Jekyll (2007) User Reviews

All TV shows... are commingled out of good and evil...

[Nine-Seven · 9/10 · 17 June 2007]

....Luckily this one is firmly planted in the 'good' category.

When I first heard the BBC was making a modern day adaptation I initially jumped for joy but deep worry set in later. The story of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde has been redone so many times, I started asking many questions.

Will they do anything new with the story? Will James Nesbitt be able to carry off such an important role? Will there be a big enough gap between the good doctor and his other half? And finally, Will I be able to watch it the same night as Doctor Who to fill the gap 'Any Dream Will Do' left? The answer to all of these questions is 'YES'! I don't want to ruin it for anyone so I won't go into details but I felt this was a very good adaptation of the book. James Nesbitt showed the contrast between his characters perfectly. I was afraid that 6 episodes would be stretching the plot but the first episode certainly gave me more fodder for that small amount! There is a good mix of horror and humour, (Especially shown by two female private detectives.) and none of the characters really got on my nerves.

There were quite a few nods to the book, some were quite subtle and not too in-your-face but this adaptation has also taken a life of its own branching out into other areas. I would like it immensely if at one point Hyde sings 'You should see me dance the Polka' but I'll just have to wait and see. Hyde is the real star of the show of course and can be summed up in one word: Insane.

A lovely mix of Jack Nicholson, Beetleguese, The Mask and even Robin Williams in places, Nesbitt's Hyde is incredibly entertaining but gives you an underlying sense of terror. His lack of morals and love of life is refreshing as I personally feel there haven't been any 'good' baddies in a long while. My mind was made up as soon as Hyde made an appearance. I have a feeling he will make this show- I will definitely be tuning in next week and I sincerely hope you do too.

I hope both of you do.

Simply Excellent

[wolfmann-1 · 9/10 · 16 June 2007]

Just watched the first of the series on the BBC. Was not sure what to expect as I had not seen any publicity leading up to the broadcast.

I was very pleasantly surprised. Not just with the slowly revealing dark tones of the plot but also with the underlying eroticism from both the female and male protagonists.

There is quite a lot of attention to detail which hand in hand with the competent acting makes this very believable and therefore watchable. I very much hope the same quality is maintained throughout the series.

I have to say that I like the choice of James Nesbitt in the lead role. Not only because he is an actor who demonstrates, very admirably, human frailty but also he can show that hard edged centre which is believably portrayed.

Looking forward, very much, to the next instalment.

A new, exciting piece of conspiracy drama for the BBC

[DVD_Connoisseur · 8/10 · 16 June 2007]

Steven Moffat's new thriller is a breath of fresh air for the BBC1 Saturday night evening post-"Casualty" slot. Beginning with super-sexy Michelle Ryan preparing the restraining straps on a chair, you just know this is going to be fun. Ryan is a delight and it comes as no surprise to learn she is the new "Bionic Woman".

The always-excellent James Nesbitt is the star of the show. As Jackman, Nesbitt plays a man who is living literally two separate lives. There's a thick air of mystery in the air and more than a scent of a conspiracy. His transformation into "Hyde" is genuinely unnerving.

The beautiful Gina Bellman has always had a place in my heart, ever since I watched Dennis Potter's puzzling but erotic "Blackeyes" in '89. Bellman remains devastatingly gorgeous and is as watchable as ever.

Comic relief is provided by Meera ("Life Isn't All Ha Ha Hee Hee" and "The Kumars at No.42") Syal as Miranda, a private detective who is mysteriously paid not to investigate Jackman any further.

"The League of Gentlemen" and "Doctor Who" fans will be pleased to know that Mark Gatiss will be making an appearance later in the series as Robert Louis Stevenson.

This is an interesting show - part mystery, part horror, part comedy. It's certainly unique and well worth a viewing. The BBC really have Saturday nights sorted out at the moment as this is a great "book-end" companion with "Doctor Who"!

For those who may find the first episode a little disappointing, stick with it. The later episodes are darker and more satisfying installments.

Fantastic!

[sg2790 · 10/10 · 23 June 2007]

This is a brilliant modern adaption of Jekyll and Hyde. The bbc are now on the 2nd episode out of 6 and its getting tenser and tenser and it is brilliant.

