every week,nobody would go to the movie theaters anymore.

Alsalar

Who cares if its deductions are accurate? Everyone's dead and we'll never know for certain. What matters is this story delivers you a culprit which owing to the official unsolved status, I didnt believe I would see until the last second. Very well done TV fare. If I have one criticism, it is the filming quality. On the interior and set shots, the camera work and lighting cast those pinkish hues off of phony scrubbed brickwork that betray a backlot and might confuse you into thinking you are watching an old Gunsmoke rerun. But rest assured, the story is powerful enough to make this quite insubstantial for a normal person. The performances are excellent. Michael Caine would be good doing tampon commercials, and the rest of the mostly English cast are all equally excellent. There are some truly frightening sequences. Asante's conversion into Mr. Hyde is the stuff nightmares are made of. The suspense at the climax deftly handled. Its quite long, and drags only a bit 3/4 through. But this is well worth anyone's time who has an interest in this most infamous of criminal investigations. Which puts it up just about everyone's alley doesnt it?

Mullador

I hate to admit this, but I have always been fascinated with Jack the Ripper. I have probably seen every movie and special about his crimes and have read quite a few books as well. There have been many movies made on the case (one was directed by Alfred Hitchcock). My favorite was an episode of Boris Karloff's Thriller tv show called "Yours Truly Jack the Ripper". It was written by Robert Bloch the man who wrote Psycho. This miniseries was a delight to watch and Michael Caine gives a wonderful performance as Inspector Abberline. They do a great job of re-creating the horrid living conditions in the East End of London. The only let down for me was the way this film ended. I wont give it away but I was hoping they would be original about who our boy Jack really was. Instead, the theory they propose is an old one and I feel it is preposterous. Other then that, this is a great film and I wish that they would put it out on video.

Rivik

Just great!

This is the best TV-production I have ever seen.

First time I saw it at the age of 8, it was awesome. But I could hardly remind.

I have just known that it was a well done movie with a great Atmospher and thrilling suspense.

I bought the film and my expectations were exceeded.

A movie which can take it on with Jack the ripper is "The count of monte christo" with gerade depardieu. It's a trilogy which is also god work.

Scream_I LOVE YOU

"For over 100 years the murders in Whitechapel committed by Jack the Ripper have baffled the World. What you are about to see is a dramatisation of these events. Our story is based on extensive research, including a review of the official files by special permission of the Home Office and interviews with leading criminologists and Scotland Yard officials."

Jack The Ripper is produced out of Euston Films and is directed by David Wickes who also co-wrote it with Derek Marlowe. Released to coincide with the 100 years anniversary of the murders, it stars Michael Caine (Frederick Abberline), Armand Assante (Richard Mansfield), Ray McAnally (Sir William Gull), Lewis Collins (Sgt. George Godley), Ken Bones (Robert James Lees), Susan George (Catherine 'Kate' Eddowes) & Jane Seymour (Emma Prentiss).

Originally released as a TV mini-series in the United Kingdom, Jack The Ripper has long since been available to view as a three hour ten minute movie. Every second of which is worth sitting thru. For his story Wickes uses actual historical characters that were involved in the 1888 hunt for the notorious killer. Drawing heavily from the Masonic/Royal Family conspiracy theory that has been used before in tellings of the story (notably the film Murder By Decree born out of Thomas E. A. Stowell's theory), Wickes boldly proclaimed to be revealing the true identity of the Ripper. Something that unsurprisingly he was forced to recant, but regardless of that, this is a glorious telling, meticulous in detail and providing much food for thought.

In amongst the grizzly murders and the fraught search for the killer by the exasperated police, Wickes' movie fully forms the other issues to hand. Such as the role of the press during this dark time and why was George Lusk leading vigilante's across Whitechapel? The Government and Royal Family aspects are given screen time because that's how high the issue went. The pressure on Abberline from his superiors is told in full, as the murders start to escalate and Abberline runs up against questionable assistance during the investigation, his anger grows. We are with him every step of the way. The prostitutes aren't merely Ripper fodder characters either, we at least meet them, understand them, even seeing the role of the "pimp" in Victorian England. It's good stuff, well researched.

