My problems with the film adaptation of From Hell (2001)

The things that the film version of From Hell had going for it was a top-notch cast with the likes of Johnny Depp, Robbie Coltrane, Ian Richarson and Ian Holm who gives a truly terrifying performance as Dr. William Gull who is revealed as Jack the Ripper...

...sorry to spoil the ending.

The film is also atmospheric with both the streets and the prostitutes looking equally as dirty.

Johnny Depp is very good in the film and given his performance in this film and Sleepy Hollow probably 10 years ago he could have starred in a big budget Sherlock Holmes.

Unfortunately, I think moviegoers have readed a bit of a Johnny Depp satuation point given the number of big budget films he has appeared in since the days of From Hell. And this isn't a slam on Depp. I confess I'd probably be the same way as far as work is concerned.

So, at this point in time Johnny Depp name attatched to a blockbuster isn't as much of a draw as Robert Downey Jr. is.

But enough of that. Back to hell.

Apart from Heather Graham, this film seems to have everything going for it as far as being a really great film.

But I find myself on the side of creator Alan Moore as far as my criticisms towards this film.

Although, I do like the fact the film keeps the connection with the Freemasons being involved in Ripper murders, I do not like the changes they made to make the case more sensational.

The biggest thing about the movie that bothers me the most is making Inspector Abberline the psychic in the film. This is not historically accurate. There was an alleged psychic involved in the form of Robert Lees who assisted Abberline on the case.

Abberline isn't the opium addict who dies of an overdoes in his late 30's either. Actually Abberline was happily married and lives to a ripe old age of 86. I suppose this might have been the filmmakers attempt to make Abberline more a Sherlock Holmes type character and give him a vise somewhat similar to cocaine.

Although Moore's original novel might be seen as slow and plodding to some. It makes a better attempt at sticking to the facts rather than trying to make it a sensational and exciting whodunnit. I think the intrigue of the case speaks for itself and doesn't need the extra gloss.

What could have been a really great film becomes a very mediocre effort. I can see why Alan Moore doesn't want his name to be attached to any of these Hollywood efforts. They just do not do his best work justice.

One of these days I hope to see a Jack the Ripper film that sticks to the facts and doesn't try to sensationalize it.

A Study in Terror (1965)

Keeping with my series of blogs highlighting Sherlock Holmes movies you may not have seen I highly recommend checking out the 1965 film A Study in Terror.

It's definitely a film of it's time period. Produced at the height of both the Batman television series and the James Bond film, this version of Sherlock Holmes is heavily influenced by both.

Heck!! Even the poster for the movie states "Here comes the original caped crusader".

Based loosely on the same novel by Ellery Queen, we see Sherlock Holmes face off against a factual murderer in the form of Jack the Ripper. This is the first time I can recall anyone doing a film which would have Holmes solving the Ripper murders. I won't be the last either with the film featuring Holmes facing off against Jack the Ripper.

The next film is 1979's Murder By Decree starring Christopher Plummer as Holmes.

Although, this earlier take on the Ripper murders is less factual than the later film. It's not less enjoyable by any means.

Despite it falling into many of the Sherlock Holmes stereotypes created by the Basil Rathbone films, I found it to be a highly entertaining and enjoyable film.

The late John Neville does a very good job as Sherlock Holmes in this film. And although Donald Houston leans more towards the bumbling Nigel Bruce Watson of the Rathbone films with a touch of Oliver Hardy bashfulness. I do find him much more likable and agreeable than the harrumphing old duffer Bruce created.

Both Neville and Houston add a touch of youth to the roles that had not been seen in the previous attempts at Holmes.

The other two things I really enjoyed about the film was Robert Morley's portrayal as Mycroft Holmes and Frank Finlay as Inspector Lestrade. Both actors look exactly the way the characters are described in Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's original tales.

Finlay would in fact appear as Lestrade once more in the later Holmes/Ripper movie. To my mind, he is still the best actor to appear as the "ferret-faced" Scotland Yard inspector.

A bit of trivia I love to throw out, both the late Robert Morley and Stephen Fry share a distinction as actors who have both played Oscar Wilde and Mycroft Holmes.

