Dr. Henry Jekyll experiments with scientific means of revealing the hidden, dark side of man and releases a murderer from within himself.Dr. Henry Jekyll experiments with scientific means of revealing the hidden, dark side of man and releases a murderer from within himself.Dr. Henry Jekyll experiments with scientific means of revealing the hidden, dark side of man and releases a murderer from within himself.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Almantas Sinkunas
- Old man
- (as Almantas Sinkünas)
Liubomiras Laucevicius
- First Street man
- (as Liubomiras Lauciavicius)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
5.5807
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Featured reviews
A great film.
This movie is very scary. 5.7 is just underrating. This is movie that will make your hairs stand on end. If this movie does not scary you then no movie will. This movie has a great story line. It also has great acting. It is based on one of the best book ever. And it is one of the best movie ever. Doctor Jekyll try to get ride of his evil self. But this evil self his taking him over. This is a great horror story. Brian Pettifer is a great actor. John Hannah is great actor. He is very scary in this movie. Maurice Phillips is a great director. See this movie. This movie is a must see. Gerard Horan is a great actor. This movie is a great. See it.
An old tale, bang up to date!
This 2003, T.V version, brings this dark tale bang up to date. Starring John Hannah, it's the most brutal version yet produced. The creation of the Victorian Era is both honest and truthful. The film chiefly deals with the vice, crime and downright seediness of these subversive times. David Warner is the fine back-up.
Not the shocking film it tries to be
I checked out this version of J&H on TV mainly because I'm a fan of John Hannah, but he was very disappointing in this role. It was his affability that made him a treat to watch in films such as 'Sliding Doors' and 'Four Weddings and a Funeral', and it is that very trait that undermines his portrayal of Mr Hyde. He is completely unconvincing as a menacing, dangerous figure, and the decision not to present Mr Hyde as physically different from Dr Jekyll exacerbates this problem, although it is an interesting choice artistically and could have paid rich dividends in the hands of an actor capable of projecting a truly intimidating presence. Also, his acts of barbarity, which are obviously meant to be shocking, don't have the desired effect; this is partly because of our familiarity with the story, but more so because of the lack of any real tension or suspense of any kind. Not only does Mr Hyde not seem as menacing as he is meant to be, but Dr Jekyll never convinces us that he was a paragon of virtue in the first place, due to inadequate exposure in the screenplay as well as the underwhelming acting and direction. The performances from the supporting actors likewise feel rather wet and unconvincing.
It seems to me that the theme of this film was that there truly was no difference between Jekyll and Hyde, and that it was Dr Jekyll who deliberately chose evil. This point is made repeatedly in several repetitive scenes where Dr Jekyll keeps talking about "removing impurities" and that in the end he will "contain evil", and the servant Mabel time and again discusses the fact that we are able to choose between good and evil. This might have been an interesting subject had is been dealt with more subtly. The battle between the good and evil sides of a person also became more ridiculous as it became more explicit, and the resolution seemed to be designed more for its non-existent shock value than for any faithfulness to either the tale as it was originally told or to the tale as it had been told thus far in this film.
Even if, or maybe especially if you are a fan of John Hannah, stay clear of this film if you want to avoid being disappointed on all levels.
It seems to me that the theme of this film was that there truly was no difference between Jekyll and Hyde, and that it was Dr Jekyll who deliberately chose evil. This point is made repeatedly in several repetitive scenes where Dr Jekyll keeps talking about "removing impurities" and that in the end he will "contain evil", and the servant Mabel time and again discusses the fact that we are able to choose between good and evil. This might have been an interesting subject had is been dealt with more subtly. The battle between the good and evil sides of a person also became more ridiculous as it became more explicit, and the resolution seemed to be designed more for its non-existent shock value than for any faithfulness to either the tale as it was originally told or to the tale as it had been told thus far in this film.
Even if, or maybe especially if you are a fan of John Hannah, stay clear of this film if you want to avoid being disappointed on all levels.
10goebelhe
Wonderful adaptation of the novel
I have seen one of the Jekyll-and-Hyde films so far. But this one is much better since it shows Hyde as he was described in the novel: as a person that seems different looking although there is no obvious malformation present (like it was overdone in the "League of the extraordinary gentlemen" and also in the movie from 1931). John Hannah demonstrates perfectly here that the evil does not have to be connected to a horrible look. He did a great job working out the psychological dark side of this tragic figure. The changes from Jekyll to Hyde were brilliantly filmed. For everybody who is interested in the novel this film is certainly a must-see.
Upon Dr. Jekyll's final reporting the picture unfolds with above-average results!!
The classic Robert Louis Stevenson's novel is one's of my favorite Sci-fi-thriller adapted to big screen, it was made by John Hannah as executive producer in Lithuania to mitigate the high cost in UK, they got some ancient spots at Vilnius to shooting as it if was in Victorian age in London, apart some careless sets as Jekyll's laboratory and others places it goes practically unnoticed by mostly on unaware viewers.
As TV movie it has an usual photography without the legendary London's fog, it somehow undermines the production concerning technical issues, in other hand the story has a fresh approaching with Jekyll & Hyde face to face allowed by CGI process and some creativeness on special effects on hallucinogen sequences, also the sexy girls Kellie Shirley and Elodie Kendall improve the offering, I wouldn't be totally honest myself if rated it less than 7 out 10, sorry for the bitters.
Thanks for reading.
Resume:
First watch: 2011 / How many: 2 / Source: DVD / Rating: 7.
As TV movie it has an usual photography without the legendary London's fog, it somehow undermines the production concerning technical issues, in other hand the story has a fresh approaching with Jekyll & Hyde face to face allowed by CGI process and some creativeness on special effects on hallucinogen sequences, also the sexy girls Kellie Shirley and Elodie Kendall improve the offering, I wouldn't be totally honest myself if rated it less than 7 out 10, sorry for the bitters.
Thanks for reading.
Resume:
First watch: 2011 / How many: 2 / Source: DVD / Rating: 7.
Did you know
- TriviaThe last TV role of James Saxon.
- Quotes
Dr. Jekyll & Mr Hyde: I'm *not* Dr Jekyll. I'm Mr Hyde.
- ConnectionsVersion of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1908)
Details
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content