After recently studying Jekyll and Hyde this year for GCSE, this mini series really pays tribute to Stevenson's story.

Many adaptions portray Hyde and a mutated monster or something along these lines. However in the novel he is descibed has having a deformity about him which can't be explained. The suttle changes in this adaption really had an impact and aren't over whelming like the in the Michael Caine version...which was pure trash.

This is a truly brilliant piece of TV and i can't wait to watch the further episodes i would advise watching this, or if they come out on DVD definitely buy!!!!

Truly this is what a mini series should be

[lister50 · 10/10 · 8 July 2008]

After watching the final episode on DVD I can list this as one of the best mini series of recent memory. I remained on the edge of my seat throughout each and every episode, so completely drawn into the characters and story line.

James Nesbitt absolutely shines throughout his performance with the contrasting shades of Dr Jackman/Hyde's personalities. The sheer intensity of Hyde left me aquiver, never quite knowing what was next.

An excellent supporting cast showing a range of dynamic talent in bringing the back story to life. An eclectic mix of personalities, each of the characters interacts convincingly with the others, weaving a captivating performance.

The references to Robert Louis Stevenson's works were both subtle and gross, and I think a second watching is in order to truly appreciate the depth of the writing.

Certainly not the kind of television one expects nowadays, Jekyll hearkens to days of true creative writing and absolute engagement with the audience. Whether you while away a day watching the whole series, or watch the series piecemeal, a thoroughly entertaining romp through the annals of a classic with a contemporary twist.

Great

[Kate_Dammit_Run · 8/10 · 26 August 2007]

Great show. James Nesbitt is mesmerizing as BOTH Tom Jackman, a modern day Dr Jekyll, and Mr Hyde his vicious alter ego. This show is part sci-fi, part psychological drama, part conspiracy actioner. It's not perfect. The American accents are atrocious and some of the explanations and conspiracy elements are a bit weak, but it's riveting TV.

James Nesbitt plays Tom Jackman, a British doctor who discovers that he changes into someone else. That someone else is Mr Hyde, a superhuman driven to indulge his impulses. As one character says "Hyde is a child with all the urges and needs of a grown man." Jackman seems to be the descendant of Henry Jekyll, who was the real life inspiration for the Robert Louis Stevenson story. This is despite the fact that Jekyll had no known descendants, and apparently died a virgin. Jackman himself had no known parents, being found abandoned at a train station and raised in foster care. That's the basis for a somewhat intiguing mystery and a sometimes disappointing conspiracy plot as Jackman is targeted by a powerful multinational corporation.

But the real attraction here is Nesbitt and the interaction between the Jackman and Hyde personalities. Nesbitt, who will be familiar to British, and some American viewers, from the show Murphy's law, and the film Bloody Sunday, shines here and gets to show off the full range of his acting chops. When he's Jackman he's a somewhat nebishy man who loves his family so much that he leaves them in order to isolate them from Hyde. It's a very real and dramatic performance. As Hyde he is all flamboyance a swaggering bon vivant who could have stepped out of a Broadway show, except for the fact that his shirt is covered in blood and he could turn violent at any moment. Nesbitt doesn't play Hyde as a macho bully, but rather as someone even more dangerous, a creature with no boundaries, driven only by passion, whether that's for food, sex, or violence. The interplay between these two aspects of Nesbitts performance is a joy to behold.

excellent well worth watching

[nicolawilliamulvey · 10/10 · 26 January 2008]

Jekyll is an excellent series.

The tagline, Everyone has a dark side. oh so true Jekyll and Hyde depicts this wonderfully.

I could not miss an episode.

It pinned me to my seat and i wish it had never ended.

I am not one for watching telly much as most series are the same old plots and stories in general i find TV boring.

Jekyll was played magnificently by James Nesbitt.

I will be looking out for more of his work.

