IMDb-BEWERTUNG
7,6/10
16.972
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuDr. Jekyll faces horrible consequences when he lets his dark side run wild with a potion that transforms him into the animalistic Mr. Hyde.Dr. Jekyll faces horrible consequences when he lets his dark side run wild with a potion that transforms him into the animalistic Mr. Hyde.Dr. Jekyll faces horrible consequences when he lets his dark side run wild with a potion that transforms him into the animalistic Mr. Hyde.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
- 1 Oscar gewonnen
- 7 Gewinne & 2 Nominierungen insgesamt
Robert Adair
- Ivy's Admirer at Music Hall
- (Nicht genannt)
Harry Adams
- Pub Patron
- (Nicht genannt)
William Begg
- Party Guest
- (Nicht genannt)
Leonard Carey
- Briggs - Lanyon's Butler
- (Nicht genannt)
Rita Carlyle
- Jekyll's Patient
- (Nicht genannt)
Frank Goddard
- Undetermined Role
- (Nicht genannt)
Bobbie Hale
- Pub Patron
- (Nicht genannt)
Pat Harmon
- Music Hall Customer
- (Nicht genannt)
Sam Harris
- Party Guest
- (Nicht genannt)
Boyd Irwin
- Police Inspector
- (Nicht genannt)
Tom London
- Undetermined Role
- (Nicht genannt)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
An exceptional cast and intelligent direction seals the quality of the first 'talkie' version of Robert Louis Stevenson's tale. Often hailed as the best of the many screen adaptations of the story, director Robert Moumalin exploits the symbolic potential of the tale as well as boldly tapping into popular Freudian trends concerning sexual repression. The result is not a by-the-numbers rendition but an effective interpretation with quirks and dimensions of its own. Yet the film belongs to Frederic March who scooped an Oscar for his sensational dual role. Although as Jekyll he unfortunately has to trade flowery romantic dialogue with Rose Hobart, there can be no disputing the menace of his Hyde, with his simian-like appearance, top hat, cloak and cane, who turns cockney hooker Miriam Hopkins' life into a nightmare. It's a breathtaking transformation both physically (thanks to stellar make-up and special effects) and artistically and is undoubtedly the centrepiece of this excellent vintage classic.
This film is far superior to the 1941 version with Spencer Tracy, Ingrid Bergman and Lana Turner. Fredric March's portrayal was more subtle than Tracy's. March's Mr. Hyde is terrifying, especially in his scenes with Miriam Hopkins, but at the same time, he was able to imbue his "bad side" personality with sympathy, especially toward the end when he realizes the monster that he's become because he messed with his natural impulses through the use of chemical augmentation. The scene where Jekyll is watching his fiancée cry and he desperately tries to control his impulses and keep himself from transforming was well-acted by March and was very sad to watch. I thought March did an excellent job and he earned his Oscar.
Spencer Tracy's rendition of Mr. Hyde was way too hammy and the makeup was ridiculous. He seemed forced and over the top, whereas March's portrayal of the two sides of his personality was more complex. Both Jekyll and Hyde had their bad parts. Hyde, even though he did some awful things, may have had some good qualities despite his selfish and unconscionable behavior. Based on March's portrayal, it seems that the best of human nature lies somewhere in the middle of Jekyll and Hyde.
Miriam Hopkins is very good here as the professional trollop who gets more than she bargained for in Hyde. I thought her cockney accent was a little uneven, but it didn't detract from her performance. Miriam's bad girl liked to take chances, and thus she gets herself into questionable situations, but she didn't deserve the fate of being stuck with the abusive Mr. Hyde.
I really liked her opening scene with Dr. Jekyll where she flaunts her legs and ends up nude in the bed with a strategically placed sheet, that was pretty risqué, even for a pre-code. Unfortunately, her whispered "come back" was a temptation for Dr. Jekyll, but it was an invitation for Hyde. The scene where Mr. Hyde attacks her was very frightening and I thought that Hopkins and March acted it well.
I think that director Mamoulian managed to keep the secret of Hyde's transformation until his death or pretty close to it. That is an accomplishment in and of itself - keeping a secret that long. At any rate, highly recommended.
Spencer Tracy's rendition of Mr. Hyde was way too hammy and the makeup was ridiculous. He seemed forced and over the top, whereas March's portrayal of the two sides of his personality was more complex. Both Jekyll and Hyde had their bad parts. Hyde, even though he did some awful things, may have had some good qualities despite his selfish and unconscionable behavior. Based on March's portrayal, it seems that the best of human nature lies somewhere in the middle of Jekyll and Hyde.
Miriam Hopkins is very good here as the professional trollop who gets more than she bargained for in Hyde. I thought her cockney accent was a little uneven, but it didn't detract from her performance. Miriam's bad girl liked to take chances, and thus she gets herself into questionable situations, but she didn't deserve the fate of being stuck with the abusive Mr. Hyde.