Technically, for a TV movie, its production value is very high. Great sets that bring to life Victorian England (the exteriors were actually shot in Belper, Derbyshire), the costumes catch the eye and the cast are hugely effective. Particularly Caine (throwing himself into the role) and Assante (switching his character's emotional state regularly with consummate ease). We also get the chill factor too, something that's needed in a film of such dark thematics. As the street girls walk alone in dimly lit cobbled streets, the air of unease is palpable. Then a silhouette of the man with the hat, cloak and bag brings a cold shiver down the spine. Witness to the sequences involving the play Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, a nice put in to the plot by the writers, and one that provides genuinely creepy moments. It's a top film that has so much going for it.

There will be other Jack The Ripper film's no doubt, and for sure more books will arrive proclaiming this and that is true. But with this take, if you buy into the theory or not, is probably as good as it gets for detail and execution of the material. 9/10

Kahavor

I haven't seen many ripper movies out there that haven't been made with a fantasy aspect to them, "Time After Time" comes to mind, but this movie actually tells the story of the first serial killer and makes a murder mystery out of it. Depicted through the eyes of Inspector Abberline, played by the wonderful Michael Caine, this movie is actually supposed to be based on the re-opened files of the case in Scotland Yard and the research on them by today's for-most experts in Criminology. Whether that assertation is true or not is up to the viewer, but this movie does end with a fanciful theory and several fine performances by Jane Seymour, Armand Assante and others. The parallels and connections to the novel/play "Dr, Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" are creative, bold, and clever. The sets and scenery of the period are exquisite and actually add to the atmosphere of the movies. The killing recreations thankfully don't have the distaste of slasher films and the overall style reminds me of the Liz Montgomery movie, "The Legend of Lizzie Borden" which also like this movie masterfully created the incidents of an infamous crime in period costume and ended with a new hypothetical theory. Even without closure in either crimes, both cases continue to inspire creative movies.

Juce

Well, it's not perfect, but what is? This one is a cut above the others I've seen, in some of which the victims were all "dance hall girls" or whatever. I thought Michael Caine was a good as he usually is, which is to say, pretty good. The other performances were also above average. (I thought Lysette Anthony was Helena Bonham Carter grown inexplicably more mature with the receding years.) Armand Assante does a great job of turning into Mr. Hyde on stage. Jane Seymour is beautiful but takes up screen time that otherwise could be put to better use, granted that three and a half hours constitutes a lot of screen time. A problem, though is that there are too many red herrings, too many dead ends gone into at length, at the expense of more interesting material. Every theory dreamed up by any manque criminologist with a pulp sensibility has been dragged into the story, and some made up that have never before been proposed. (How about: Jack was an alien from outer space?) I'd like to have known more details about the cases -- the sign about the "Juwes" and the bag of "cashous" found by Nichols' body.

On the plus side, the crowded streets of 1888 London were colorfully evoked. The second murder took place in the small scruffy backyard of a tenement, next to a wooden fence, and to judge from the look of the scene the production designer worked directly from contemporary photographs. At least one of the props, a horse-drawn trolley with a Nestle ad, showed up virtually unchanged on Sherlock Holmes' Baker Street in the later Jeremy Brett series. Of course this isn't the REAL city. The London of the time would have been almost repellant as the lingering shots of the dismembered bodies which are mercifully absent from this film. This was industrial-strength capitalism in its most untrammeled form. What was glamorized as London "fog" we would nowadays call "smog" or simply "industrial smoke." In the absence of toilets, Whitechapel would have smelled like an outhouse.

Why did all those women go out alone at night? One reason may be similar to the one than prompts people to live in large coastal cities in California. Oh, I know it's going to happen, but it won't happen to me. Another is that they may not have had much choice in the matter at a point in history with no social security or unemployment or medicare. If a man lost his arm at work, he was fired and was out on the streets. If a woman with no skills and no independent means lost her husband, she was out on the streets too, wearing the signature apron of her trade. For a few minutes unpleasantness in a dark corner she might earn enough for a drink of gin or a flea-ridden bed. Failing that she might find a seat in the lowest of flophouses, where there were no beds at all, just parallel lines of chairs with long ropes strung in front of them for sleeping patrons to lean across. Most of the poor looked like hell. And felt like it too, what with debilitating infectious illnesses and decaying teeth. It wasn't a good time to be broke.

The problem with Ripper stories is that there is no satisfactory narrative conclusion, no neat ending, because the murderer was never discovered, let alone caught. Structurally it's a kind of coitus interruptus. So over the years we've pretended to solve it, using upstairs lodgers or effete royalty. The case file still exists but it's been so pared down over the years, through pilferage, loss, and souvenier hunting, that there are only a few original pages left.