I'm on the look out for a second Jekyll series.

a higher standard

[AdnanZian · 6 December 2009]

It's one of the most brilliantly engaging, twisted, hilarious, morbidly fascinating pieces of television writing in ages. "Jekyll", very unlike Steven Moffat, also falls apart a bit at the end. At least, it does if you consider it a stand-alone mini-series. That Moffat has written a second series of the show does not matter if it never appears on our television screens, and it appears from interviews and such that Moffat regards the second series as a 'sequel' to this, which suggests this should be able to stand alone. And it does, for the most part. The final episode, however, solves most of the questions and gives satisfying answers to the questions so brilliantly posed by Mr. Moffat during the first five episodes... then goes and throws in a few new questions, including one huge mystery posed by the epilogue of the series, one which causes the answers which previously made sense to be questioned, and yet is worked so intricately into the fabric of the elaborate plot Moffat lays out that it is impossible to ignore or dismiss as a cheap sensationalist shock moment. It would be an effective teaser for an upcoming series if the upcoming series were anything approaching a certainty, but since this was, to some extent, supposed to stand alone it is a tragically poor ending, beyond the initial jolt of the moment.

There is so much going on in "Jekyll" psychologically, so much going on in the writing, layers of meaning and layers of narrative devices being used at all times, that one could write a dissertation in many different fields in Humanities, Social Sciences, and Sciences on just six episodes of television. That is impressive, but almost not as impressive as Moffat taking a literary classic with huge popularity and truly making something that is almost entirely his own from it. This is not an 'adaptation', this is pretty much an original script with characters (and not even really that) and a central plot (and not really even that) we're familiar with. It is originality in a field of unoriginality, and proves with great finality that modern-day adaptations don't have to be dull. There's no point in even comparing this to Stevenson, whose story had different concerns and a different ideology. Jekyll and Hyde here serve as the basis of a different (and much more modern) exploration of duality than in Stevenson's novel.

With his "Doctor Who" episodes and with later series of "Coupling", Moffat displayed a knack for being clever with structure and with story. His scripts have always worn their complexity on their sleeves, which is great when the thing works organically and completely. "Jekyll" is five episodes of absolutely some of the most dazzling, brilliant storytelling ever on television, and one of the most unique takes on a literary classic I can think of, then... Maybe, just maybe, Moffat tried to be too clever and lost the thread a bit. There are several plot issues, but let's not bother with those. Hopefully we will see what Moffat had in mind for the second series in some form. If left unproduced, perhaps the scripts will somehow find their way online. As it stands right now, "Jekyll" is 97% of an astonishing television classic, and that 3% is a lot harder to ignore than you'd think.

A Thrilling Drama

[davidhicks-1 · 7/10 · 30 July 2007]

When I first heared that James Nesbitt was going to be starring in this adaptation of Jekyll and Hyde, I was looking forward to seeing what he would be like in this role, not like anything he has previously done. When I saw the first episode I was really impressed, Nesbitt played a great role as both Dr Jackman and Mr Hyde, and I found the first episode thrilling.

However, for me the genre changed to its intended genre fro the second episode onwards. The drama became much darker and so began the horror it was about to give us. I thought the 'countdown' in episode two with Mr Hyde was the start of the horror, and from here the darkness continued throghout the rest of the series, though it became more of a horror I still thought it was great and kept you gripped to your seat.

What I really liked about it was the way it had been structured. The producers had done it so that it was full of twists. One minute you thought one person had been victim to the horror of Hyde, then later you find out you were completely wrong and it was someone else. This is done as the drama is not done in chronological order, so even though this can make it confusing it all eventually pieces together.

What I found was overdone however were some of the scenes. I felt some of this was really dragged out. In one of the episodes when Jackman was out into a 'box' we were tuning into the next episode to find out what happened to him. However we waited until the end and just as we thought we would find out we were left in a cliffhanger, as most of the following episode was based on Jackmans past.

Overall I feel that 'Jekyll' was a really good modernised version of the original Jekyll and Hyde story and as this is a really hard task to pull of successfully, I think they did a really good job and found this great to watch.

Amazing...

[teenangelman · 10/10 · 28 July 2007]

I've actually never watched a show starring James Nesbitt before, but I'm glad I took the time to watch this one.

I found it amazing how Nesbitt could play two such different characters but make you believe both were real, even though this may seem obvious as that is the part he was playing, he almost made you forgot each alter-ego while he acted the certain character. (Dr. Jackman or Mr. Hyde)

In summary, Jekyll was a great and enjoyable show, with a good cast lead amazingly well by James Nesbitt.