And as I had mentioned, the movie doesn't completely stick to the facts of the case in the way the later Christopher Plummer Holmes film or even Alan Moore's epic Jack the Ripper graphic novel From Hell does.

However, this does not make the film all the less enjoyable for me. Even the Batman/Bond flavored action is not that bad.

Not to mention you get to see a very young Dame Judi Dench in only her third feature film.

Although, it seems someone is selling DVD-R copy of it on Amazon.com, sadly it looks as though this film has not had a proper release on DVD just yet. And it really should.

Add this one to your queue of Sherlock Holmes films you need to check out.

Book Recommendation: League of Extraordinary Gentlemen Century 1910

Before you confuse this series with the 2003 movie of the same name STOP RIGHT THERE!! This is another unfortunate case where a less than spectacular movie adaptation completely ruins a really smashing comic book series.

And it's been well documented that Alan Moore will not have his name put on the credits of any movie adaptations of his work because of the treatments his books like From Hell, V For Vendetta and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen have received. In the case of From Hell and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen the adaptations have been so far removed from the original graphic novel that the only thing they have in common is the name and a few of the characters. Johnny Depp's Detective Abberline was not a psychic or clairvoyant or whatever. The psychic in the original case was Robert Lees but the film producers saw it fit to consolidate them into one character.

However, the movie had good bits in it with Johnny Depp, the late Sir Ian Richardson (another favorite Sherlock Holmes actor of mine) and Ian Holm.

But enough about that.

If you have not had a chance to read the original LOEG series, you're missing out. I think it's probably one of the most clever and original series to come out in a while. I really can't say much more about Alan Moore's writing that hasn't already been said numerous times. But I don't know how much has been mentioned about Kevin O'Neill's artwork. I really like it because it reminds me a lot of Keith Giffen's artwork for some of the Lobo mini-series's. But probably a bit technically better than Giffen's art.

So, expunge the 2003 movie from your mind as you're reading the series. You'll find that very easy once you get several pages into the books.

And this brings me to the newest chapter of Moore/O'Neill series Century 1910. I've gotten through the first chapter in this new series What Keeps Mankind Alive and it is great!! Mina Murray has returned with an entirely new League which consists of Allan Quatermain's son, Orlando, A. J. Raffles and Thomas Carnacki.

I was quite pleased to see the inclusion of Raffles in the league. For those unfamiliar with the Raffles series, it was actually created by E. W. Hornung, a brother-in-law to Arthur Conan Doyle, the creator of Sherlock Holmes. Raffles was supposed to be the anti-Holmes. Holmes is a consulting detective who is absolutely brilliant at fighting crime. Raffles is a gentleman thief who is absolutely brilliant in crime.

I had thought about doing an adaptation of Raffles at some point. Then again, I had thought about doing an adaptation of several things I may or may not ever get around to doing. Typical ;-)

What really grabs me about this entire series is how Alan Moore has brought these fictional heroes from both classic literature as well as pulp magazines together in a very fun Justice League/Avengers sort of way while still remaining true to the personalities created for the original characters by their respective authors.

The first book is only $7.50 in graphic novel format. And even if you have not read the entire League of Extraordinary Gentlemen series, you can still jump in here and enjoy this story on it's own.

The Red Hood

Inspired by my previous illustration of the Joker and Bat-Man, I thought I would do a second illustration. This time I thought I would incorporate the Red Hood origin into the illustration a little more.

As I stated in my previous post, I had always kind of liked that origin. Especially the way it appeared in Detective Comics #168 The Man Behind the Red Hood (February 1951). They mention that's how the Joker became the Joker but they still leave the exact identity of the Joker a mystery.

And as much as I like both the Tim Burton Batman and the Killing Joke, I don't particularly like how they give him an identity like Jack Napier or the stand up comic name Joe. Although, Alan Moore does hint at the fact this might not really be a true origin of the Joker and just one of his delusions.

But still. I think the latest Batman film got it right by never revealing who the Joker was. It makes the character a little more dangerous to have that bit of mystery.