Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

Thematically complex, cinematically adventurous, and generally intense adaptation. A fresh air of honest sexuality and candor pervades this pre-Code production. March, who copped an Oscar for his schizoid work, is excellent as Jekyll and Hyde; as the latter, outsized dentures force him to talk like Humphrey Bogart while his unharnessed id prompts antisocial behavior worthy of Al Pacino's Tony Montana. Hopkins projects raunchy vulnerability as Ivy, the hooker with a heart of champagne.

The POV intro completely blew me away, and maybe raised my expectations of what was to come a bit too high. March succeeds in creating both a sympathetic character in Jekyll and an amusing (but maybe too goofy looking) villain when he goes into Hyde-mode. Some amazing special effects and interesting split-screen use, though it all plays out rather simple.

Mostly enjoyable from a technical point of view, including the beginning, which is filmed as, erhm, point of view. The make-up effects used when transforming Jekyll into Hyde are also something to behold. The atrocities of Hyde have faded somewhat in comparison to your average 'Serbian film', and thus the impact of the tragedy is lessened. It's worth a watch, if you can accept, let alone ignore, that it seems to be an allegory for how alcohol is bad for you.

The fact that it's a transitional sound pictures shows in two areas, the occasionally stiff dialogue delivery and recurring frontal reaction shots that linger and feel out of place. Outside of that the acting is very good and the story is quite effectively told, with a mix of humour and horror. The special effects hold up really well and make the transformation seem genuine.

Told with a keen sense of pathos and some unexpectedly good acting. Almost every scene shared between Fredric March and Miriam Hopkins is terrific. Well crafted cinematically too, with convincing effects and adventurous camera work. Could have easily been the best horror flick of the year if it weren't for FRANKENSTEIN.

A significant step ahead of its horror counterparts on a technical level. The tracking POV shot at the beginning is impressive and pays off nicely in the execution of the transformation scene. For as amazing as the first half is, the second is a bit of a letdown featuring far less technical wizardry and far more melodrama. Overall still a very impressive film.

This movie is immediately entrancing with lots of creative camera effects, not to mention the great use of makeup and other special effects. Surprisingly, things feel pretty slow once Mr. Hyde actually comes into the picture, but he's still a well-acted villain, and the story is always engaging.

Chilling and very relevant tale about the relationship between violence and the subconscious.

The early special effects are really impressive for the time. Also interesting to see what Hollywood could get away with pre-Hays Code. However...why does Mr. Hyde suddenly adopt a foreign accent? That's got some unfortunate implications.

March is both over-the-top ridiculous, but eerily awesome as the hyper-libido Hyde. The special effects are incredibly impressive.

It's faithful to the subject and even manages to improve it thematically. Has quite a remarkable craftsmanship for its time. Very good adaptation.

I can't imagine a better adaptation of the story.

Interesting; March does a great job.

Wonderfully acted, stunning camera work and unintentionally hilarious moments. Great stuff!

Beautifully shot and directed; the camera movements were so impressive. The script is super tight, and the performances were stellar.

Incredible for its time with an amazing lead performance

Good performances, especially from the lead. Interesting dialogue with depth about the nature of human advancement and the negatives associated with it. I think this might be my favorite very old film. It is consistently entertaining and interesting, and surprisingly contains some very dark moments, and my emotions were stirred from the tragedy Dr. Jekyll goes through.

A good-looking film with some interesting aspects. Novel transformation effects. Lots of dramatic declamation from March. There's actually a fair bit of structural interest in how the focus on sexual repression and sublimation is explored through revisiting the same situations several times over with varying degrees of "sincerity" (for different values thereof) and sarcasm.

The technical aspects are where this version of the classic story shine, and the wink-wink of the pre-Code days adds a bit more. Some surprisingly good stunts in the last ten minutes, too. The one thing that really bugged me was that Hyde would presumably have fought against being repressed again, so the change-back sequences seemed a little silly.

Although progressive but not smart. Dialogues are super-shallow and nerve-wracking as hell. Muriel is a senseless lover who doesn’t want to know the truth or question the obviously faulty situation and is ready to put up with anything. Why? Unclear! Her father? Don’t get me started! It’s not the technique that’s damaged, it’s the logic.

If this was part of the Universal Monsters instead of a Paramount production, I imagine it would have a much higher profile than it does today. The POV shots are cool, and ngl that transition effect actually blew me away when I first saw it. While March's Oscar-winning performance has an incredible range, it does feel a little bit cartoony at times. There's nothing that makes this must-watch, but the technical skill and lead performance still make it one of the better horror films of the 30s.

This is probably the best film adaptation of Robert Louis Steven's novella, largely due to Fredric March's performance. That said, I don't think any film version I have seen is particularly good. They all radically restructure the story and turn Hyde into a monster. This one fundamentally changes Jekyll's character to the point that the point of the story is compromised.

It's a solid adaptation with some technical razzle-dazzle but I wasn't crazy about the look of Hyde.

