User reviews

I am at a loss to explain why James Spader is not a major star. He got a good start with 80s teen flicks and didn't burn out too fast. This movie shows off his acting as well as his on-screen charisma. His everyman is better than Harrison Ford's, usually, because you know there's some intelligence and humanity behind the intensity.

There's some nice moments in the movie, and it has a quirky feel that makes it endearing despite the violent content. Unfortunately, it doesn't quite hold together and the quirkiness doesn't stop it from been a familiar story. Incidentally, despite the direct description of its plot, it's a terrible title.

This item might be trapped in its 80s decor (fashion, music), but this stylishly compelling and crisp psychological thriller holds it cards close and leads the way with an appealingly subtle and sincere James Spader performance. This guy has charisma! And he strongly pulls off the whole dual part of playing twins. The premise is one of those, the less you know, the better off you are. When you think you have it figured out, you'll find yourself at square one again. It's a simple, but cleverly penned whodunit murder mystery story. Its odd and manipulative multi-layered structure offers unpredictable turns, hidden clues, suspicious red herrings, but in the long run leaves some spotty developments and a real lack of motivation. It might annoy and could've used some tweaking, but the well-paced story (that takes time to give our protagonist some depth) and sense of urgency just grips you that you just go with it. Director / writer Rowdy Herrington's directorial debut shows assurance in his abilities. The thrills are routine, but confidently done with razor-sharp timing and jarring force. They're menacing, brooding, bloody and a little disturbing. He really does hold you at bay with powerful visuals and anxious suspense. The moody photography and lighting composition drills in well with the stirringly blues music score. This blends well in with eerily glum and sullen atmospheric tinge coming from the Los Angles' setting. The performances are well-suited. Spader is the film's main drive, but Cynthia Gibb is capably good and Robert Picardo turns in a sound performance. Its also stars Jim Haynie, Chris Mulkey, Rod Loomis, John Wesley and Rex Ryon in amusingly fine support.

A wonderfully quirky and darkly projected thriller that's better than your average output.

This was recommended on my Amazon prime. It looked like a hokey, made for TV movie. I decided to throw it on and it definitely was a hokey, made for TV movie but I really enjoyed it. Most roles I've seen Spader play have been arrogant and not all that likeable. I really enjoyed seeing him play the good guy(s) and for whatever reason, found him to be really attractive in this movie. The copy cat murders don't really have much to do with the movie, it mostly focuses on Spaders character. I enjoyed it and would watch it again.

Rating: *** out of ****

Despite having one of the worst titles I've ever heard, Jack's Back is actually a nifty little thriller, a true hidden gem if I ever saw one. I happened to come across the film at a used video store (like the title, the cover box is pretty awful, too) (makes you wonder if the trailers and TV promos were also just as lame), and being a James Spader fan, decided to give it a look. Nice to see this turned out to be one of the better impulse buys I've made in a while.

The title refers to Jack the Ripper, or more specifically, a copycat who's committing similar murders in Los Angeles on the same days on the hundredth anniversary of when the original killings occurred. Without giving anything away, I'll simply say that James Spader and Cynthia Gibb are the protagonists who are searching for the killer, even though Spader himself might be the one.

Despite a plot that plays somewhat like a routine thriller, the story is still fairly enjoyable for what it is. There are a few plot twists and turns, some unpredictable, some which are fairly obvious. Fans of whodunnits (and let's face it, I think everyone enjoys a good whodunnit every once in a while) will find just enough intriguing detail to make this at least an average viewing.

But what sets this apart from many thrillers, particularly those of the late 80's, is the emphasis on characters. Writer/director Rowdy Herrington probably spends even more time developing the lead protagonists than he does fueling the main plot (I can actually see how this might somewhat disappoint whodunnit fans hoping for a very convoluted plot, or slasher fans expecting more, well, slashing). Consequently, the suspense is ratcheted up a few notches and we find ourselves caring about the outcome.

Most of the credit for this should go to Spader, who delivers a terrifically charismatic and extremely likable performance. He plays a man who's hardly a saint, but realistic in that he's flawed, and simultaneously more than capable of showing a genuine conscience. Cynthia Gibb (who's very cute) works well with Spader, she's charmingly convincing and adorable. The rest of the cast isn't really worth mentioning except for maybe Robert Picardo as a thoughtful police psychologist (who happens to live in a mansion, no less). Everybody else is mostly present to act as suspects or people who are simply in Spader's way.

Herrington's direction is quite good, setting up a creepy atmosphere, nicely accompanied with an equally creepy score. It's Herrington's storytelling that could use more work. While many details are set up well, the finale stumbles due to a rather large leap in logic. To some, the film's conclusion might also seem rather abrupt, without quite enough explanation for all that transpired. If Herrington had tightened up his story, he might have had a great thriller on his hands. As it is, this is merely a good movie that rates well above average. But I shouldn't be complaining. Jack's Back is a pleasant surprise, even moreso for a movie with such an awful title.