10/10 for such an enjoyable storyline that felt modern while staying true to the idea of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

Rather contrived and artificial

[paolo_bf · 6/10 · 16 June 2007]

I'm a big fan of BBC drama, which gave us wonderful productions such as Line of Beauty, Funland, Life on Mars and the list can go on for ever and it may also seem a little harsh to pass judgment, after having only watched one episode, but I got the feeling that this installment was as good as this drama is ever going to get. I suppose that when someone come up with the idea of making a super cool, post-modern, up-to-date remake of RL Stevenson nineteen century's 'blockbuster' novel, packed with all the latest high-tech gadgets, it might have seemed a wonderful idea at the time. However the way James Nasbitt's (normally a rather excellent actor)Dr. Jekyll experiences and tries to cope with his split personality owns more, it seems to me to some obscure medical text on Multiple Personality Disorder, rather that to Stevenson's wonderful writing. Not even an actor of the calibre of Nesbitt can do anything to improve on a script which is completely far-fetched and contrived and some quarter of an hour into the story, you just don't care what fate is going to befall the wretched doctor: happy ending, tragic ending or anything in between. Only powerful scene in the first episode was the drunken, pub closing time confrontation between the good doctor and a yob and his girlfriend in an alleyway, this scene was quite exilerating and rang true to life, but all the rest...

Stephen Moffat's Jekyll

[LilyRFox · 9/10 · 28 December 2008]

A new, fresh take on the same old Jekyll/ Hyde theme which has so captured fans of literature and all other kinds of popular culture since its inception in the C19th.

Stephen Moffat is known well as the writer on Doctor Who (soon to replace Russell T. Davies) and as such one can see how he can make material like this work so well. The main theme of good vs evil - captured with genius by Stevenson in the original story as the dichotomy in one individual man - is a great, meaty topic to dig into and Moffat certainly does. There are brilliantly written moments of drama, comedy and sheer horror, all well constructed and the plotting is perfect. The way the series is shot too is quite stylish, capturing the darkness of Hyde, and accentuating the pacy tension-building story.

However, despite a great start, this series does not end quite as well as it begins. It turns from a tense, stomach churning thriller into a 'Run!' style action/horror story. That said, it does not detract from a brilliantly written and acted, fresh drama.

Perhaps the best thing about it is James Nesbitt in the dual role of Jackman and Hyde. He both perfectly captures the exasperated, desperate family man of Jackman and relishes the delectable evil of Hyde. This performance not only holds the whole story together, but brings it into spectacular Technicolour.

If you want to watch an exciting, well-written, and well-made drama, with a punchy script, fast pace and great performances, then this is for you.

A failure of the imagination

[ruhi-yaman · 4/10 · 12 March 2008]

The problem with Jekyll is not that it is a 58th or 59th remake of Stevenson's classic tale. The problem with it is that it is very bad. Stephen Moffat's self-consciously postmodern take on the old story is full of gaping holes. James Nesbitt's performance fluctuates between 'look-ma-I'm-a-serious-actor' grimaces to faux-Nicholson 'Joker' antics. Many scenes don't make sense, even within the logic of the surrealist universe of the story. An organization with endless resources is not only unable to control one individual (no matter how strong he is) but they still think a tough mercenary is his match after they witnessed him strangle a lion and throw it over a high fence like a football. A group of women (one of them heavily pregnant) can outrun a band of highly-trained commandos briefly distracted by a lightning. A man who dedicates his whole life befriending and observing a special individual to reveal his inner demon has no idea what to do with it when he finally manifests himself. Almost no part of the story can withstand scrutiny. It appears as if they made the whole thing up after they began shooting. Acting reflects that, as well. Otherwise highly competent British cast move from high drama to high-camp with barely disguised frustration in a single scene. The clues that are sprinkled into the last episode, seemingly hinting at a sequel, are simply silly.

This slick, expensive but ultimately vacuous production serves to prove that the failure of imagination that is the hallmark of modern blockbuster has now infected the good television, as well.

"Daddy's Home..."

[cchase · 8/10 · 20 August 2007]

As much as I tend to be an Anglophile when it comes to all things British in the cinema and on TV, I know that just because the actors have plummy accents it doesn't necessarily make something good. However, I'm glad to discover that BBC America's new series is a welcome exception to that rule.

