Metascore
54

Mixed or average reviews - based on 32 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 32
  2. Negative: 7 out of 32
  1. Sensational and accomplished.
  2. 88
    Gripping and stylish thriller.
  3. 80
    Their discretion makes From Hell less a horror movie than a classical film noir.
  4. 80
    Superbly shot around Prague -- From Hell is even more stylish than gruesome -- it has the lush decrepitude of an autumn compost heap or an old Hammer werewolf flick.
  5. Reviewed by: Derek Elley
    80
    Surprisingly conventional Olde London Towne gaslight mystery, gussied up with some doctored visuals, and an eccentric performance by Johnny Depp.
  6. Ambitious, visually stunning and hugely accomplished.
  7. A visionary breakthrough for the young directors, a darkly alluring and largely successful attempt to crowd the territory of Roman Polanski and Dario Argento.
  8. 75
    The movie feels dark, clammy and exhilarating -- it's like belonging to a secret club where you can have a lot of fun but might get into trouble.
  9. The movie works well as a straight-out horror yarn, proving that the Hughes Brothers are more versatile than their previous "ghetto pictures" suggest.
  10. Mystery skillfully evokes Victorian London's dark depths.
  11. Depp gives yet another introspective, slightly mopey performance -- Graham never begins to act (and never has begun, as far as I know). But they're surrounded by an authentic, first-rate English cast.
  12. It's not a great movie by any means, but it grips tighter than a chokehold and it cuts as deep as a knife.
  13. 67
    A tug-of-war between a bracing vision of a truly infernal crime spree -- complete with engaging whodunit storytelling -- and a sometimes clumsy period drama.
  14. It's by far the most violent, most clinical and most sumptuously atmospheric.
  15. An amazing physical specimen, beautifully photographed and edited. If you think of it as your own opium dream, you may dismiss the lousy story as a mere side effect.
  16. Reviewed by: Cody Clark
    60
    The movie's most glaring flaw is that the brothers and their screenwriters, Terry Hayes and Rafael Yglesias, don't manage to preserve the secret of the Ripper's identity for nearly as long as they intend to.
  17. 60
    An astonishing act of synthesis, bringing together disparate Ripper theories and a fiercely idiosyncratic version of London's history, architecture, policing and social structure.
  18. 60
    So beautifully realized as a mood piece that it takes a while for a slight disappointment to register.
  19. 50
    Lacks the energy and urgency of its source material.
  20. 50
    There's no bite or sting, nor is there a single moment when the film is anything close to scary. It isn't ever engaging, either; it's a dull, sluggish bum-out.
  21. With almost as many subplots as corpses, the movie maintains its mild watchability only because the Ripper saga still engrosses.
  22. 50
    Labyrinthine yet oversimple, the story seems to hide a more provocative one. But perhaps this is the nature of the beast.
  23. 40
    Could have been a beautiful and suspenseful thriller, lukewarm performances make the film just another movie to add to one's "rent-it-when-it-comes-to-DVD" list.
  24. 40
    A visual tour-de-force; it's just that there's not much else to sink your teeth into once the pretty colors fade from view.
  25. It is deeply unpleasant to see women abducted, tortured and eviscerated by a methodical and meticulous butcher.
  26. Feels stagy, stiff and entirely unnecessary.
  27. Reviewed by: Jay Carr
    38
    What the Hughes brothers have come up with is, to borrow another phrase from that bygone age, a penny dreadful.
  28. 38
    A visionary sort of horror movie should ponder three words: "Bram Stoker's Dracula."
  29. 30
    A brain-dead version of a dark and complex work.
  30. The only note of authenticity in the movie comes from Ian Holm, playing the royal physician. What is this nuanced performance -- at least until the final fireworks -- doing in this twaddle?
  31. 20
    The Hughes boys blow it by burying a fine cast -- Robbie Coltrane as a cop and Ian Holm as a royal sawbones are standouts -- in stock scares, sappy romance and cliches that really are from hell.
  32. Feels razor thin. None of the characters is particularly noteworthy. And the revelations of deep-seated conspiracy in the usual privileged, closed circles are hackneyed and tired.
User Score
6.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 52 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 17
  2. Negative: 2 out of 17
  1. Mar 25, 2011
    4
    Was this supposed to be a detective film, a thriller, or a horror story? Because it fails at all three at them. Johnny Depp has been miscastWas this supposed to be a detective film, a thriller, or a horror story? Because it fails at all three at them. Johnny Depp has been miscast into a bland and uninteresting character while all other characters are simply uninteresting to begin with. Not bad, but completely forgettable. Full Review »
  2. Aug 25, 2013
    10
    Watch it!!! Perfect!!!! A masterpiece!!!! It's one of my favourite thrillers!!!! Johnny Depp is always perfect in his movies!!! He has aWatch it!!! Perfect!!!! A masterpiece!!!! It's one of my favourite thrillers!!!! Johnny Depp is always perfect in his movies!!! He has a gift!!!!! He's the best actor in the world! Full Review »
  3. Nov 4, 2013
    5
    From Hell would almost be interesting if it wasn't for the bungled love story, awful accents and empty conclusion. There are a few nice thingsFrom Hell would almost be interesting if it wasn't for the bungled love story, awful accents and empty conclusion. There are a few nice things about this Jack the Ripper flick but overall it's a mess. Full Review »