User Reviews (23)

Add a Review

  • Warning: Spoilers
    This show reminded me of Geraldo Rivera's "Mystery of Al Capone's Vaults". There was a lot of build up that (obviously - for most) didn't go anywhere.

    The team of Jeff Mudgett and (the supposed) "former CIA operative" Amaryllis Fox used the term "evidence" to mean just about anything but actual evidence. Everything was speculation. Boat manifests, vague eye witness accounts (some 20+ years after the Ripper murders), similar killing styles, pictures found in a box, burial wishes, etc. were somehow evidence that H.H. Holmes was really Jack the Ripper.

    Every time an analyst said, "I can't determine one way or the other", Mudgett took that to mean "Well, my hypothesis hasn't been proved 100% wrong, so it's probably correct!" Fox made a few protests to some of Mudgett's ideas, but I think that was the producers way of bringing "balance" to the show.

    Every time Mudgett was told that his ideas didn't pan out, he looked like a kid that was told that Santa isn't real.

    I am not an investigator, but I would have approached this case very differently. However, my way wouldn't add drama or suspense to the show, nor would it have caused the show to last so long.

    Wouldn't it make sense to compare a timeline of Holmes' locations against the London Ripper murders BEFORE you travel to England? Couldn't they use a (sonar?) device to determine items buried underground without digging up the actual ground? (I've seen it used in other shows, like Hunting Hitler). When the team was told that they couldn't dig up the grounds of the former "murder castle" they didn't explore any other alternatives. (Or maybe they did, but it proved to be a dead end - thus not for entertainment value).

    After the team got back from England and went off on their wild goose chases, I asked myself, "How does this help prove that Holmes was Jack the Ripper?" All the so-called evidence that the team uncovered could have tied Holmes to a lot of different killers.

    I'm sure the Ripper wasn't unique in his killing style. He just happened to be famous. Surely there were a lot of "copy cat" killers during the time, due to the headlines that the Ripper cases generated.

    I would have enjoyed the show more if they focused on the horrific details that they could prove about H.H. Holmes. The "murder castle" alone would have been an interesting topic for a few episodes.

    Sure, Mudgett's great-great grandfather was a horrible person, but I do not want to see this guy on TV anymore. The ending was exactly how I suspected. There is no real tie to Holmes and the Ripper.

    The History Channel's choice of historical programming is not very historical.
  • Like clearing up after a hurricane, where do you start? An appalling load of rubbish from start to finish. Here are a few facts. 1. Nobody ever saw the killer - so there are no eyewitness statements as to his appearance. 2. For anyone who thinks he has surgical skill, take a look at the Eddowes photographs, I could have done a neater job with a blunt chainsaw. 3. Not one single letter has ever been proved to have come from the killer, the one that a lot of experts say might have wasn't even mentioned. 4. There are no clues left by the killer, except possibly the Goulston Street graffito. 5. There is absolutely nothing to point to the nationality of the killer. The one American suspect Dr Tumblety was arrested for homosexual acts in a public toilet with men, not for being a suspect. 6. The killer knew the streets of the East End and knew the people, he was one of them, he wasn't a mastermind - just lucky.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I understand Americans do not have a good relationship with facts, wisdom, history and general knowledge but this History Channel is driving me crazy. Somebody should shut them down.

    They have invented a method to mess with history, sensationalize it and worst of all reproduce facts and present it as 'new'.

    This series follow the same poisonous method.

    1) Take a historical figure or story 2) Find some conspiracy halfwits that want to be on TV 3) Add a Hollywood touch by inserting some low self-esteem ex military or secret service people who have absolutely no pride or self-worth. 4) Narrate it using a deep sensational voice 5) Shamelessly claim known facts to be new facts 6) Do not hesitate to disturb a person or grave if it serves the sensationalizing agenda. 7) Don't conclude anything until you reached 7 to 10 episodes. The result is not important.

    They pulled this horrible scam with 'Hunting Hitler', a long hunt with no conclusive results. Just sensationalized BS. Everybody knows about Argentina. They simply had the audacity to disturb people who have been suppressing these horrors for decades. Ultimately the History Channel added ZERO to history. Shame!

    Then they turned to Earhart. The female Pilot who crashed and got captured by Japs. What they did with her is simply compile known statements by a whole lot of people, but found nothing new. For fun they disturbed some grave. Essentially making a documentary about nothing. Shame again.

    So now the mess with Jack the Ripper. I have seen two episodes and already know that the end will be inconclusive, no new facts will be added and the last sentence will be 'we will never know for sure'.

    The History Channel is an insult to History.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I watched the first episode of this, and had hoped that they would at least start to address likely the MAIN issue in trying to connect HH Holmes with Jack the Ripper. HH Holmes had a daughter, Lucy Theodate Holmes, born on July 4, 1889 to his second "wife", Myrta Belknap, in Englewood, Ill. The last Ripper murder, Mary Kelly, occurred on November 7, 1888. Therefore, unless his daughter was born very premature (of which there is no indication), or she was not actually his daughter (which would have to be proved), she was conceived around the beginning of October 1888. For that to occur, either Myrta accompanied him on his supposed killing spree trip to London, or Holmes was nowhere near London... but instead was in Chicago.

