If heather was a prostitute in 1888 looking that good she'd never have been off her back as would the other girls in this movie
Agreed.
But you aren't the first person to point this out. Not by a long shot.
Never defend crap with 'It's just a movie'
http://www.youtube.com/user/BigGreenProds
Yes, it's a pity (in a dramatic sense) that they glamourised the women's lives, and made all the women considerably younger and more attractive than they were in real life.
I'd like to see a version of the story that depicts the women accurately, that does justice to their memory by showing the people they were and the lives they struggled to make the best of. But that'll never happen; as a culture we've bought into the idea that any "unfortunate" has to look like Heather Graham or Julia Roberts before we'll see tham as the heroine of a story.
You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.
I watched the movie for the first time last night, and I don't feel that the prostitutes' lives were glamorized at all.
How do you feel that their lives were glamorized?
"Never mind walking a mile in my shoes. Try thinking a day in my head."share
Well, the Ripper's victims were not particularly good looking & unhealthy. Nichols had some of her teeth missing, & Chapman was quite sick at the time of her death.
This film does portray them as more pretty & cleaner, & the living conditions not as desperate as people were in reality.
Pretty much nothing in this film is accurate.