|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Eluned
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 13, 2004 - 2:46 pm: |       |
My fella and I have borrowed the michael Caine version of Jack the Ripper from a friend. I didn't think the murders had ever been solved but the film said it was the Queen's doctor.... was this just over zealous dramatisation?
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 520
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 15, 2004 - 6:40 am: | |
Eluned,
In short the answer to your question would appear to be yes.
Jennifer
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 965
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 15, 2004 - 4:43 pm: | |
Hi Eluned,
The queens doctor Sir wiliam Gull , has to be the worst suspect ever put foreward in an attempt to solve the Ripper crimes, for goodness sake he was a doctor/surgeon to the monarchy, he also was elderly and in ill health.
Like all films ever made on this subject , they are unrealistic and try to portray a member of the upper classes complete with cloak and gladstone bag, or even a sword stick, approaching Barbara windsor lookalikes leaving a public house.
The horrors of whitechapel were nothing like that, and the sooner some production gives a true and realistic account of these murders the better, ie if censorship can be relaxed which i doubt.
Regards Richard. |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 111
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 16, 2004 - 3:43 pm: | |
For my part I feel Michael Caine was and will always be the ultimate 'Abberline'. That particular Ripper movie I thought started out reasonably well, that is until we got to the visions & 'wheels', then the whole thing went down-hill from there.
I've never liked the 'conspiracy' theories but I accept this is where producers see the most return for the dollar.
A more realistic Ripper movie would have little attraction for most audiences in this "wham/bam", "shock-n-awe" world of special effects we have today, though like Richard I would welcome such an enterprise.
I guess the first step would be to agree on such a suspect........ah well, never mind :-(
Regards, Jon |
Scott Suttar
Detective Sergeant
Username: Scotty
Post Number: 125
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 1:29 am: | |
Hi All,
Jon agreeing on a suspect could be a stumbling block. I do think I would like to see what Richard has asked for though, a film which dramatises the facts we have in a historically accurate context. For my vote the film would be that much better if it did not focus on one suspect but left him as the sinister character we have come to know him as.
Eluned, I loved the Michael Caine version and Jon I agree, in my mind he made a great Abberline. It is unfortunately based on one of the more sensationalist theories regarding the identity of Jack and has been thoroughly discredited over the years. Actually most Jack movies these days focus on the royal conspiracy or elements of it. Oh well. To my knowledge this theory is put together in Stephen Knight's book "Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution". It's a compelling read and as I say has spawned many associated theories including the recent Patricia Cornwell book.
Scotty. |
Shelley Wiltshire
Police Constable
Username: Shelley
Post Number: 6
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 8:08 am: | |
Eluned, yes it was just dramatisation, straight out of the books and films of fairyland. You could start with reading books that policemen have written, ie: Donald Rumbelow,Stewart Evans etc. Also good books to read are written by Martin Fido, Keith Skinner & Paul Begg. This is if you want to take an interest in the ripper case seriously, also if you have time to spare and want to do it, your'e own personal research through public records is a good start, therefore you can make up your own mind about it. I'm hoping once i get my criminology qualification, that i may be allowed to see genuine records that police kept back from the public, in the 'Black Museum', i should have my qualification at the end of this year. Anyway what ever you decide to do, good luck with it.
cheers
Shelley
Criminology Student
MASC (Ad Crim) |
Chris Scott
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chris
Post Number: 1297
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 9:32 am: | |
Richard
Interesting post - which aspect of censorship do you think is preventing a more realistic and historically accurate account of the murders? I'm not sure whether you mean the gore and the physical aspects of the murder or censorship preventing the naming of some of the suspects. I can't see either preventing a true account. In the light of Seven, the Hannibal Lecter films, Texas Chainsaw filsm etc. Jack would be a walk in the park visually in comparison.
All the best
Chris |
Chris Scott
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chris
Post Number: 1298
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 9:40 am: | |
Eluned
On your original point, I have to agree with my fellow posters that Gull is one of the most mystifyingly popular suspects - he has featured (under his own name or thinly disguised) in at least 3 major filmed accounts - the 1988 Michael Caine version, Murder by Decree and From Hell. In terms of plot the 1988 version was a bit of an oddity in that it adopted the Royal conspiracy and then omitted the part of the plot that served as the mainspring for the action - i.e. the Annie Crook connection, which the other two versions retained. Despite the solemn sounding message at the end of the 1988 version - emphasising the depth of their research and their conviction that their solution was correct - I still consider their version of the story weak and, in the presentation of many characters - Mansfield, Abberline, Lees, Lusk etc. - deeply flawed. Neither Murder by Decree nor From Hell claim (to my knowledge) to be true and authoritative versions of events. The fact that the Lorimar version does claim to be a well researched and "true" solution does put it in the line of fire for more criticism than the other two.
Chris |
David Andersen
Sergeant
Username: Davida
Post Number: 45
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:18 am: | |
Hi, I would just like to add that following the Caine film descendents of Abberline complained at his portrayal as a drunk. He was also portrayed as an opium user in the recent Johnny Depp movie 'From Hell'. There is absolutely no reason to believe that Abberline was anthing other than a fine upstanding officer. Production companies look for bums on seats amd facts will always come second to the dollar.