    Until they address this rather large elephant in the room, all the rest of their "investigation" is meaningless...
  • Over the years I've always had a fascination of just who Jack The Ripper was? So when I heard about this new documentary I tried to keep an open mind going into it. I will always listen to theories on who it could be. I had done a little research and had heard that many people had said that Jeff Mudgett who has the leading role in this documentary series and is H.H. Holmes great, great grandson, or something like that, was a bit 'nutty' ... All this show really does is confirms that. His theory that H.H. Holmes is Jack The Ripper... NO, HE'S NOT. 100% he's not. Don't waste your time with this. It's full of close but not close enough theories. A lot of it is based on if Holmes faked his own death and the Ripper style murders that happened afterwards.. Well, it turns out he didn't fake his own death and the Ripper style murders still happened. They go on about periods where he stopped killing. And the murders started in London. There could be many other explanations for this.

    Like I said, there are too many... so it's Holmes, it's Holmes, it's Holmes... Only to discover it's not. All the conclusive - we can't say it's not him... yeah, but you can't say it is him. Like I said. Don't waste your time on this. If I could give a good bit of advice - Go and read some books on Jack The Ripper and come to your own conclusions... Just be prepared for your main suspect to change the more you read into this... I know I have over the years
  • corvette-4592121 September 2017
    OK the main flaw that I feel throws this conspiracy theory out the window is this: We have an American in Chicago, living in a town that was familiar to him with a simple "grid" system infrastructure which would have been easy for him to navigate. However,he jumps on a ship and travels to London to commit several murders that he does under the cover of darkness in an unfamiliar city that is basically a "labyrinth" of confusing streets and gets away every time? I think not! Jack the Ripper was a local to the area and that is how he managed to elude capture - I know its not as exciting but do we want reality or entertainment.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Mr. Mudgett is desperate to prove his g-g-grandfather, the vicious murderer H. H. Holmes is Jack the Ripper. I just have to ask "Why?". That question hung over each episode for me. You already have a horrible direct ancestor, and you want him to be even worse? Is it desperation for personal fame?

    This desperation is apparent throughout the entire series. As each expert dispels and chance that Holmes and the Ripper are the same person, Mudgett refuses to accept that his theory lacks any evidence, and in fact, believes that the negative evidence proves the positive.

    And this other, fame seeking ex-CIA operative is embarrassing. I'd hope such important jobs would be filled with people who were more well-spoken and erudite. "Wow". "That's interesting" and repeating the obvious.

    The series is interminable. They drag every idea, possibility, and reflection (not to mention, long known facts) out so long, that the actual data--the meat of the investigation--could be presented in 4 episodes or less. But then, four episodes could not have generated 8 episodes worth of advertiser dollars.
  • It's a bad and Bollywood type documentary.

    A lot of splicing, awful eye contacts and the CIA's so called 'former operative' Fox was talking too much. In a simple conversation, 1 sentence was from an expert and 10 sentences were coming from Fox. Disgusting attitude.

    Every time, the worthlessness tryouts of linking Ripper and Holmes seemed pretty blunt.

    Each time, an irrelevant object was too much for that Fox. That's interesting' was hear 80-100 times at least throughout the show. Dullness at the best. The way she was acting, had to make me me forget all the joy that I intended to have before watching the show.

    History channel is a turd these days. The background music had no points. Showing same clips again and again and again. Ew...
  • Warning: Spoilers
    From the first episode to the last, this program tries to convince the viewer, that H.H.Homes (H.W.Mudget)is somehow Jack The Ripper. And fails miserably at every attempt.

    Even the unearthing of the grave is done with so much drama & pausing in between shovels full of earth as possible, it's painful to watch. The fact they exhumed a grave to make a very weak TV Drama, i find very shocking.

    This hole thing is centered around the co-hosts, and what absurd ideas they could come up with next. It was played out as one host being neutral to the idea, of a link to Jack The Ripper. While Homes's Great, Great Grandson being desperate to prove the connection being real.

    Both failed on both accounts, and this series was just entertainment trash. No doubt there will be a second series, and no doubt it will be the same fantasy conclusions reached ... Whith no Proof, what so ever.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    First of all, I want to say that I am pleased that some attention is being given to serial killer H. H. Holmes. This individual deserves some study, being a brilliant, prolific killer of the late 1800s.

    A lot of the so-called "evidence" is not compelling in the least, which makes me wonder why Jeff Mudgett is so heavily invested in proving that his ancestor was also Jack the Ripper.

    I am guessing that the Holmes-Ripper connection was established in order to attract viewers and advertisers.