A serial killer in Los Angeles celebrates Jack the Ripper's 100th anniversary by committing similar murders.

My first thought was how strange this film was for starting when there was only one murder left. It seems like it would make more sense to start at the first murder and allow the characters to solve the mystery of the pattern. Instead, they know from the opening scene that the killer is following the pattern of Jack the Ripper. This takes out much of the mystery element...

The cast here is pretty great, with both James Spader and Robert Picardo, both (I think) before becoming bigger names. Spader always had that boy next door charm, and Picardo is interesting and plays his role as a psychiatrist well, coming off as very suspicious at all the right moments.

The New York Times said "is so dull it leaves you plenty of time to marvel at how a plot can be this rickety, how a production can look this shabby, and how the first-time writer and director Rowdy Herrington could borrow a story with so relentless a grip on our imaginations and in no time at all declaw it." This seems terribly harsh. While not the greatest movie, it is still much better than many films out there, and had a premise that was enough to carry it.

I watched this film on Netflix, and I am told this version is different from the one on VHS or that was shown in theaters. I would be curious to know the differences, as I am told they are big enough to completely change the plot of the film... I liked the version I saw, but maybe the other is even better?

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.

I'd put off watching Jack's Back for quite sometime. I couldn't tell if it was the bland artwork that turned me off or the idea of a modern Jack the Ripper. Something just told me not to bother. I finally bothered and I wish I hadn't.

Jack's Back is exactly what it sounds like. A copycat of Jack the Ripper has been killing hookers in modern day L.A. (well, modern day L.A. of the late 80's) and a young doctor is drawn into his web of terror. Twists and turns abound, but they usually show up because you can feel that the writer got bored with what they were writing and decided to make a sequence a dream or give a character a twin.

There aren't many thrills here, which is the kiss of death for a so-called thriller, but James Spader is good and there are some cool shots of downtown L.A. in the 80's.

A Sexy James Spader ( Pretty in Pink) stars in dual roles as two twin brothers. One of them us a doctor accused of murdering young women in the style of Jack the ripper. But when hes murdered his twin brother shows up saying that he's seen visions of the killer as well as the murders he's going to commit. It's all a bit lackluster. And there's not enough development or engagement to merit any sort of effectiveness. That being said Spader does what he can with the role but the writing is so overly mediocre it's hard to really feel any type of way about the whole thing.

**/5

Someone is killing prostitutes in a very Jack The Ripper-esque fashion on the 100 year anniversaries of The Ripper's original murders. A med student (Spader) gets caught up in the last murder and winds up meeting a tragic fate. Now his twin brother (also played by Spader) is out to find the man responsible for his death and gets caught up in the middle of the copycat murder case in the process. Oh, and he has to clear his own name because he is a suspect in the above mentioned case AND also a suspect in his brothers murder...Whooo. Now that's a s*** load of plot!

Jack's Back is an odd movie and kind of deceiving. You see, no one in their right mind is gonna market a movie this complicated. So what the box tells ya is that Jack's Back is about a murderer mimicking the Jack The Ripper slayings of a century ago. Well, that's only half the movie. Jack's Back is a murder mystery turned revenge noir turned suspense thriller that manages to avoid drowning itself in murky plot, pointless subplot, or endless dialogue in an attempt to competently tell the story and wrap everything up in the end. From the title and basic premise of the film one may think it's just your basic slasher type/murder mystery exploitation stuff that was recycled over and over again when this movie was released. If so, you're wrong...

Jack's Back starts as a murder mystery about a nutball killing prostitutes, when we meet a med student with a heart of gold, John played by James Spader. He soon finds himself at the scene of one of the Ripper murders and is eventually killed. His shady twin brother Rick who sees the murder in a dream soon pops up. The police are quick to write off John's death as a suicide, but Rick knows better. He soon sets out to find the guy responsible with the help of Chris (Gibb) who had a thing for John and is developing a thing for Rick when he finds that things aren't as they seemed and the Ripper copycat is out for more blood. Writer/director Rowdy Herrington gives us a strong, well developed script with great characters and memorable situations. His ability to shift from a murder mystery to revenge flick to thriller deserves major props. Props to Herrington for creating such likeable and complex characters too. Great job! From a directing standpoint, Herrington gives the movie a moody and uneasy atmosphere blanketed in thick fog. Burnout Central award to Herrington.

James Spader delivers a layered and very strong double performance that engaged me and kept my eyes glued on him. Cynthia Gibb gives a strong performance as well. I dug how the script didn't go into familiar romantic territory even though Spader and Gibb had great chemistry. Burnout Central awards to both!

