Talk:From Hell (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

References to use[edit]

Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.
  • Booker, M. Keith (2007). "From Hell". May Contain Graphic Material: Comic Books, Graphic Novels, and Film. Praeger. ISBN 0275993868.

Where did this phrase come from?[edit]

However, the accuracy and attention to detail in the re-creation of Whitechapel and Spitalfields (based on period photographs) is very impressive.

Nonsense, for starters the 5 victims did not knew each other to begin with, nor did the movie explained why it was so hard to catch the killer to begin with (partially because of the way the killings took place, a novelty at the time, and partially because the existing laws of the time, such as entering a church for example). There is detailed information about the gruesome nature of some of the crimes and details of how they were killed, yet most of the victims are not portrayed as they were in real life (the attention seems to come only at the characters as victims). One detail that is quite impressive though, is how the detective recognizes how Martha Tabram was killed not by the same killer, quite impressive i must say that the director took notice of that (even include Martha Tabram), yet at the time there were little knowledge about serial killers or forensic for such bold statement to be as believable as it is. Theres no mistake to make, the movie is only losely based on the actual event, and shares more with the comic than with real events. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.215.173.173 (talkcontribs) 02:57, 20 June 2006.

I think the sentence was referring to the recreation of 1880s Whitechapel and Spitalfields in terms of architecture, costume etc. That was probably the only good thing in the film. i live in Whitechapel and it was fascinating to see what it would have been like before the slum clearances, the Blitz, post-war development etc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.196.239.189 (talkcontribs) 14:29, 11 August 2006.
Oh... well, then i suppose its alright then. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.215.169.199 (talkcontribs) 03:45, 3 September 2006.

However, the accuracy and attention to detail in the re-creation of Whitechapel and Spitalfields (based on period photographs) is very impressive.

I've removed this phrase again but for different reasons, as it's not NPOV. If something can be found to show that critics or historians considered it impressive then ok, but as it is at the moment (an unsourced statement) it is basically just someone's opinion, not a fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.140.106.166 (talkcontribs) 14:36, 14 June 2007

No synopsis?[edit]

No plot summary? Has one been removed? It would surely be useful to have one, especially as the story in the film differs so greatly from the graphic novel which it's based on. I don't have a copy of the film (nor can I be bothered to watch it again, to be honest) so I don't know if anyone else is willing to write one up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.140.106.166 (talkcontribs) 14:39, 14 June 2007

Fair use rationale for Image:From Hell film.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:From Hell film.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 21:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Plot section needs help[edit]

it reads like someone typed up the back of the DVD.

I can't recall the exact ending of the film, but it should be included in the summary.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Kryptography (talkcontribs) 14:49, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, I just removed that last, commercial-like sentence. At least it's a start. It still needs a lot of work though, but I don't really have the time tonight. I'll probably spend some time working on it in the next few days.--Metalhead94 (talk) 21:35, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
It does sound like promotional packaging... but we do not have to give endings of films... in fact plot summaries are completely unnecessary unless there's some encyclopedic reason to mention it. We aren't WikiCliffsNotesSubstitute. DreamGuy (talk) 22:09, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
It still reads like an ad though. Dumaka (talk) 20:30, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Absinthe/Laudanum...why?[edit]

At one point in the film, Depp's character mixes Absinthe with Laudanum (and, I assume, salt)...I can't find much reference to the mix on wikipedia and anything in this article at all about either...it's a minor point, but I'm interested to know why :-) 78.86.230.62 (talk) 21:26, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Chasing_the_dragon seems to be what it is known as (mentioned in the film) but, again, it's not mentioned in the article...just thought I'd point that out :-) 78.86.230.62 (talk) 21:53, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Salt? I thought it was sugar...--80.133.241.189 (talk) 10:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Murder By Decree[edit]

This film bears a remarkable similarity to Murder By Decree (1979) a film which pits Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson against the Ripper, with the premise of a secret royal lovechild who is catholic. Sherlock Holmes = Christopher Plummer = Johnny Depp & Dr Watson = James Mason = Robbie Coltraine. I am aware of the Alan Moore comic, but the film seems much closer (re-imaging, even) to Murder by Decree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.71.35.211 (talk) 16:32, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Illegitimate child[edit]

In the synopsis it states that the daughter, Alice, was the legitimate child of the prince and therefore heir to the throne. This may be how the film states it, but this would not have been the case. It is law that Catholics cannot sit upon the throne of the UK. It is also law that a royal may not marry without the soveriegn's permission. Therefore the marriage could not have been legal and the child was illegitimate and could not ascend to the throne.KhProd1 (talk) 03:49, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Prostitue, or "bangtail" [Other terms, used in the film][edit]

I didn't hear "BangTail", but I heard:

"PinchPrick"... Just thought it was funny. I'm sure there were others mentioned in the film. Should we make a list?