IMDb > Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (2008) (TV) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (TV) More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 18 reviews in total 

23 out of 30 people found the following review useful:

An Enjoyable Watch

6/10
Author: wsmith-26 from Ventura, California
27 May 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

If you are wary of seeing the same movie redone again, and again, don't let that stop you from watching this version of Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde.

No, it is not perfect, and yes it does drag a bit, but there is enough here to recommend it to any horror fan.

There is an interesting enough plot twist that explains Mr. Hyde's existence that gives a new angle to this old story. Dougray Scott is very good in the lead role, and the attorney representing Dr. Jekkyl (Krista Bridges) is very easy to look at and does a fine job in her role, as well.

The transformations from Jekyll to Hyde are actually well done, inasmuch as they are not overdone.

There is one major Hollywood moment - yes, the scientist discovers the antidote just as he is being arrested and is unable to administer it to himself. Oh, if he only had one more second! The trial is difficult to believe, but contrivances are something I have learned to live with as a horror fan.

There is a very nice twist at the end, though not completely surprising.

Although Tom Skerrit is heavily publicized in the ads for the movie, his role is actually rather small and unnecessary.

Over all, well worth a watch.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

Forgettable Update

5/10
Author: Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
17 January 2009

In Boston, a mysterious serial-killer is attacking and murdering women. The distinguished Dr. Henry Jekyll (Dougray Scott) asks his friend Gabe Utterson (Tom Skerritt) to indicate an attorney for him and he schedules a visit to Claire Wheaton (Krista Bridges). He confesses that he was the subject of his research with psychotropic trying to isolate the evil side of the human beings and he is responsible for the murders. When Dr. Jekyll goes to court for the trial, Claire wants to prove that the killer is the unknown Mr. Edward Hyde.

This umpteenth version of "Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde" is a forgettable update of the classic story. Set in Boston in the present days, instead of London in the end of the Nineteenth Century, the plot is confused and the conclusion is predictable in spite of the good acting of Dougray Scott. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): "Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde – O Médico e o Monstro" ("Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde – The Doctor and the Monster")

Was the above review useful to you?

16 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

Updated Jeckyll and Hyde

5/10
Author: kai ringler from United States
27 June 2008

I'm quite actually not sure how i feel about this one yet,, there are some parts that i like,, and some i don't ,, first i think that Dougray Scott is a fine actor,, but someone else should have played that role,, second,, they could have at least set it in London,, not the states,, i liked some of the modernization,, with the computers, and him at the hospital as a Dr. and stuff, and mixing all of those compounds together, to try and get the anti-dote. but some of the stuff i didn't' like is when he turns to the lawyer for help,,, why did the writers go in that direction,, but okay,, that aside,, it does get better after the half way point,, when they all get in the courtroom,, very intense there,,without giving away the ending,, i did like the ending very much,, i just think that this could have been written better, set somewhere else,, and this could have been a great movie,, as is,, it's just you're average late nite TV fair.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Superficial Jekyll and Hyde

6/10
Author: kryziss from Netherlands
3 November 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Although I obviously know the concept of Jekyll and Hyde, this is the first full film I ever saw on the subject. The movie was decent to watch, but I have the feeling it's a bit superficial. Never was I actually scared, shocked or thrilled. It was all too normal for my taste.

Another negative side to the film is its ending. I guess a minimum of 90% of the viewers will be able to guess the ending after seeing the prison interview where the lawyer gives Jekyll the syringe.

Despite this negative critique, the movie also has its up side. The film's mildly entertaining.

All in all decent cinematography, quite superficial narrative, reasonable acting. It's 'watcheable' just don't expect too much of it.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

A Bland Budget Makes For A Bland TV Movie

4/10
Author: Theo Robertson from Isle Of Bute, Scotland
12 May 2013

This is yet another version of Robert Louis Steveson's THE STRANGE CASE OF DOCTOR JEKYLL AND MR HYDE and if truth be told this is possibly the most bland version you will see . It's inoffensive containing the sort of material that'd make it through he censors of a dull daytime TV soap . It is as uninvolving as it is inoffensive . Director Paolo Barzman doesn't have a big enough budget to do the story justice and much of the story is told in medium close up and we get some very choppy editing . When Doctor Jekyll relates a story about being in the Amazon we don't get an establishing shot of wild untamed majestic shots of the tropical rain forest we get a close up of a fire and a couple of Oriental extras giving the impression that it was filmed in someone's fireside living room . Hey I wonder if ....

Scottish actor Dougray Scott plays the title character and he's somewhat ill cast in the role . His American accent is totally unconvincing as Dr Henry Jekyll and seems to think Mr Hyde is a bit of a camp homosexual , honestly the villain comes across as some pantomime dame and will have you booing and hissing and throwing popcorn at the screen . It's not even bad enough to be entertaining high camp , just ... oh what's the word ? ... oh bland . That's the word I'm looking for

That said I did see Dougray Scott in an episode of DOCTOR WHO a couple of weeks ago and his performance was probably the best thing about the episode so one wonders if he could be a ready made replacement for Matt Smith once he leaves the role . At the very worst Scott giving a bad performance as the Doctor would be ..... bland

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Not half bad, but not half good either.