My bet? In the FBI typology he was a disorganized murderer, operating impromptu. As someone said in another comment, he was probably a local nonentity. He probably lived alone and kept to himself. If anyone noticed him at all, they probably thought of him as slightly goofy for talking to himself, believing in magic, or whatever.

elegant stranger

It is very rarely that I rate something 10/10. However, after watching the DVD for the zillionith time today I can't describe how much I enjoy this production. Putting aside who you think Jack the Ripper was, 'Jack The Ripper' is lavish, colourful and lively, and easily beats some of the cinema's Jack The Ripper Films.

Michael Caine is great as lead Detective, Abberline. Being from London himself he slipped easily into the role of the main Detetctive. I also like that it's hinted that he is a alcoholic. It's good to see in some scenes that he beats the temptation to dive into the bottle, even when the case gets really rough. Lewis Collins, as his sidekick, Godley was marvellous also and I don't know if the men got on in real life, but they certainly gelled together extremely well on the screen and their characters were close too. Lysette Anthony was a gem as Mary Kelly, and Susan George played Kathy Eddows with consideration and sensitivity.

The Whitechapel set is brilliant and I love how they don't go OTT on the famous misty appearance as on none of the nights of the real murders was London covered in fog. It's very convincing and in fact, is superior to the set used for 'From Hell'. The costumes were accurate a joy to watch.

I liked how the murders were treated with sensitivity, and the murder scenes were not over the top in gore.

One aspect of the film that did not work well and which slowed the production down was the affair between Abberline and Emma Prentice (Jane Seymour) the official artists for the newspaper that was in the film, 'The Star'. I found the scenes not always unnecessary but it slowed the film down to a plod and it's hard to believe that a woman from the upper class such as Emma would even mix with someone like Abberline, let alone bed him which she did in the film, although thankfully it was only shown briefly.

The whole drama was full of suspense and the ending, where a fake murder was set up was high in tension and on first viewing was excellent. You get a choice of four or five men who, just before this fake murder is due to happen, all leave their places of work dressed in dark clothes carrying parcels which could be the famous Gladstone bag that the Ripper supposedly kept his knives in. Each man is a potential Ripper, but when you see who the Ripper is, it's cleverly filmed so that you realise it was none of the men put forward as suspects.

I would highly recommend this drama. It's four hours long or thereabouts but is very enjoyable. You can get two versions in the UK on DVD. A normal straight forward version, and one with extra's on. I'd go for the latter as it has a great lot of footage showing the production before Micheal Caine was hired when Barry Foster was Abberline.

Over all a good, historical piece of drama. In my mind it far outweighs 'From Hell' which follows the same story line. If I had the choice of the two, (dispite Johnny Depp being in 'From Hell'), I'd choose Jack the Ripper every time.

Welahza

This film is a slickly produced effort, although the claims that it may represent the definitive answer to the mystery are extremely tenuous. The plot is watered-down version of the masonic conspiracy theory, in which William Gull, the queen's doctor, committed the murders to silence a group of east end prostitutes attempting to blackmail the government. The more simple premise of the film is that Gull was simply a deranged psychopath. Yet this already three hour production benefits from this by turning it into a classic whodunit. The suspects it puts forward generally weren't regarded as such at the time, but this matters little thanks to the general quality of the production. There are a numbers of "gaffs" in the film regarding historical accuracy:

Annie Chapman is seen photographed at the murder site in Hanbury street. This never happened.

Prince Albert Victor is mentioned as Duke of Clarence and Avondale. He never assumed these titles until 1891.

There is a bloodhound visible at the scene of Mary Kelly's murder. While there were rumours dogs were to be used, ultimately they weren't.

Emma Prentice, Inspector Abberline's love interest declares a picture she is drawing is "for strand magazine". Strand magazine wasn't first published until 1892, four years after the film is set.

Rose Of Winds

When I first saw this telemovie back in the late 1980s, I found myself wondering if the film makers actually believed the theory they were peddling. The DVD commentary makes it clear that they take it very seriously indeed, which somehow reduces the impact of the piece.

Taken as a blood and thunder melodrama, this is good fun. But as a recreation of London's East End in the 1880s, it leaves a great deal deal to be desired. The depiction of prostitution is particularly inaccurate. The Ripper's victims were not, on the whole, the good hearted floozies depicted here. They were alcoholic, washed out drabs, homeless and aimless. And the depiction of George Lusk as a left wing agitator is way off base.

