Dorathen Better Late Then Never

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

ChampDavSlim The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

BA_Harrison Molly Keller (A. J. Cook), the only survivor of a violent massacre when she was sixteen, is now a student enrolled in a forensic science course at Berkeley. When her fellow classmates start dying at the hands of a mystery killer, who is following the modus operandi of the infamous Jack the Ripper, she suspects that the murderer from her past is back to finish the job.Molly and the remaining students from her study group pool their profiling talents in an attempt to discover the identity of the maniac.Director John Eyres directs this slab of stalk 'n slash with both eyes firmly fixed on the teen market, and what may have been a nice addition to the genre becomes an annoying and unwatchable piece of garbage due to its MTV trappings. So obnoxious are the trendy narcissistic teens that make up teacher Marshall Kane's (Bruce Payne) class of wannabe Clarice Starlings, that you'll find yourself rooting for the killer. Main character Molly is perhaps the most annoying character of all; her emotionally troubled, spunky, grunge-chic heroine is carefully designed to appeal to the widest possible teenage demographic; angst-ridden loners, trendy fashion followers, horny guys—she's supposed to appeal to them all. Well I'm not a teenager anymore, and I hated her with a passion! And while I'm having a rant about the students, could someone please explain to me how they all became so damn erudite. From hacking into a police computer undetected, to conducting an autopsy, to fixing a satellite dish, nothing seemed to be beyond their capabilities.And now onto the death scenes. The first murder is the most impressive—a multiple stabbing followed by defenestration—and it is also the bloodiest. The rest of the killings are relatively gore free and disappointing. The nastiest deaths actually occur by accident, when two characters fall in front of the whirring buzz blades of a sawmill.Toward the end of this drivel, which at 115 minutes is way too long, I gave up following the ludicrous plot. There was some rubbish about the victims sharing the same initials as those killed by Jack the Ripper, a pointless (non-explicit) sex scene, and various characters were revealed as red herrings. The finale is completely confusing and I ended up unsure as to who the killer really was.Apparently, the director deliberately wanted the ending to be ambiguous, with the viewer making their own mind up about who was responsible. Well I'm not going to be ambiguous about what I think of this film—it was awful.

shuia Girl-running-in-a-thunderstorm-with-killer-close-behind-girl-trips killer-gets-her kind of story. Lots of blood, no originality. One would expect more from a movie which promises serial psycho killers copying Jack the Ripper. No real motivation for the blood bath, least of all a psychological one. Except for the ending which at least creates a little bit of confusion, one could predict every scene at least 10 minutes before it unfolds. Everything in this movie has been done, redone and overdone. It's like watching Scary Movie and taking it seriously. It's been a real disappointment. Where are the calculated blood thirsty psycho killers? What happened to movies like Seven or Silence of the Lambs, with original plots and motifs? Because personally I'm tired of watching helpless blonds being butchered like cattle while instead of defending themselves they scream in agony and then always manage to trip and fall.

divrdwn41 I viewed this movie basically because of A J Cook, who is now in the new TV Series "Criminal Minds". In the beginning I was like many(most) of the commenters on here. I played the ending twice to determine the killer. Then, the switch went on. This IS a movie with connections to Jack the Ripper. And there has never been definitive proof of who he was.Aha, there is no definitive proof of who the killer is in this movie.So, let's move on. Perhaps this is the answer to the oft asked question about the ending, perhaps not. But the logic makes considerable sense. As far as I know, none of the directors dialogs has ever addressed this issue.I vaguely recall a movie back in the 60's that had an ending that was left entirely to the viewer's interpretation. It began as a black and white movie, and then as a female is killed and she begins to bleed the blood turns to red and the movie becomes a color movie. One of the best transitions I can recall. I cannot recall the name of that movie. However, at the conclusion you were left to decide the ending.

kewlguy51 Ripper: Letter from hell is a fun and stylish slasher that manages to be better than most of its kind. The plot is fairly silly at times and some of the acting is choppy on the parts of the corpses-to-be but it overall delivers and turns out to be a fun movie. A.J. Cook is awesome as molly and does excellent and steals the stage from everyone. The music is also very very suprisingly good, performed by little-known rock bands, selected well for each scene. The gore is a plus and the death scenes are well done. Overall, Ripper: Letter from hell is a fun movie to watch on a friday night when your all alone in the dark. Also, I really liked the ending, something that you will have to figure out as you think about it days later. GRADE: B-