It was great to watch a movie with such a dense storyline that never forget what it was supposed to do-entertain. I was intrigued and fascinated with the story, performances and Herrington's ability to construct such a multi-layered plot and still find a way to pull it all together. Jack's Back isn't conventional in the least, it marches to its own drum, has class, and is well written, acted and directed. Check it out!

An updating of Jack the Ripper made on the centennial of his infamous murders.

A murderer in Los Angeles is imitating Jack the Ripper--he kills only prostitutes and in the exact same way Jack did. Idealistic kind doctor John Westford (James Spader) stumbles into the last killing and finds a coworker there who said he didn't do it. This leads to a fight, a very unpleasant killing....and a plot twist that will either have you laughing out loud (in disbelief) or thinking "what the f*** where they thinking"? Obviously I'm not going to give it away--but it comes about 30 minutes in--your reaction to the twist will determine how you like the movie. If you accept it you might like it. If you find it totally ridiculous (like me) you'll probably hate the movie.

Also this is being sold as a horror movie. Hardly. There is one bloody killing and another unpleasant one...but that's it. This is a murder mystery--you try to figure out who the killer is. The acting varies. The supporting cast is very good but the two leads aren't. Cynthia Gibb is TERRIBLE as the love interest. As for Spader...he's an excellent actor but way too laid back for this role. Also the movie just looks ugly.

So...an OK murder mystery--but a bad script and some miscast actors really hurt it. I can only give it a 5. You might just want to watch the beginning for the twist--it IS quite different!

It's been a long time since I've seen this but I enjoyed the movie and thought that James Spader gave a great performance. My best friend had it taped off TV and was mentioning the movie one day and hunted it out for us to watch after I had said that I had never seen it or even heard of it, which was odd because I was a fan of James Spader.

The movie has a lot of twists and turns and the excitement builds up and you really get engrossed in the film. James and Cynthia had great chemistry and I agree with others that their romance was not done in a typical, over-done fashion.

The title of the movie is bad and makes you think automatically that it will just be some stupid B movie but it's actually one of the best thrillers I've seen and definitely the best thriller out of the "B" section. I think if the film had more publicity and a better cover/title more people would know of it and want to rent it.

I would recommend it to anyone that likes a good thriller, especially ones that they've never heard of and want to be surprised.

Jack's Back's main gimmick is that the film was released exactly 100 years after the Jack the Ripper murders; it sees a copy-cat serial killer murdering prostitutes in Los Angeles in exactly the same manner as the infamous Whitechapel murderer. The film also features a pretty decent twist, in which John (James Spader), who we assume to be the main character, is killed early on, before the introduction of his twin brother Rick (also Spader) as the real protagonist.

Presumed to be the copy-cat killer by the police, John is declared to have killed himself before he could be caught; however, having seen his twin's murder in a dream, Rick knows that John was innocent and tries to bring the real killer to justice, with the help of pretty trainee medic Chris Moscari (Cynthia Gibb). The charismatic Spader handles both roles brilliantly, giving each brother his own distinct personality (John is saintly, while Rick is a bit of a bad boy), and writer/director Rowdy Herrington handles the twisty-turny plot with skill and style, giving his film a wonderful neo-noir style atmosphere.

Solid support comes from Gibb as the girl who we all know will be targeted by the killer at the end, Robert Picardo as possible red herring psychologist Dr. Carlos Battera, and Rex Ryon as creepy hulk/backstreet abortionist Jack Pendler, who is guilty of many things - but is he the L. A. Ripper?

6.5/10, rounded up to 7 for IMDb.

James Spader had the best hair in the 80s, heads above the rest. Now he is bald. A greater tragedy than the Ripper's story, which has been told countless times, but never quite like this. I love the car the 2nd Spader drives in this movie and the seedy, smoggy L.A. setting which always has a noirish vibe. Cynthia Gibb was great, too. Dorky head, wicked body. The Red Harvest song is solid as well. If anybody deserved to be cloned, it was 80s era Spader and that tonsorial perfection!

One hundred years after the infamous Whitechapel murders, a copycat killer manifests in Los Angeles. After five duplicate slayings, the police are (mis)led to believe that the murderer committed suicide. If not, the culprit is still on the loose!

Being that "Jack's Back" (1988) is about the second coming of Jack the Ripper, I expected a gory, sleazy slasher along the lines of "Edge of Sanity" (1989), but this is more akin to "I, Madman" (1989) mixed with "The Night Stalker" (1972), just inferior to both. It was one of James Spader's first starring roles and he does a fine job while winsome Cynthia Gibb is another positive on the female front.

Unfortunately, something turned me off. For one, the character played by Rex Ryon comes across as a NFL linebacker as opposed to a young doctor, which is bad casting. Then there's the jarring twist at the half hour mark and the hackneyed identical twin trope. Why Sure! It doesn't help that very little of the flick FEELS like Jack the Ripper in the modern day, as was the case with "Edge of Sanity" or the more recent "Maniac" (2012).