No matter, its diverting entertainment. But its only real historical value lies in its depiction of the hysteria that the Ripper murders engendered in the population. If you believe the denouement, and the explanation of the Ripper's identity, drop me a line. I'd like to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge.

TheMoonix

Good. Very good. Stylish and atmospheric with an impressive cast, including Armand Assante, Jane Seymour, and Lewis Collins. I regret to say that Michael Caine is less impressive. The murders are presented with more restraint than Mr. Caine's performance. As praised as he often is, and often deserves to be, it sometimes seems as though Caine should wear a slice of pineapple on his head with some macaroni salad on the side.

Even though Caine hams it up here and there, this "Jack the Ripper," first aired on CBS in the fall of 1988 to mark the 100th anniversary of the killer's reign, is stylish, exciting, and even dares to speculate on the identity of the real killer. Interestingly, while Michael Caine was hunting down Jack the Ripper on TV, he was playing Sherlock Holmes in a theatrical feature, "Without a Clue." Holmes and the Ripper haunted the same Victorian era in foggy old London, although the great detective was, to some people's surprise, a fictional creation. That didn't stop Columbia Pictures from sending him out to battle ol' bloody Jack in a 1966 film, "A Study in Terror."

LadyShlak

Last Friday June 20, Jack the ripper was free with the Irish Daily Mail.Not a bad DVD as a freebie and the transfer is spot on.I remember watching it on TV when it was first released. Yes Michael does ham it up but thats what he does. As a mini-series it has aged well, given that its 20 years old. On matters of the Ripper, "Murder By Decree" with Christopher Plummer as Holmes is the best of the bunch albeit that it is factional. The old deerstalker hat was never seen round whitechapel.Back to Jack the Ripper, the Jane Seymour character doesn't seem to serve any purpose apart from providing a love interest for Michael Caine. Lewis Collins is pretty good and Armand Assante is suitably bewitching as Mansfield the actor with his cape.

Charyoll

I got the DVD of this series free with the newspaper and wasn't sure what to expect; in fact I initially assumed it was a film as it stars Michael Caine! One could be forgiven for thinking it was a film right up until the half way point when the first episode ends as it has a surprisingly cinematic look. There are always going to be some difficulties in bringing the Ripper case to the screen; the largest of which being that it is probably the most famous unsolved case in history and a good story needs a proper conclusion. In this adaptation that problem is handled fairly well by showing a culprit then giving an logical explanation as to why the public must never know of course after all this time it is almost certain that we will never learn who the ripper was. For those unfamiliar with the story it is 1888 and somebody is murdering prostitutes in Whitechapel them mutilating them in a way that suggests a good knowledge of anatomy. Chief Inspector Abberline is put on the case but it isn't going to be easy; the local police seem keener to clean up the mess than to preserve a crime scene, the populace don't want to talk to the police and a rabble-rouser is whipping up a mob because 'the police are doing nothing'. Abberline and his Sergeant, Sgt. Godley persevere however and establish a long list of suspects that includes doctors, an actor, a psychic and even a grandson of Queen Victoria herself!

I really enjoyed this, although in hindsight I think it would have been better to watch the two parts separately rather than in one sitting it is quite long! Michael Caine, in a rare TV performance is great as Abberline and is ably supported by Lewis Collins as Sgt. Godley the rest of cast were pretty good too. I quite liked how they got around the problem of solving a real unsolved crime and the wide variety of suspects kept me guessing to the end. While there is no swearing or nudity there are scenes showing the Ripper's victims, which some viewers may find disturbing, although they are still fairly tame by today's standards. If you like a good mystery drama this is certainly worth watching especially if you see it being given away on a newspaper; even if it isn't your usual read.

Larosa

I came across this picture on Hallowe'en this year, when a DVD copy of it was being sold with "The Guardian". Having gotten familiar with Jack the Ripper earlier this year doing a play about him, I found the idea of the infamous serial killer in a movie with Micheal Caine irresistible. I wasn't disappointed.

The film shows the investigation of the famous killings in 1888, in the Whitechapel district in the East End of London. When a spate of apparently motiveless prostitute killings start bloodying the streets of Whitechapel, the local constabulary find themselves powerless. They call in Scotland Yard who send in their best detective Frederick Abberline (Caine) who pursues the case with a ruthless tenacity in the face of rising corpses and mounting public pressure...