You may care to add to your library;
'The Complete history of Jack the Ripper - Sugden,
and 'From Hell' Evans & Skinner.
Regards
David |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1007
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:48 am: | |
Hi David and Chris and all,
Its true that Abberline appears to have been portrayed wrongly from thes standpoints.However I got the impression in both films that they were trying to pinpoint something very special about him---that he had more intuitive understanding of the East End through special sensitivity to the local community who he worked very closely with.They are saying are they not that he had an unusual amount of inspiration when it came to solving a case,the sort of inspiration that often accompanies the visionary hazes of alcohol or opium.That he was in other words no ordinary detective.He relied on intuition and hunch.Abberline was no PC Plodd its true but on the other hand neither was he a drug or alcohol abuser as far as we know.
Natalie |
David O'Flaherty
Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 355
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 11:41 am: | |
Hi, Natalie
I bet you're right, but Abberline's intuition and hunches came from his fourteen years of stomping around the East End. I guess that's not as sexy as loafing around a Chinese opium den!
Now if only it were possible to drink Abberline's fourteen years in Whitechapel from a bottle, or smoke it in a bong. . .that would be pretty cool.
Cheers, Natalie
Dave |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1008
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 6:23 pm: | |
Hi David,I enjoyed your post!It is true that to see Johnny Depp like he was in the film turned Abberline into a glamourous and mysterious figure.To some extent this was true for Michael Caine though not as much.You still felt that Abberline had his feet firmly on the ground unless he was legless!Why not though?Why not give this man ,now posthumously a "ripper celebrity"
a bit of glamour?He deserved his reputation and to have him as a glamour boy as well brings him some style!
Natalie |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 985
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 3:46 am: | |
Hi chris,
On reflection i was living in the past regarding censorship, it is much more laxed these days, i was refering to a more relistic film being too gory to be shown to the average audience.
My idea of a good account would be for the opening shot of the movie to show a man resembling Hutchinson walking into commercial street, and a woman resembling MJK walking out of Dorset street, Hutchinson would then observe a man loitering, and on carrying on would stop and speak to Mary with the actual words spoken, and the whole event would continue until both kelly and client entered the court. then the picture credits would start to the background voice of a female singing 'Sweet Violets'
That would be the start of the story of the whitechapel murders and would then build up to the Tabram murder.
Dream on Richard, but my film would be totally realistic and would show these ghastly murders as they occurred with the actors having a visual likeness in looks and dress.
Why this type of film is a asset is, it would include every single aspect of the case in it, every witness , every movement and would give the public a truthful account of the Whitechapel Murders.
Regards Richard. |
CB
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 1:09 pm: | |
Hi Richard,
I agree with you. While I do not think that it is a must that you show the women being brutally butchard. I would like to see a movie that is an accurate account useing the facts that we know are true. I do not care what suspect a writer or director chooses. I would just like too see an accurate account of the murders. I think the Hughes brothers did the best job of depicting the crime scenes and they tried too show the awful living conditions the unfortunates lived in. but other then the fact the crime scenes were accurate and the women did look the part [Nothing is more funny then seeing a women like sharron Stone playing Liz Sride] the movie was inacurate. I bet you got a kick out of the dipiction of how the window was broken in Kelly's room. The Cain movie in my oppinion had the best feel and might be the most accurat as far as showing reel life suspects at the time and I liked the way that they showed the vigilance commities. The movie had other great qualities that I dont need to go into but it probably was the best ripper movie. I also like the way they chose Gull as there suspect but they did not use the royal conspiracy.
I would like to see a movie that is shown through the ripper eyes. If I was writing a ripper movie and I believed Barnett was the killer. I might explore the relationship between Joe and Kelly. This would alow me to be accurate about the plight and the awful living conditions in the east end. The references too the previous murders would come in the form of flashbacks witch would occur while Joe was reading the accounts of the murders to Kelly. This would enable me too be accurate about the murders themselfs. Of course the movie would end with the Barnett interagation by Abberline and possibly the Kelly inquest. In the end Barnett would get away with murder. I guess you could take some libberties and the last scene could be Joe being followed down a poorly lit foggy easend street by a man with dear stalker hat and a pipe. witch would indicate that Scotland yard knew that Joe was the killer and they were watching him.
All the best,CB
|
Colin Benson
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 5:40 pm: | |
Just to throw in my two cents; first, very interesting is the second audio track of the "Caine-Ripper"-DVD, describing many of the oddities encountered by the professional reasearcher Wickes had hired. I feel I should add the lady actually got paid for her work and she had access to resources quite different from your average "Ripperologist". Even more interesting is her remark that the files changed from visit to visit, things disappeared and so on. The prdocuer's decision to pick Gull is quite plausible from what they have found.
Secondly, being part of the business; both films don't claim to be documentaries - they are "dramatizations" including the right, the liberty and the obligation to create vivid and interesting characters. A good lead needs an inner conflict to work from, like every actor does. Thus drinking problems / psychic problems were added to Abberline (of whose character we know nothing). I didn't like the Hughes brother's approach, but I think alcoholism not very unlikely. Personally I didn't like the love interest angle.
Regards
Colin Benson
(wondering who "CB" might be) |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