When a post-modern adaptation of "classic" material such as this is attempted, the filmmakers had better bring something fresh and different to the table, if they expect the project to make an impression beyond the first moment or two. And luckily, "JEKYLL" has a real asset in James Nesbitt's tour-de-force portrayal of Dr. Tom "Jackman", the 'hero' of the piece who is sharing his mind and body grudgingly with the absolutely amoral and insane "Mr. Hyde". Blessedly, Nesbitt chose to take the Spencer Tracy route with this version, relying more on acting ability than cheap prosthetics, (though there are some makeup effects used very sparingly, which makes them that much more gruesome when they appear.)

This take is part-mystery, part-conspiracy thriller and part-psychological drama, which at times hints that it might even be headed into old "X-FILES" territory. It is fascinating to try and second-guess Steven Moffat's excellent script, but just when you think you know where it's going, the plot line swerves in another direction, but not with such unexpectedness or contrivance as to make you want to turn it off and ditch the whole thing. (Too bad I can't say the same thing about "LOST".)

I'm coming up on the last couple of episodes, and I'm hoping that it will be back for another installment, if things don't get wrapped up towards the end. Nesbitt, whose work I've never seen before, is outstanding, and he's backed by a terrific supporting cast, especially a nearly unrecognizable Denis Lawson, whom I only ID'ed thanks to IMDb.

If you haven't been following this on Saturdays on BBC America, be sure to catch it when it becomes available on DVD.

Wild Things Run Fast

[laika-lives · 9/10 · 21 October 2008]

'Jekyll' moves more quickly than TV audiences have been taught to expect. It covers an astonishing amount of ground in the first couple of episodes, enough to sustain most British series through six episodes or more and some US series through an entire 22-episode season (I'm looking at you, 'Heroes'). Foreshadowing is foreshortened - climaxes come quicker than you expect. I thought the hide-the-family cat and mouse game would be the focus of the entire series, climaxing in the final episode with the standard family-in-peril scenario. The series gets past that point in the first episode, then goes back to the beginning at the start of the second episode and does something completely different. Every episode has a different feel to it - the first is domestic-Gothic, the second a paranoia thriller, the third one of those teasing formalist puzzles that writer Moffatt is so fond of, the fourth a romance inter-cut with a techno-thriller, the fifth a psychedelic ghost story in period costume, the sixth a gonzo action-movie parody.

Even as it slows down a little as it goes along, Moffatt never loses his delight in undermining expectations. The pivotal moment is the death of a major character in the third episode. They're the one character no other writer would kill off so quickly - but Moffatt does it casually, and you can almost taste the adrenaline as the series surges forwards, figuring out where to go from here. The other key transition comes in a fifth episode bait-and-switch twist which might make you punch the air - with one word ('suckers!') the entire nature of the series changes, and what seemed like an inevitable dramatic trajectory suddenly slingshots in a whole new direction.

The downside to this restlessness is that some characters get left by the side of the road. Miranda and Min (Meera Syal and Fenella Woolgar) get little to do after the first episode, when they should be getting their own series. Similarly, Katherine Reimer (Michelle Ryan), potentially the most interesting character in the series, gets lost in the background as Clair (Gina Bellman) and Syme (Denis Lawson) move centre stage in the second half of the series. But what a manoeuvre that turns out to be - Clair's transition from victim-wife cypher in the first episode to audience identification figure in the fourth is strangely exhilarating; the series suddenly finds a focus for its restless energy, and the couple's difficult, fragile relationship lends it an unexpectedly soft heart. It's a shame Moffatt can't quite sustain it to the end of the last episode - the 'emotional' climax feels oddly perfunctory. Perhaps I was just hoping for a less formulaic resolution to the Jekyll/Hyde split from such an unorthodox series - integration rather than sacrifice, perhaps?

The only other flaw in the series? The lions. It was never gonna work on a TV budget.