Atmospheric early horror notable for some inventive camera work that pleasingly goes out of its way to challenge the director during the transformation scenes, as well as March's arch and theatrical performance, which does a good job of projecting the central insanity of the Jekyll/Hyde persona. Never truly scary or even unsettling, despite the fearsome makeup; the remainder of the cast are era-adequate, but tend towards over-the-top emoting which becomes wearying after a while.

O Médico e o Monstro estreava há 90 anos em New York. Gosto imensamente da teoria freudiana presente no filme do Fleming, mas a verdade é que ele roubou muita coisa desse aqui na mise-en-scène, sem falar que o March é muito mais ator do que o Tracy e vê-se que é um glorioso pre-code pela ousadia. HDTVRip no MakingOff.

A product of its time in multiple ways, but the special effects are pretty well done. The duality of Jekyll's character is also mirrored successfully by the cinematography as a whole. The dialogue is not consistently satisfying, but there are elements of psychological innuendo and thematic content that are crucial to the story, providing much of the intrigue in the first place.

Some great technical feats and an absorbing story.

85.00

Damned interesting atmospherically, particularly the exteriors. Solid performance from Fredric March, though I admit, I half expected him to break into a little song and dance each time he completed the transformation to Hyde. Just something about the way he expressed his excitement in the moment. Very enjoyable watch on the whole.

MARCH MADNESS!

This is the best of the classic Jekyll and Hyde films. Frederich March gives great performances as Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Very good makeup effects as well.

Pre-Halloween camera, eroticism, realistic Hyde portrayal; all creates the most successful film adaptation. by the way, Hopkins is an underrated actress of the Golden Era who played in Lubitsch movies like Trouble in Paradise and Design for Living and many more (The Story of Temple Drake, The Children's Hour) very well.

There is a lot thats impressive about this Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde production. The effects, the wonderful camera work and so on. The acting has got to be taken for what it is. A very deliberate stage styled performance which kind of takes some away from the feeling of cinematic drama. And it doesn't help that the Hyde character looks more comical then frightening. However this a very elegant display and a really fine movie regardless.

March's double performance is the real reason to watch this.

As you'd expect, this film adaptation isn't as good as and fairly different from the book. Some of the acting and dialogue wasn't the best, but I was really impressed with some of the shots. In particular, there were several shots from a first-person perspective that were really clever. Overall, it wasn't perfect, but very watchable.

The classic "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" film. Frederich March is so much fun to watch.

Great cinematography, great acting, and thoroughly complex. What more do you want from a horror movie? The opening POV shot is brilliant.

Only marginally better than the 40's remake with Tracy. I did appreciate the title characters a bit more in this version, but it's still a far cry from the classic it's made out to be.

Dr. Jeekyl? I've enver heard it pronounced that way before. I'd like to live in the good doctor's house, but the rest of the movie I could do without, actually. I never did see the fascination in this movie.

Fast-paced, well-written, and impressively edited, Mamoulian's feature highlights the internal struggle of the doctor while at the same time bringing out the physicality of the Hyde character. March offers a fine performance, both in and out of makeup, and the film gains momentum as it moves along, ending in a furious and nicely shot chase sequence and finale. Mamoulian also shows off his chops with the camera, with several impressive sequences that feature lengthy tracking shots.

Production is very careful, it has an excellent lead performance, and a bit of philosophizing, yet it's a bit underwhelming as a whole, and not too exciting. Notable for London sets and camerawork, including a striking transformation scene.

81.750

Still kinda creepy after all these years. It shows its age--particularly March's Hyde--but if you give it a chance, it can still work its spell on you. Oh, and the Hyde in me agrees: Miriam Hopkins has very nice legs.

Hokey transition-period direction, starting with the well-nigh unbearable POV opening sequence (5 minutes of tunnel vision). Then there were the segues: extreme slow dissolves and goofy half-wipes (looked like the windshield blade had gotten stuck). Still, once March really Hydes out it does get pretty good, even if his teeth don't fit. We do see a lot of Hopkins (ah...the good old pre-code era). Btw what's with this "Jeekle" business?--and the phrase "with all my heart" seemed to crop up a lot.

March's Oscar-winning performance is the highlight of this terrific horror film, which is also the best of the many versions of Stevenson's classic tale of good and evil. The direction is exquisite.

Worth seeing because of March.

solid acting by fredric march and fantastic special effects for the time make this a horror classic

The definite film version of the classic tale. A milestone of acting, directing, special effects and cinematography- damn near perfect in every sense. Most awesome.

What an awsome version of the movie! Frederick March and whoever played Hyde were brilliant! One of the greatest strories ever made into movies and they how hyde was being transformed is always an interesting site to behold no matter what version you watch. A great classic movie to watch!

Fredric March, as Jekyll/Hyde, impress with some crazy body gestures, and positive echoes from the expressionistic film prevail in certain scenes of lustful play with cinematography and mise-en-scène. But this is tame as a whole, and the embarrassing, importunate moralizing near the end meets apathetic ears and tired eyes.

Probably the best adaptation to date.

ger

This story gets filmed constantly, but despite its age this is the best version yet. Rouben Mamoulian's directing is way ahead of its time

Decent, but it didn't compel me very much. Good acting. Otherwise, not so memorable.