Skip to main content

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1941) - Victor Fleming


The story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is one of the earliest and most recognizable stories of the Mad Scientist genre. It has been remade dozens of times, even to the date of this particular iteration, but still continues to be a successful gimmick that can adapt to whatever time period it's being made in. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde from 1941 isn't very different in story, but much more so in style. This version of the classic tale, has a larger emphasis on Doctor Jekyll and his philanthropy. This is a quality entry into the series. With some great acting. It just came out too soon after the last remake. 

The story basically follows the path of the original storyline. Doctor Jekyll is a good man that believes that you can separate the good and bad sides of people. He tries his own potion that creates the diabolical Mr. Hyde. A methodical and calculating villain. Different from the versions that we had seen before. He is, of course, in love with a young woman and she falls victim to his darker actions. 

This version of the tale focuses more on the terror of being held against your will. The Hyde character is a beastly, realistic psychopath. His sadistic nature is further explored as we watch him torturing and taunting his victims. The quality is top notch. As with the spectacular 1931 version, the camera is used to its fullest and most creative extent. Some shots in this movie are beautiful works of art that would be fit to be hung on a a wall. The inevitable transformation scenes are neat but simplistic. Lead actor Spencer Tracy wasn't a big fan of big make-up jobs and did a good job with its minimal use here. Tracy focuses more on facial expressions and body language to bring out the character of Hyde than in other renditions.

Spencer Tracy, Ingrid Bergman, and Lana Turner all turn in some fantastic performances. Their acting really pushes this film above all of the others. While not outright scary, it is off putting to watch the way that Hyde treats his victims. I suggest this if you really want to explore this tale across a series of different films. While the silent era produced a few good versions, the most popular is definitely the '31 version from Rouben Mamoulian. However, this version is just as good. 

Director: Victor Fleming
Country: USA
Studio: MGM

Did ya know...
One night Spencer Tracy turned up at Clark Gable and Carole Lombard's second wedding anniversary party wearing his make up as Mr Hyde.
Due to the Hay's Code much of the film had to be watered down from the 1931 version. The character of Ivy Peterson had to be changed from a prostitute to a barmaid.
Spencer Tracy originally wanted a realistic approach, whereby 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 the 1931 version, insisted on a more traditional approach. He also said he felt his wig and make up as Hyde made him look "ridiculous".

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Human Monster (1939) - Walter Summers

Bela Lugosi turns in a fantastic performance. It is right on par with the exact same films that had made him famous like Dracula . My personal favorite being The Black Cat . Like the latter, this film suffered from poor circulation and lack of advertisement. Either that or the public wasn't interested in seeing Lugosi in anything else other than his famous bloodsucker. This film has a broad and well acted plot that was rich with detail.  Lugosi has two sides in this picture. His well loved and compassionate side. The other is a strict, brutal lone shark that acts as a sinister villain to blind and handicapped people. He really brutalizes his victims. It's a macabre message to pay your bills.  The film is slow moving and plagued by the usual setbacks from its time. Most of the nation wasn't really that concerned with horror at the time. But studios knew that they would always have an audience. This film is a prime example of that. It's sad because it's 

Ju-On (2000) - Takashi Shimizu

Watching Japanese horror is similar to watching British comedy. If you enjoy dry whit then you probably enjoy the boys of Monty Python in drag. That's the joke, they're dressed like women. Get it? Well, that's British humor. But if you're like most Americans you probably prefer Adam Sandler farting his way across a football field and hooking up with chicks that are way out of his league. Americans usually prefer this more in your face, crass brand of humor. My point is funny in England is different from funny in the US. The same goes for J-Horror. What the Japanese consider scary is very different from what Americans consider scary and it shows in this horror film. Japanese horror is generally slow (a little too slow sometimes), suspenseful and creepy. Ju-On is a creepy effing film. The movie has almost no soundtrack. It is incredibly suspenseful and the pay-offs are pretty awesome, but I think that it was done better in the American version (cultural t

Inseminoid (1981) - Norman J. Warren

What can be said for mindless schlock pictures like this one. They were pumped out in droves during the eighties. Inseminoid !? give me a break! It sounds like some pre-pubescent teenage boys came up with the title. On the plus side the movie isn't horrible to look at and it has a decent amount of gore. If you can separate yourself from the political incorrectness, then you might have a perfectly decent Sci-Fi Monster Feature.  A research team exploring caves on Jupiter accidentally awakens an ancient alien that rapes and impregnates one of the team members. She suffers from terrible shock and trauma, leading to a complete mental breakdown as her pregnancy accelerates faster and faster. Feeling threatened she decides to kill anyone she deems a threat. Can the rest of the research team survive or will they all become victims of INSEMINOID! Apparently this movie had a million dollar budget. That's really shocking considering the outcome of the picture. The acting