An impressive modern sequel to a Victorian classic

[Tweekums · 8/10 · 13 May 2021]

This six part series is set in the present day and centred on Dr Tom Jackman. As we are introduced to him he is meeting psychiatric nurse Katherine Reimer at his home. He explains to her, and the viewer, that he undergoes a change to a separate personality. This personality is more violent and considerably stronger than Jackman. The comparison with the 'Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde' is obvious and stated; although Jackman points out that unlike Dr Jekyll he requires no potion to change. While he struggles to learn more about his condition and keep his wife and family secret from this dangerous alter-ego, inevitably dubbed Mr Hyde; others are showing an interest in him... or more particularly to Hyde.

I enjoyed this series when I first watched it on television and enjoyed it just as much when I re-watched it on DVD. The story manages to work as a modern sequel to Robert Louis Stevenson's Victorian classic rather than a mere retelling of that story. James Nesbitt does a really fine job in the dual role of Jackman and Hyde as well as Dr Jekyll in a sort of flashback to the original story. The rest of the cast are solid too. There are plenty of good scary moments, a sense of mystery as well as a fair amount of unforced humour. The DVD may be labelled 'Season One', suggesting more was intended but the ending nicely wraps up most of the important questions. Overall I'd certainly recommend this series.

Fantastic!

[KCCharles · 9/10 · 29 September 2008]

I just saw Jekyll on DVD, and I thought that it was fantastic!!

Steven Moffat is a great writer and I like what he did with the story. I especially like how he developed the relationship between Dr. Jackman/Hyde and Mrs. Jackman. (I know that great things are in store for Dr Who in 2010).

James Nesbitt did an excellent job as Dr Jackman/Hyde. I must say that I developed a crush on Tom Jackman during the series. Gina Bellman gave a stellar performance as well, I particularly liked the scene with her and Hyde in the cellar.

Everyone was well-casted!

I will recommend this show to anyone!!

Duel personalities...

[poe426 · 15 October 2007]

Brilliantly conceived and executed on all fronts, JEKYLL is an updated, adult take on the Stevenson story. A "cerebration of horror," if you will. (And, no, I didn't misspell "celebration.") James Nesbitt's ever-on-the-edge performance is mesmerising. While there are a couple of instances where he chews the scenery, the fault for that lies with the child-like mentality of the character(s) he's playing and is very, very rarely the result of an over-the-top performance. (Even when he's fairly bristling with menace, Nesbitt's character seems to be in complete control; a remarkable acting achievement that needs be seen to be believed.) If there's a single aspect of this series that's to be found lacking, I missed it. Superb storytelling.

mixed stuff in this remake of an eternal story

[dromasca · 6/10 · 14 February 2009]

'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' is the kind of eternal horror story that fits well for any number of remakes. Its depiction of the dark aspects of the human character has not only the elements of mystery for a suspense story but also deeper insights that can be exploited on the artistic and psychological story side. Script-writers and directors doing a J&H story can find the premises of entertainment and art and pick the right dose.

This BBC mini-series is taking an approach that is mixing science fiction and conspiracy theory. It does build well with the principal characters in evolution from one episode to another. The strong and surprising character is dr. Jackman's (Jekyll and Hyde character name in the movie) wife who is growing from the apparently supporting role at the start of the series to the key character saving the day in the final episodes. Gina Bellman is exquisite in this role, while James Nesbitt's Jackman seems to feel better in the positive role, while grimacing in a slightly non-convincing manner on the dark side of the character.

Where the series fail is in developing a story that has logic and clarity. We never get a good understanding of what this huge organization watching on the Jekyll/Hyde descendants is really after - yes, we know the government conspiracies are evil, but this is not really enough. The final explanation is confusing, and I could not figure out why and how the two souls/one body Jekyll survives, although we have all seen one body dying eventually and convincingly (if it was a clone body that died, this was not clear either). A few side characters (the psychiatric nurse, the two female detectives) are side-lined after the first two series and their presence on screen in the last four ones is not needed and justified. The mysterious a la Lynch character of the mother is interesting but does not really fit in the logic of the story.

Despite the two many holes the story builds and lives well through the six episodes, and there is enough good stuff in the mix to make it worth watching.

This Series is great

[gavinlucraft · 10/10 · 20 May 2008]

I liked this series from the off. it has suspense and thrills all the way through and the plot is top notch. I first saw this series in the summer of 2007 and wasn't sure about it at first but it is an absolute gem.