    The entire series should be taken with a huge grain of salt. If one does not take any of this too seriously, it is entertaining and somewhat informative. I am a bit skeptical of the "evidence" presented, although I did enjoy seeing some of the locations where pertinent events took place.
  • sportznu31 August 2017
    Well I learned two irrevocable things about this series: #1. I wasted 8 hours of life watching it. #2. We still don't know who The Ripper was. This series lost me on series 7 when Jeff Muddget convinces himself, after every other expert debunks all his theories, that H.H. Holmes escaped his own hanging death and exacted revenge on all the people that assisted in his capture or criminal trial. What's worse is although quite sexy in her own way, the CIA operative Amaryllis Fox actually entertained this theory. The first few episodes I found somewhat entertaining as it did shed facts of the crimes, and hopes that there was some plausibility to the claim Holmes was linked. All in all, I guess The History Channel succeeded in what they set out to do and that was to get people to watch. I confess I watched all 8 episodes but I figured, "what the hell," I've already wasted 6 hours of this debacle.
  • Eloquently or Not This Program still proves to be insightful and VERY Entertaining. It's too Easy to haphazardly make judgments, about such a Famous Cold Case. But the facts are too Endearing to ignore! Say what you want about American Programming, But the History Channel has brought life, at the very least a new dialog for the younger generation to form their own opinions.

    The fact that H.H Holmes's own descendant, is the soul force behind the show's existence doesn't take ANYTHING Away from the validity of the claims. It's a tale everyone whats to know the end to.

    It's a 6 part series, And I for one am going to stay tuned to see if Holmes's Lost Time can be accounted for!
  • Loved the show so much. Very satisfying especially if you nerd out over this kinda stuff! I wanted there to be a season 2 so bad and VERY disappointed its canceled. I think the audience had lots more questions that could have been answered. Now just crossing my fingers that maybe Netflix will pick this show up.
  • turkman141220 November 2017
    Remember Geraldo Rivera and Al Capone's vault? This is the same thing. All sorts of hype and absolutely nothing to show for it. If Amaryllis Fox had any credibility before this show, she has surely lost it now. I suspect the people who put up the money for this and saw it go swirling down the drain, decided that a second season of nothing but circumstantial evidence wasn't worth it.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Okay this so was outstanding why the hate People don't pay Attention. You see the show never claims its solved the case it gives you a theory, A theory H.H Holmes is Jack The Ripper it then proceeds to lay out it's interesting Theory, It's an interesting Theory that a lot of experts around the world subscribe too, But our Pommy friends of course are outraged that the yanks are trying to steal their ICON, But over all its a great show not to be watched by idiots, Other wise said idiots end up on here crying about it, Remember it's not fact it's a theory, It's Jack The Ripper if you don't know that JTR is still a mystery today your an idiot, Again did you expect DNA evidence or for such and old case to be officially solved if so, Your an idiot. So please don't watch this if you lack an I.Q. Otherwise it's really interesting
  • MeekoTown3 April 2019
    Jeff Mudgett comes across as someone who only cares about proving he's right. The way it's edited, the leads seem shocked by some of the stuff they learn from 'experts' that's common knowledge of H.H. Holmes & as his grandson who has spent 20 trying to prove H.H. Holmes & Jack The Ripper are the same person he would have know these facts. The leads also take a rumour and state it as facts.
  • natemansur3 February 2019
    3/10
    Meh
    Warning: Spoilers
    The dude is obsessed with proving H.H.Holmes (his great great grandfather) is Jack the Ripper. He ends up failing to prove anything. The one good take away is you can learn facts about H.H. Holmes you never knew before
  • turkeytwo20 July 2018
    What a piece of crap. Every time a "lead" went nowhere, they found some other circumstantial piece of "evidence". Amaryllis Fox may have been a credible investigator at one time but not any more.
  • Don't waste your time. Ghost Adventurers is about as credible as this series.
  • US documentary makers seem to love stretching something and this show is a classic example. Lots of dramatic music while the camera zooms in on the face of one of the participants. Endless summarizing of what has already been discovered (actually pretty much nothing), teasers for what is to be discovered next (generally, absolutely nothing). Use of very tenuous evidence and conspiracy theory. Classic example is the use of the 'Dear Boss' letters to try to link Holmes to the Ripper killings. Problem is, the Dear Boss letters have pretty much been discounted as fakes, probably written by a journalist to sell newspapers.
  • My title says it all really. If the CIA have "operatives" as guillible and downright naive as Ms Fox God help the USA. Avoid wasting your valuable time watching cheap tv trash like this.
  • First I love documentaries and this is about 50% documentary and 50% conjecture.Learning about this serial killer was interesting and scary, but the attempt to draw a connection to Jack the Ripper is very so-so with at best coincidences.Worth your time?If you love documentaries about crime and wasting half your time,you're good to go.
  • sdearwechter25 February 2018
    Does anyone know when or if this is coming back on>