Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931)

Good movie but grossly overrated

It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

In Victorian London, Dr. Henry Jekyll (Fredric March) investigates the duality of human being. He develops a drug and creates an alternate violent personality Edward Hyde inside himself.This is generally good as far old classic horror. The standout is the transformation of Jekyll into Hyde, and Fredric March's visceral performance as the unhinged Hyde. That grotesque face is a horror icon. The story does drag a little at times and meanders in its melodrama. It is heightened every time Hyde is on the screen. The movie is truly Jekyll and Hyde.

Paramount gives Universal a run for their money with this excellent adaptation of Robert Louis Stevenson's novel Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde.Fredric March stars as well-meaning Dr. Henry Jekyll, who is convinced that a person's soul consists of two halves, the good self and the bad self, and that mankind would benefit if he could banish the bad and liberate the good. In his laboratory, Jekyll perfects a potion that will separate the two sides of his personality and uses himself as a guinea pig. The formula allows Jekyll's repressed bad self to take control and, as his new alter ego Mr. Hyde, the doctor enjoys the forbidden fruits of old London town.If only Dr. Jekyll wasn't so sexually frustrated, things might have turned out differently. Engaged to be married to the lovely Muriel Carew (Rose Hobart), but made to wait for months on end by his future father-in-law Brig. Gen. Danvers Carew (Halliwell Hobbes), Jekyll has a serious case of blue balls; it is this that causes Hyde to come to the fore. As his monstrous bad self, free of all morality and decency, he is able to indulge in every animalistic whim, taking a mistress, variety hall girl Ivy Pearson (Miriam Hopkins), and treating her like a sex slave.Of course, none of this is any good for Jekyll's relationship with Muriel, especially with Hyde eventually being able to take control without the need for the potion.Not only does Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde boast an Oscar winning performance from Fredric March, it also benefits immensely from outstanding direction from Rouben Mamoulian, whose innovative film-making approach makes the film a marvel to behold. Opening with a wonderful extended POV shot as Jekyll plays the organ and prepares to give a lecture, Mamoulian executes a variety of ground-breaking techniques (the mirror trick is still impressive, even to this day) and makes effective use of his atmospheric foggy London sets. Made in Pre-Code Hollywood, the film also packs in quite a bit of racy material, Ivy stripping to get ready for bed (Hopkins giving a brief flash of side-boob) and Hyde promising the poor, terrified girl a night to remember.An excessively mawkish scene in which Jekyll eventually confronts Muriel, telling her that he must set her free, probably would have aged better if the melodrama had been toned down a bit, but other than that the film is simply terrific—up there with Frankenstein and The Invisible Man as one of the greatest classics of the era, and of the genre as a whole.8.5 out of 10, rounded up to 9 for IMDb.

The novella THE STRANGE CASE OF DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE by Robert Louis Stevenson has become of a classic of horror literature. As a result, it has become fertile territory for Hollywood to mine this book again and again as numerous versions have been filmed, while still dozens of other films borrow heavily from its' themes and central premise. Most in the critical community, though, would agree that this is the best version of the Jekyll and Hyde story and I would wholeheartedly agree.The film is shocking for its' time in history, before the censorship codes would prevent Hollywood from making movies like this for decades to come. Still, even when compared to other pre-code horror, this movie attempts to go places that no other horror film does in terms of its' raw portrayals of sexual aggression. Dr. Jekyll is, after all, a good man. A scientist of some intellect, we meet him as he's on his way to speak to a crowd which has gathered to hear his ideas. The lecture he gives is of the possibly of splitting man in two. While many in the audience have a laugh at him as they take him literally, Jekyll is speaking not of a physical splitting, but of a splitting of personality. The story doesn't need much more exposition than that, as we all know the tale by now. Eventually, Jekyll succeeds in his experiment to disastrous results, as he unleashes the beast within himself.That's where this version succeeds so triumphantly. Where other versions from this era, including the Spencer Tracy version a decade later, hint at the sexual repression, this movie makes it the central focus. Jekyll is obviously struggling with the morals of his society, as well as an overbearing future father-in-law, as those forces conspire to keep him from wedding his love and, thus, from releasing his sexual frustration. When he splits Mr. Hyde from his personality, Hyde becomes a primal force of sexual aggression, doing all of the things that Jekyll cannot. Hyde goes straight to a prostitute that Jekyll could only innocently flirt with and takes it to places Jekyll could never go. Initially, he "keeps" her in luxury to win her favors, but the evil in Hyde begins to torment and abuse the woman. Eventually, Jekyll loses control and Hyde begins to destroy his life in more ways that one.Fredrich March won an Oscar for his role and it is well deserved. He brilliantly pulls off both sides of this man. He is charming, intelligent and loving as Dr. Jekyll, as much as he is crude, evil and deviant as Mr. Hyde. One might believe they were two different actors, he puts that much effort into wildly disparate personalities. March's physical acting as Hyde is excellent, as well. He takes on an almost simian nature, as he regresses to an earlier evolution, free of society's morals, but also of it's refinement.The makeup goes a long way to portray this, as well. They give March the look of a Neanderthal, complete with animalistic teeth. A big part of that makeup is the transformation scenes, which are very well done for the time, a decade before Universal tried anything similar in THE WOLFMAN, March undergoes a gradual progression from man to animal through some excellent camera-work. While we are on that subject, the camera framing by Mamoulian is spot on in helping to lend weight to this movie. The POV shots that he continually explores help the viewer put themselves more firmly into the shoes of Jekyll. We, often, see things in this movie from his perspective, so the audience is all the more invested in Jekyll as his life falls apart under the influence of the evil Hyde.Universal was the king of horror in the 30s, but could easily stand amongst those horror classics and gives us another outstanding movie villain from the golden age of the horror film.

One of the creepiest older sci-fi horror films ever made. Fredric March's performance as Jekyll/Hyde was superb. This is one of those films where most of the horror is subtle - the idea of this looking hideous man-creature Mr. Hyde on the loose.The story is, in it's way, similar to 'The Invisible Man' and 'Frankenstein' because we have a scientist that is considered to be insane for creating monsters yet their intentions started out good.Dr. Jekyll's beliefs in the good man vs the evil man lead him to experiment with the concept. By doing so, he created the strong, primitive Mr. Hyde. Dr. Jekyll represents the brain and the good side of man while Mr. Hyde represents the brawn and the evil.I love these older horror films - they are still some of the best, most creative movies ever made.10/10