When a death row prisoner tells him he wouldn't have led a life of crime if only he had had one friend as a child, Father Edward Flanagan decides to do something about. An advocate of child... See full summary »
Dr. Jekyll believes good and evil exist in everyone. Experiments reveal his evil side, named Hyde. Experience teaches him how evil Hyde can be: he kills Ivy who earlier expressed interest in Jekyll and Sir Charles, Jekyll's fiancée's father.Written by
Ed Stephan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Right after Marcia and Ivy have been talking about a new theatre production and Hyde enters the room, the shadow of a boom mic is visible throughout much of the remaining scene with Hyde eating the grapes and playing the piano. The mic shadow, visible on the back wall, moves over to the doorway as Hyde enters, interrupting Ivy and Marcia, and follows him around the room. It's quite visible. See more »
Mr. Edward Hyde:
When you went to see the good doctor, before you left you said... I almost thought, well what did you think? Maybe that you saw a little bit of ME, Hyde in him?
See more »
This is a thoughtful interpretation of the Stevenson story but is very rarely emotionally engaging. The theme seems to be sexual repression, with Hyde coming from Jekyll's repressed lust. As Hyde takes over we witness some extraordinary and very graphic Freudian imagery such as Bergman and Turner, naked, pulling a chariot containing Tracy and his whip, and Bergman being screwed out of a bottle by a corkscrew! Amazing. But the horror of the story is never realized and there is too much philosophical chat.
Tracy is terrific in the lead, but his make-up for Hyde is too subtle to be effective. The transformations require him to stand completely still which makes them a bit dull. The final transformation is quite an achievement however. Bergman could have been great but her attempt at a cockney accent seriously detracts from her fine emotional interpretation. Lana Turner is awful as Tracy's true love. But the rest of the cast is very strong - especially Donald Crisp.
The film also contains some fine Fleming touches, including his beautiful slow pans over magnificent sets and crowd scenes. The cinematography is excellent - make sure you don't watch the colorised version - and foggy Victorian London is recreated stunningly. This film never rises to the horror of the 1920 or the 1932 versions but still has much to offer.
21 of 32 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this