It is actually quite an effective piece of film-making, even on a television budget. The streets of Victorian London are captured well on screen, Caine gives his customary brilliant performance and he is surrounded by a very strong supporting cast, including Lewis Collins as his assistant Godley, Ken Bones as crazed psychic Robert Lees and Ray McAnally as the Queen's doctor Sir William Gull. Armand Assante as stage actor Richard Mansfield and Jayne Seymour as the lover of both him and Abberline give great performances.

Without giving too much away, the film's theory as to the identity of the killer and the reason the case has been marked unsolved is actually a highly plausible one and the build-up to it is suspensefully enacted. The film does well to show Abberline's thought processes as he breaks down the logically how the killer operates.

Better than the more slickly polished Johnny Depp effort "From Hell" (which arrives at similar conclusions to this one), this is definitely a must-see for all the Jack the Ripper buffs out there. Case closed.

Jeb

When I was about 6 or 7 (I am now 18), I was sitting in the hotel room with my parents. I flipped on the TV and went through all the stations, untill I came upon one that was showing a murder mystery. I watched it for a while and then my dad said that it was about Jack the Ripper. My dad went on to tell the story of Jack and I was hooked ever sence. Most of my friends think that I am crazy to be almost obsessed with Jack the Ripper, but I dont see anything wrong with it. Anyway, this movie is where it all started. If anyone knows where to find a copy of it, please e-mail me. The address is above. thanks

Doktilar

This movie is excellent, with the spectacular blend of fabulous acting, great direction, and spellbinding suspense. Michael Caine is phenomenal with Armand Assante.

It's rather disappointing that this movie cannot be found on video - anywhere - because it is beautifully written and directed by David Wickes. For a made for TV Movie about one of the most gruesome murderers in history, this Mini Series says it all.

Beazekelv

I have watched this movie several times - the story is great, the acting is great, the casting is great, etc.. It hasn't got anything to do with the original Whitechapel murders, however.

The factual errors in this movie are to numerous to mention - a few webpages have tried counting them all, and I think there are more than 100 major errors in this movie. A lot of the characters are portrayed quite differently from how they actually where, some of the chronology is all wrong, a lot of central evidence has been withheld, some evidence has even been made up, etc.

There is nothing "well balanced" about this, if you're looking for a portrayal of the actual events that took place. Most of this movie is based on a book by Stephen Knight - or one of his fans - a book which has been denounced as totally incorrect and factless by ALL serious Ripper researchers.

Still a great movie, though - can't give it more than 7/10 however, as it claims to be a true story - which it most certainly is not!

MeGa_NunC

I've seen few movies about Jack the Ripper case and this is without any doubt the best of them, also one of the best criminal dramas ever. Opposite to other productions about one of the most famous killers in history creators of "Jack the Ripper" based on police files rather than legends and gossips (just to mention "From hell" with Johnny Depp or "Murder by decree" with Christopher Plummer).

This created very unique image of clash of two worlds - poorly organized police force and psychopathic mind of the killer at the end of 19th century. We see inspector Abberline (played brilliantly by Michael Caine) struggle with the case that no one at his times would find simple.

There are dozens of theories who Jack the Ripper really was and this movie covers most of them showing us all the suspects and until the end keeps waiting if identity of the killer will be revealed...

This movie is simply masterpiece - entertaining (despite the main motive being really nasty), involving, great casting and beautifully handled by the director.

Ffyan

Simply the best world-wide TV production ever. It's a SHAME there's no french version of this gem available on DVD. Why should I write ten lines of text about it, just get it and see by yourself : a splendid time is guaranteed for all ! I'd like to tell the IMDb crew that it's not easy for non-English speaking people to write 10-line commentaries, so they should be allowed to mail shorter texts ! Some might call it R.E.S.P.E.C.T. ! But I want to post this one, so I'll do what I am asked to : what do U think 'bout the following words : cats, dogs, chairs, beds, beards, heads, ears, legs, feet, arms, stomach, torso, music, book, trees, birds, walls, paper, pencil, cars, roads ... well, the ten lines are done, I think I can quit now.