This was the writer/director's first film, which might explain the deficiencies. He intended for it to be titled "Red Rain" with the use of Peter Gabriel's song for the opening credits, but the miniscule budget wouldn't allow for the licensing.

While I was surprisingly disappointed, Siskel & Ebert gave it a fairly enthusiastic "thumbs-up." So, if anything I said trips your trigger, give it a shot. You might like it. As far as I'm concerned, there's good reason for its obscurity.

The film runs 1 hour, 37 minutes, and was shot in Los Angeles.

GRADE: C/C-

Prostitutes are being killed in copycat fashion of the Jack the Ripper murders exactly 100 years on, only this time London is swapped for Los Angeles, California. There is quite a curveball in the plot 30 minutes in when the likeable leading character is brutally killed, enter his estranged and identical twin brother, who sees his murder in a dream and is determined to hunt down the killer. James Spader is alright in the duo role but sadly some of the other cast members acting is of the wooden variety. Despite a few twists and red herrings the identity of the real killer is obvious early on, so no great surprise at the end when his identity is revealed. There are a couple of decent horror scenes but overall this film is more of a suspense crime thriller, slasher and gore fans best give this a miss. The plot is rather slow and the overuse of dramatic 1980's music gets annoying, though it does have some good shots of downtown LA. I was a bit surprised that this got a theatrical release, it looks more like a made for TV or straight to video movie. It is a reasonable watch but I would not give it another viewing. I did chuckle when reading the closing credits and saw that "Fatman" was played by one Brian "Fats" Bender! Jack won't be back on my TV!

James Spader stars as twin brothers, one of whom is trying to clear the other who he believes has been framed for a series of Los Angeles murders exactly mimicking those of Jack the Ripper (can't give any more detail - it would spoil the first half-hour). It's very '80s', both in look and soundtrack; but it's stylish and the performances are good - especially Spader, and Robert Picardo as a consultant psychologist assisting the police. Nice to see Chris Mulkey (Twin Peaks) as one of the investigating detectives. Cynthia Gibb is sadly underwhelming as a work colleague of one 'Spader', and love interest of the other. Producer Cassian Elwes cameos as a pimp (and looks like he's having fun). Not bad (although it does have the feel of a TV movie). 6/10.

I think I saw this on tv/cable not long after this came out. I don't remember being blown away by it but I also don't remember hating it either. I have the feeling it probably worked better before decades of shows like CSI and NCIS - you know, where evidence actually is collected and matches the crime. And there's a motive. This did however come out the same year as Die Hard and long after Miami Vice debuted, so that doesn't explain the lack of suspense and plodding pace. Its ok for those who like James Spader or Cynthia Gibb, along with an occasional 80s soundtrack, complete with saxophone at one point. There's also lots of shots of the streets of LA. The police are completely inept and I don't think it was on purpose. Just terrible writing. Characters throughout do things that make no sense. This is maybe ok to have on tv while you're doing other things since it's so slow and nothing happens where paying attention makes a difference.

"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.

in theory this movie should/could have been awesome. unfortunately, it's probably the single most disappointing little known 80's B Horror film i've managed to track down in all my years of horror viewing. I love 'those' types of movies, the complete freedom to be crazy, violent, ridiculously funny, or even scary and disturbing if the colours are mixed correctly. This movie is none of those things. The 'ripper' is not-so-elegantly foreshadowed by his first 2 lines in the first 5 minutes in the movie, so even the most unsophisticated viewer will know exactly what will transpire towards the end. Also the red herring is shamelessly gallivanted around as if to say "it's this guy, its this guy, it's THIS GUY. And I think most of the IMDb and cult horror viewers like myself will struggle to not roll their eyeballs completely out of their sockets during the course of this movie.

OK so the plot stinks! The acting is alright, there's a bit of a sub- plot love story between a younger more attractive James Spader (look up recent pictures of him as an example of how to NOT age gracefully :( and he's just not sexy enough to carry the 'mysterious dark loner' type guy. While horror movies do NOT need to have explicit amounts of gore or violence in order to be good; it certainly tends to help in films like this that just end up being completely boring.

I'm assuming this film was originally produced to air on TV and then later video as even the uncut version has zero nudity or violence. Jack the ripper would be ashamed if he had seen this.

That being said, if you really enjoy James Spader and whatever lady he co-stars with, if you have an affinity for slightly trashy murder mysteries (sans the mystery in this case) or if you had seen this movie decades ago, perhaps it is worth a revisit :)

*also* be on the lookout for the single most ridiculous uppercut/ninja punch that I cannot believe wasn't edited out to look less ridiculous.