Mickey Rooney and Spencer Tracy return in this sequel to the original Boys Town. This time the school faces financial trouble as Father Flannigan tries to help every little boy he meets. ... 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 <email@example.com>
Spencer Tracy originally wanted a realistic approach, whereby Dr. Jekyll would commit violent deeds in a neighborhood where he was unknown after drinking alcohol or taking drugs. He was disappointed that the producers, having bought the screenplay from Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931), insisted on virtually remaking the earlier film. 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.
20 of 30 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this