My favourite episode is the one where Jekyll is at the zoo with the lions. this episode was slightly gory but fun all the same i think it was the best one of the series.

I really am hoping for a second series it would be a great way to see how the story develops. I will keep my fingers crossed. James Nesbit did a great job

Uneven show

[gridoon2024 · 6/10 · 16 July 2015]

This series has a lot going for it: an intriguing premise, a great music score, a magnetic lead pair of performances by James Nesbitt, a solid supporting cast, a simultaneously cheeky and dark sense of humor. But the story could have been told in a 2-hour movie instead of six 55-minute episodes. I thought the earlier episodes were the best, because they focused more on the psychological aspects of two minds, and two personalities, occupying, and fighting for control of, the same body. In the later episodes, the focus switches to a rather clichéd "super-secret-powerful-evil" organization that seems to come from a spy show like "Alias". The final episode does give us some big surprises (the truth about Claire), but also some unforgivable cheats (the "not sharing the damage" thing, completely contradicting the previous five episodes). Steven Moffat has a habit in "Doctor Who" of devising such ingenious and fiendish traps for the Doctor and his companions that they can only get out of them by the script cheating, and this habit followed him in "Jekyll". Plus the series ends on a cliffhanger that will never be resolved.

You Might Want To Hyde, It's A Bit Scary

[robertdegeus · 9/10 · 5 May 2013]

Punny...

This show kept me on the edge of my seat, possibly Steven Moffat's best work. This show is dark and intriguing, it kept me guessing until the very end.

It is also a completely new and original take on the Jekyll and Hyde story and I've said this before, I'll say it again, it is hard to find new and original things nowadays.

Overall it's hard not to be impressed by James Nesbitt wide range of acting ability and gripping-ness of the story. I had to force myself not to watch more, just so I could wake up on time.

Really, really well done.

Such a waste with so much potential

[rorshach9 · 3/10 · 25 August 2010]

The only way I can imagine that so many people think so highly of this series is if they only watched the first episode and didn't bother with the rest. The entirety of this mini series is nothing but a lot of build up, threats and promises of activities that would make this a good show with no payoff whatsoever.

The first episode is really good. There is so much potential for a great story. But the creators spent years shopping the premise around to various studios before finally getting the green light and after watching all of the episodes one gets the impression that they only wrote the first episode and then slapped the rest of them together after funding came in.

During all of the episodes Hyde makes continual threats of violence, cannibalism, sexual abuse, acts of debauchery, etc. Outside of them pointing out that he frequents prostitutes none of these things ever happen. Hyde beats up some bad guys. That's it. That's all. Spoiler alert! Instead of building up to a shocking finale Hyde sacrifices himself for his wife. Nothing else. We watch him for six hours spitting insults and promises about the vicious and savage proclivities that permeate his thoughts and he does little more than barking without biting.

I'm the first person to say there's no call for violence for violence's sake. I'm the first person to point out that story is far above explosions and machine guns and gratuitous sex. But don't have the lead character promise all of the above and give us none. Sucks to be you in the BBC won't air things like that but, as with the prostitutes, there are ways around anything. The best horror movies are those that do not show you the creature/monster/whatever until the end if at all. By the same token this line of thinking can be extended to anything that would prompt censors to baulk at whatever behavior hits the screen.

All in all don't make promises you can't keep and if you're going to write and rewrite a pilot episode for years the least you could do is have some concept of how to finish the damned series. As for everyone who seems to think this show is great... well I just don't know what to say for you. Or to you for that matter other than how bad is the stuff you're watching now if you think this show is great?

Excellent one-shot series

[ceeingred13 · 8/10 · 29 February 2012]

I'm excited by any version of the story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (much like Treasure Island, but that's for a different review), but this one caught my attention before the first title card ever rolled.

James Nesbitt is a phenomenal character actor in this role, gleefully diving into the Hyde character and dolefully struggling to plant his feet in the world as Tom. Gina Bellman long ago earned her place in my heart as one of the most natural comedic actresses that I was lucky enough to watch, but she also performed her role as a ferocious mother and determined wife in the series.

It stumbled a bit in the last episode, but was captivating and tense for almost its entire run. A very good showing.