Sunday 11 December 2011

From Hell review


                From Hell is a movie based on the graphic novel by acclaimed writer Alan Moore, that focuses on the controversial and ambiguous murders of Jack the Ripper. The movie stars opium using, detective Abberline as he is given the case to find out who is responsible for the murder and mutilation of several prostitutes in East London. Abberline, through the use of opium, is able to see visions of the future in his mind, which he uses to uncover the truth behind the ripper murders. With these visions he is able to uncover a giant conspiracy that lies within the Free Masons and even the parliament. He is then able to find and arrest the man who was committing the crimes in order to save one of the prostitutes.
            This perspective of the Jack the Ripper case is incredibly interesting as since it is such a controversial subject no one could ever know what happened and since it did revolve around the prince it definitely could have been a job done by the government. Where the movie shines is from the sheer amount of detail to pitting the crimes against the surgeon of the Queen and the ability for the audience to have closure with the murderer being caught. But I think the man that played the surgeon was  way too obvious as the murderer, as whenever he spoke to the detective he never looked him in the eyes and always seemed very shaky. His excuse for not being the Queen’s surgeon any more was he had a brain amorism which was obviously a lie, so the film should have had more than just one obvious suspect to make the case more ambiguous to the audience.
            Also I did really like the art direction this film took as it really went for a dark and psychedelic look for when the murders are happening and for when the inspector is on drugs. In these parts the use of colour is very dramatic and creates a dream like sense to the visions he has, making him seem more like a super human than like any other detective. The manipulation of natural light was also very effective as when during the nighttime the murderer was always concealed by the darkness giving him a very monster like quality as you can’t see him and he moves with the shadows of the night. The physical appearance of characters was also very important as the constables and heads of the police department all looked very stern and corrupt as they automatically wanted to blame the jews for the murders without any evidence. As well the use of props was very important as grapes, a food meant only for the richest of people, was used to court the prostitutes into trusting the man as they were escorted to their death. In all, the costume design was very effective in portraying the 18th century and made it believable that these people were livings in this time frame.
            In conclusion, I enjoyed this film from the beginning, but near the end it started to lose me as it ended up being very obvious that the surgeon was the killer. Also I believe the suicide of the detective was very random as there is probably a deep meaning made to this in the novel that the film didn’t deliver effectively with. That is what I think the whole film is like, that the novel created a great foundation for a deep story, but the film work didn’t click with the story and didn’t become the best it could be. That is why I am giving it a 6 out of 10, I will recommend it to be people to watch as it is very interesting but don’t expect something on the level of V for Vendetta.

No comments:

Post a Comment