Syleazahad

I had no idea of this movie's existence before stumbling across it on Channel 5 (which usually shows histories of lingerie and old Emmanuelles). Caine is great, and so is the lovely Hugh Fraser, but why did the final exposition have to be SHOUTED? Also the killer's motivation is glossed over. Never mind the plodding story-telling, that's what I like. Among the great acting (including Caine's sidekick) there is some rather poor work from the revolutionary leader and Jane Seymour as the token career woman. xxxxxxxxxx xxxx

Asyasya

This one may be the best dramatization of Jack The Ripper's crimes and of the researching' that were made. Since the case was never solved, the movie relies on the several hypothesis that were considered about the identity of the world's most famous serial killer. Believe me, they made a perfect script that keeps you on alert till the very last second. Although it was conceived as a TV mini-series you can watch it in one go (I mean, you'll WANT to watch it in one go). OK, the second time you watch it (when you already know who the killer is and stuff) obviously some thing won't get you by surprise, but the movie is good enough for being watched several times.

It was a TV production, but it is as good as if it was made for cinema: the setting is just wonderful and the cast is unbeatable (headed by master Michael Caine).

PS: It is pretty similar to "From hell", but much more addictive.

*My rate: 8/10

Doulkree

Hi all. In this film,the way they piece together the clues is just amazing! None of us really know what really happened in 1888,but i have watched this film,over,and over again,and i find it definitive. But,this was made before the discovery of 'The diary of jack the ripper'And thats another story! I love the cast in this 1988 film,it,s a sensible portrayal of a true mystery,and i rate this very high,(mistakes aside) If you look at the facts in this film,they REALLY do make sense!!!The coach theory,where there was a driver and a killer is very interesting,it might explain why not much blood was found at the murder scene! I,m glad this film cut out the gore,and concentrated on the mystery,this is a MUST for any ripperoligist! Excellent!

Doomredeemer

Some have said they do not agree with the ending of this excellent mini-series. There is one fact that may not be known or has been forgotten. There were four separate endings filmed for the production and the one shown was kept a secret until the actual showing. In the novel version of the mini-series, the four are given leaving the selection of the actual Ripper to the reader. (This paperback is certainly out of print and unavailable now, but I still have mine.)

The four were Gull (the one finally selected)

Prince Albert Victor

Lusk (the head of the citizens committee)

Police Inspector Spratling

This is probably the best Ripper film of all time and is more true to the actual people than most other versions.

Samugor

One of the better adaptations of this classic tale with a few nice twists thrown in for good measure. conspiracy theorists will love it. really captures the old london era atmosphere.

caster

The real identity of Jack the Ripper will probably never be known. The evidence is only circumstantial for the best of the many theories about who the mad killer of 1888 London was. Most of the theories could be discarded after thorough investigations. But, there is little likelihood that the world will ever know for sure the identity of the most notorious homicidal killer of all time. No eyewitness ever came forward. More than a century later there's little chance that any new evidence exists. And less chance even of finding it, if any does exist. So, the murder cases of Jack the Ripper will likely go unsolved forever.

But that won't stop sleuths from investigating or the curious from speculating. And more movies may yet be made about the subject. This 1988 British movie is from a TV mini-series. It has a conclusion and unmasks Jack the Ripper for the slaying of five women from Aug. 31 to Nov. 9, 1888. The writers supposedly assembled the best and the latest evidence to arrive at their conclusion.

The movie just touches on, but doesn't go deeply into the confusion that surely existed at the time over different players in the investigations. One wonders if a clue or two might not have been lost, misplaced or dismissed. In the confusion that surely existed with handling of the various cases between different units of the law, were all the clues, tips and pieces of evidence kept intact, shared among the law groups and passed on? Different people led various investigations from the London Metro police and from Scotland yard.

This film's conclusion is as logical and probable as any. The details of the murders are portrayed accurately. Likewise some of the other situations of the time - notably, the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee. The movie combines some of the investigators into the one primary and longest investigator, Detective Inspector Frederick Abberline. Michael Caine plays that role superbly. All of the cast give top performances.

The movie shows the extent to which London was all but mesmerized by the killings. It shows how frantic the efforts must have been by the law to find and bring the killer to justice. And, the film has excellent sets, costumes and other aspects that reflect the culture of the time. This is a nice historical film as well. Anyone curious about the legend should thoroughly enjoy this film.

While history may never reveal the real identify of Jack the Ripper, it's highly probable that this film's conclusion is right. It's logical and fits with the conditions of the killings, the start and end of them, and the real people alive at that time.

Categories

Related Videos

Jack the Ripper Online

User reviews