Hello to all those faithfully reading and hopefully enjoying this effort to make even the worst horror movie more watcha... aw, screw that - I'm not that good. If a movie makes you cringe because yet another batch of unlikable teens that are pushing 30 are inching toward their deaths, having a party no one does anywhere ever, a paranormal movie is boring you to tears with unending pans of empty rooms, or thanks to CGI technology when people finally bite it, their blood squirts everywhere except on the victim, the ground, the people next to them... you're in good company and this is the right place for you.

Wednesday, January 9, 2013


Ripper aka Ripper: Letter From Hell (2001) Canada/UK

This must have been Movies That Make Absolutely No Sense And Doesn't Care If You Like It Or Not day because this was the second one that had me going 'Whaaaaa?' through the whole thing, although it wasn't really interesting enough to analyze carefully anyway. You see (she said sarcastically to the C-B film makers of this crappy thing) when you want to have a mystery and thriller and horror movie, you have to have a story that makes sense, clues that keep the audience into the story and paying attention, and a conclusion that is consistent with the clues and makes the audience say 'Aha, so THAT'S what happened.' You, sirs or madams, have done none of the above.

The case of Jack The Ripper in itself was not a solvable crime . The times were too early for things such as forensics, the newspapers made most of the story what it was for the titillation of their readers (The killer NEVER referred to himself as Jack the Ripper, that name was made up by the press.), authorities were looking for a quick end to a messy situation, and the true identity of the nasty 1880's killer will probably never be known (Note: Late in 2014, using DNA evidence, the identity of JTR was revealed - so they say.). Whether he was a member of the Royal house, a physician or simply someone handy with a knife, his identity continues to be hotly debated. So if his case still doesn't make much sense, I guess expecting a movie based on his exploits can't make much more... right?

In this attempt at a clever story, a girl named Molly is seen escaping (we think) a killer after said killer has already butchered her friends. Five years later she takes a forensic psychology class from famous expert Marshall Kane. They discuss how anyone can be a killer with the right background and triggers. Molly is a bit of an uber bitch which distances her from her classmates, who only tolerate her because they have to be in the same study group. Some later go to a rave. There one is attacked and killed in the manner of the Ripper's first victim. 

Right now I'm kind of rooting for the killer because we're about an hour into the movie before the surviving study group members (after another is killed) decides to form their little Scooby group and solve the mystery. Duh. Thrown into this messy mix is Detective Kelso (Jurgen Prochnow in a puzzling appearance but still great hair) who was on the scene of the first massacre when Molly was rescued and is now watching her because why now? Oh yeah, he claims the killer is back. How? We dunno and they're not telling.

So we have a few more murders, protracted 'angst' moments with Molly as she agonizes over who knows what, plus a weird sex scene between her and her teacher. Ick. Not. Sexy. At. All. When those left alive in the study group, who seem to be the targets find out about Molly's past they're more than pissed. They figure they've become victims because of her - but (another 'clue' that made absolutely no sense) they discover their group's initials all match the Ripper's victims and the order of the murders. Okay I call extreme BS on this one. This makes no sense, the clues are ridiculous and are a million in one chance... okay you know what? Let me just finish this sorry thing off...

As we trip the light fantastic back to the original massacre we see a different scene than shown at first. Molly sees herself as the killer, and only posed as the victim because she either A. Became an amnesiac and forgot she was the killer or, B. Was a very good actress. I'm going for C. This movie is total bullshit. And what about the person with the black gloves who tried to get her and she stabbed in the hand? 

 And the fact that the end of the movie shows 'five years later' (wow, what timing) Molly has written a best-seller, living it up in the city while her former teacher, convicted of the killings is electrocuted - but then shows Molly thrown into an insane asylum. Huh? What? Ohhhhh, like the original killings, we're not supposed to know definitely WHO the killer is. That's a load. It could have been Molly, or it could have been Detective Kelso, since he was on the original scene and in every other scene in the movie in black gloves (like the one she stabbed) or it could have been... the writers of this horrible movie 'cause nothing and nobody makes any damn sense at all.