5/10
Author: Mattphesto from United Kingdom
14 December 2008

As a borderline schizoid and fan of the original short story I'm always up for perusing any new J&H material. After catching this curio on Sky I felt compelled to comment. The usual themes of duality and the nature of guilt and morality are all present and correct. As is usual in most screen re-imaginings of Stephenson's tale an obligatory love-interest is tacked on in the form of a pretty female lawyer with whom Hyde confides. There's no real gratuitous violence or gore here, the horror seems to be attempting to stem from the psychological, unfortunately this never really gels together. As such, we're left with a fairly entertaining if unnecessary and understated (there's no real physical changes apparent between Henry & Edward) version of the familiar story. There's a fairly feeble 'twist' ending that anyone not recovering from recent cranial surgery should see coming at least a couple of furlongs off.

5/10. P.S: For a vastly superior contemporary take on the tale viewers could do much worse than check out the recent BBC mini series 'Jekyll' starring James Nesbitt. It's available on DVD and well worth a watch.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Average Horror Film With a Weak Trial Drama

Author: gavin6942 from United States
13 October 2011

Dr. Henry Jekyll (Dougray Scott), unable to stop himself from transforming into the murderous Edward Hyde, wants his attorney to secure him a speedy trial, a guilty verdict and a quick execution.

The star power in this film is Tom Skerritt, which does not say much for this film. But we also have Kim Bubbs (as a secretary), a friend of Killer Reviews. So, that was good enough reason for me to watch it! (See Kim in "The Thing".)

The horror part is pretty average -- this story has been told so many times, you really cannot add a new element to it any more. (What is interesting, at least to me, is that this film seemingly exists in a world circa 2008, but that would be a world where the classic Jekyll/Hyde story never existed... weird.)

The trial scenes... wow, big fail. There is no cross-examination, there is too much conjecture from the defense attorney outside of closing arguments. The person who wrote this film is not familiar with court procedures apparently. There are worse court scenes in films, but this still makes the list of bad ones.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

Very bad movie

1/10
Author: Mikey_0782 from Belgium
23 November 2009

You won't be happy with this movie if you really like the story of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. It is the product of a big lack of creativity and respect for the original story.

I think the main problem is that they obviously tried to make this movie as if the story happens for the very first time, which is very wrong to begin with because you can't expect viewers to rediscover the whole thing with such a worldwide known story.

Apart from that, you really won't be satisfied either by the performance of the cast, or the "new plot" for that matter. It contains virtually no suspense, everything from the beginning until the end is very predictable and even the actors seem to have no interest at all for playing in this movie. When the movie ends, it gives you the feeling that they wanted to give you an idea of what it would have been if the events occurred to Henry Jekyll today instead of the late 19th century, but they were either incapable or they wanted it to be done very quickly (a bit like you didn't want to put too much time or effort in your school work last night, so you just applied some basic rules to it and did nothing more, hoping for a reasonable note).

So since they wanted it to look like it's a new story, let me put it this way : If Robert-Louis Stevenson had not written the story in 1886, but this movie would have been the original story, you can be sure nobody would even remember the title some 120 years from now. I give it a 1/10, only because 0 is not available.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Nifty contemporary version of the classic story

8/10
Author: Woodyanders (Woodyanders@aol.com) from The Last New Jersey Drive-In on the Left
10 July 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Kindly physician Dr. Henry Jekyll (an excellent performance by Dougray Scott) is involved in experiments that unleash his more cocky and lethal serial killer alter ego Mr. Edward Hyde. Unable to repress his deadly and depraved alter ego, Jekyll turns himself over to the authorities and asks smart lawyer Claire Utterson (well played by Krista Bridges) to represent his unusual case in court. Director Paolo Barzman, working from a crafty script by Paul Margolis, smartly updates the story to a modern urban American setting, creates and sustains an appropriately somber mood, offers a neat meditation on the duality of good and evil in the human spirit, and handles the subject matter in a thoughtful, tasteful, and restrained way (the transformation scenes in particular are treated in a subtle and effective manner, with minimal make-up and a noted emphasis on Scott's exceptional acting). Scott simply excels in the juicy lead role: He brings a real frightening intensity to the supremely wicked Hyde and projects a properly tormented anguish as the guilt-ridden Jekyll. Moreover, Scott receives sturdy support from Tom Skerritt as concerned art gallery owner best friend Gabe Utterson, Danette Mackay as loyal housekeeper Mrs. Poole, and Cas Anvar as shrewd attorney D.A. McBride. Pierre Jodoin's slick cinematography gives the picture a pleasing polished look. FM Le Sieur's pulsating score hits the shuddery spot. The surprise twist ending is pretty chilling. Worth a watch.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

a good effort

8/10
Author: jadflack from United Kingdom
10 January 2009

A serial killer stalks the city of Boston and a DR Jeckyll goes to a lawyer claiming to be the serial killer and that he can turn into another person. You have to give this Canadian t.v movie updating of the oft told classic Robert Louis Stevenson tale credit for giving it a fresh approach.This is pleasingly sombre and manages for the most part to be genuinely unsettling straight from the films beginning until it runs out of steam in a courtroom finale.It does offer a different but unsatisfying twist at the end.Dougray Scott in the lead role(s)and in very little makeup to distinquish the two characters is very, very good.A good effort overall.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history