WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Phillida Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Scott LeBrun While all of my reviews usually include a brief rehashing of the story, I'll try to say as little as possible, so people can experience the twists fresh. The main idea is that in 1988 L. A., on the 100th anniversary of the Jack the Ripper slayings, a current serial killer is replicating those murders down to the last detail. James Spader plays John Wesford, a do-gooder medical student employed at a clinic, and John ends up suspected of the crimes. So not only must the psychopath be identified, but Johns' name must be cleared...by an unexpected source."Jack's Back" creator Rowdy Herrington had been working in the business approximately a dozen years, doing various odd jobs behind the camera, before making this writing & directing debut. He realized that the anniversary of the Jack the Ripper crimes was imminent, and tied in that element to a story he'd already conceived. While his movie isn't anything special, it *is* solidly entertaining. It might not be gory enough for some people, but it has some good atmosphere (the sets are deliberately rendered to be somewhat hazy), and Herringtons' story twists help to keep things somewhat interesting.The main attraction is in seeing Spader subtly delineate two different characters. Herrington has also assembled a strong supporting cast here: pretty Cynthia Gibb as an intelligent leading lady, Jim Haynie, Chris Mulkey (source of some amusing comedy relief), and John Wesley as assorted detectives working the case, Rod Loomis as the ill-tempered head doctor at the clinic, Rex Ryon as Johns' co-worker, and the always great Robert Picardo as a psychiatrist lending the cops his expertise.Nicely filmed at a variety of L. A. locations.Seven out of 10.

bean-d "Jack's Back" (1988) is a serial killer movie that is thoroughly '80s: the soundtrack, the lighting, the acting--everything. Watching this movie is like going back many years in a time machine. In other words, it's pretty fun. It's also surprisingly restrained. For example, in a scene where the lead goes into a topless bar to buy a gun, there is no obligatory shot of topless girls gyrating around steel poles; he just walks into the bar owner's office. Who knows, maybe the small budget held them back, but it was actually enjoyable to watch a movie that didn't indulge in every predictable grotesquerie.The plot is simple: It's the hundred-year anniversary of Jack the Ripper's crime spree, and someone is killing prostitutes in exactly the same manner, on exactly the same dates. Kinda fun.

sol1218 **SPOILERS** Very disjointed movie about this "Jack the Ripper" imitator who's out to duplicated his horrific crimes this time in L.A ,not London,that he committed exactly, back in 1888, 100 years ago. After murdering and dissecting, like the "Ripper" did, four of his victims it's expected by the LAPD that the "L.A Ripper" is due for one more ,victim more #5, to complete his grizzly task.The film "Jack's Back" centers around the L.A Free Clinic "Echo Park" located in the poor and slummy side of town. Working at Echo Park is young and socially conscious minded med student John Westford, James Spader, who's at odds with his pain in the a** boss Dr. Sidney Tannerson, Rod Loomis. Dr. Tennerson is always threatening to fire John for shooting off his mouth to the media about how bad those without money or health insurance are treated in the country's hospitals.Working with John is this big sweaty and deranged looking med-student, like John, Jack Pendler, Rex Ryan, who's obviously, just by his actions, the #1 suspect, to those of us watching the movie, in the "Rippers" killings. Jack doesn't disappoint us by showing up at Denises Johnson's, Daitza Kimngsley, apartment to preform an abortion on her for a cool $200.00! This in 1988 when abortions were legal in the US and for free in the free clinic-Echo Park- where Denise was a patient at! We never really get to see what happened to Denise but she ends up dead with Jack now in deep sh*t in being the last person to see her alive!With John showing up at Denise's place and finding her dead, with Jack barging down the stairs, it's obvious to him that Jack is the "L.A Ripper" and takes off after him. Trying to take on the much bigger and powerful Jack John ends up getting killed, in his being strung up, by him. It's then that were introduced to John's twin brother Rick, also played by James Spender, who at the moment of John's murder he had a dream of it happening!By the time Rick shows up the "Jack the Ripper" angle of the movie becomes completely kaput in that the killer fulfilled his quota of murders, five, that the real "Jack the Ripper" committed back in 1888. Were then bombarded with claims and counter-claims, by the police and Rick, to who the real "L.A Ripper is". Jack after murdering John had left a suicide note on him where he confessed that he in fact was the "L.A Ripper" which obviously he wasn't!Rick with the help of his late brother John's fellow clinic worker Christine Moscari, Cynthia Gibbs, then try to track down the real killer of not only John but the five "Ripper" victims. The movie get more complicated by the minute with both Rick & Christine not getting anywhere in finding the killer who seems to be everywhere and everyplace at the same time! The ridicules ending of the movie has "The Ripper", now with his identity reviled, again come out of the shadows and attempt to murder Christina while she's sleeping in bed. Why "The Ripper" would want to murder Christina or anybody else for that matter is the biggest surprises in the movie! He already met his goal, five murders, so why try to improve it by adding victim #6 to his scorecard!P.S There's a scene in the movie where "The Ripper" is caught, by Rick, spying on Christina as she's undressing in her apartment. Making a hasty retreat all that "The Ripper" left was his wet shoe prints. Later at his job as a shoe salesman Rick fits the very same shoes on one of his customers, Brian Fats Bender, that was at least a size 14 or 15! This made you as well as Rick suspect that "Fats" was the elusive serial killer in that the shoes in both the size and style that he wears fits that of "The Ripper". It's later when we finally got to see who "The Ripper" really was he was at least half, in hight weight as well as shoe size, the size that "The Ripper" was according to the shoe prints he left outside of Christina's apartment!

hewa-1 This pretty insipid horror film let's you know you're in trouble pretty quickly with bad '80s pop playing over the opening credits - wow, now there's a way to suggest coming menace - and continues to purvey its absurd plot featuring obviously telegraphed, stupid twists that Brian de Palma or Dario Argento might have made something foolishly entertaining, but which Rowdy Herrington essays with all the inspiration of an infomercial. It's ridiculous to see Spader play identical twins, one of whom is a medical student and the other, who has no physical differences whatsoever in his matchstick frame, who's supposed to have been a member of a tough gang, been through the army and prison, and in the course of the film beats up a guy twice his size. The only redeeming feature is indeed in the net being drawn around the wayside hero in trying to clear his brother and avoid arrest himself, so you kind of wanted him to win out, but basically when finished I felt I had wasted a chunk of my life.