I really liked her opening scene with Dr. Jekyll where she flaunts her legs and ends up nude in the bed with a strategically placed sheet, that was pretty risqué, even for a pre-code. Unfortunately, her whispered "come back" was a temptation for Dr. Jekyll, but it was an invitation for Hyde. The scene where Mr. Hyde attacks her was very frightening and I thought that Hopkins and March acted it well.
I think that director Mamoulian managed to keep the secret of Hyde's transformation until his death or pretty close to it. That is an accomplishment in and of itself - keeping a secret that long. At any rate, highly recommended.
A neglected masterpiece. When I picked up the two sided DVD I was excited because the Fleming/Tracy version is on the order of a guilty pleasure. But I soon realized that I had never seen the 1931 version. This is a film that lingers in the memories of many film goers as still photographs of Frederic March in his makeup. Watching it was a revelation. The same changes to original content - Jekyl's bride-to-be and her family - continue to wear wearily on the production, but nothing could prepare me for March's work. As often as we've seen "transformations" - this one is the BEST. Then young lion director Rouben Mamouilan pulls out some dandy tricks. And the sexually charged atmosphere before the Hayes code - was well - sexy as hell. Do yourself a favor and watch it.
Robert Louis Stevenson's classic tale of split personality has been filmed before in 1920 with John Barrymore and in 1941 with Spencer Tracy, but Rouben Mamoulian's expressionist 1931 version stands head and shoulders above the rest. First of all, you have Fredric March, whose tour-de-force performance as the good-natured Jekyll and the monstrous Hyde earned him the Best Actor Oscar. Second, the camera work by Karl Struss brilliantly captures the mood of the story. And lastly, the transformation sequences set an enormous precedent for the later monster movies. It all blends together to form one of most amazing horror movies of the 1930's. Even today, it still has the power to mesmerize and send chills down the spine of even the most hardened horror fan.
What happened to movies in the late 30's and early 40's? Why did they become so stale and stagey? "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" would be considered downright antique to many of today's casual filmgoers, but it feels so much more dynamic technically and thematically than many films that came out later in its decade. The answer, of course, is that this movie came out before enforcement of the Production Code, at which time artistry in films--both style and substance--took a nose dive.
This film is worth watching for its stunning camera work alone. It doesn't suffer from any of the awkwardness other films working in the early years of sound do. The camera's always moving, there's terrific use of light and shadow, and the scenes showing the transformation of Jekyll to Hyde are seamlessly filmed in what appear to be uninterrupted shots, leaving you to ponder the sheer physical behind-the-scenes mechanics of them.
But this movie isn't just more technically advanced than films later in the decade; it's more adult in content too. No filming of this story ten years later (I've not seen the Victor Fleming version for comparison) would dare add the level of sexuality that this story does. Fredric March is very good in the dual role, and when he transforms into Mr. Hyde, you can see that it's everything within his power not to rip the dress right off whatever female he happens to be with and mount her right there. I'm not exaggerating; the film is really that frank.
Creepy good fun.
Grade: A-
This film is worth watching for its stunning camera work alone. It doesn't suffer from any of the awkwardness other films working in the early years of sound do. The camera's always moving, there's terrific use of light and shadow, and the scenes showing the transformation of Jekyll to Hyde are seamlessly filmed in what appear to be uninterrupted shots, leaving you to ponder the sheer physical behind-the-scenes mechanics of them.
But this movie isn't just more technically advanced than films later in the decade; it's more adult in content too. No filming of this story ten years later (I've not seen the Victor Fleming version for comparison) would dare add the level of sexuality that this story does. Fredric March is very good in the dual role, and when he transforms into Mr. Hyde, you can see that it's everything within his power not to rip the dress right off whatever female he happens to be with and mount her right there. I'm not exaggerating; the film is really that frank.
Creepy good fun.
Grade: A-
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesThe remarkable Jekyll-to-Hyde transition scenes in this film were accomplished by manipulating a series of variously colored filters in front of the camera lens. Fredric March's Hyde makeup was in various colors, and the way his appearance registered on the film depended on which color filter was being shot through. Only in the late 1960's did Mamoulian reveal how this was done.
- PatzerImmediately after Hyde changes to Jekyll in front of Dr. Lanyon, he moves his head and briefly reveals the padded armature attached to the back of his chair, intended to hold his head in the same position while the makeup artists worked on various stages of his transformation.
- Alternative VersionenThis film was published in Italy in an DVD anthology entitled "Il dottor Jekyll e Mr. Hyde", distributed by DNA Srl. The film has been re-edited with the contribution of the film history scholar Riccardo Cusin . This version is also available in streaming on some platforms.
- VerbindungenEdited into Mondo Lugosi - A Vampire's Scrapbook (1987)
- SoundtracksToccata and Fugue in D Minor, BWV 565
(1708) (uncredited)
Music by Johann Sebastian Bach
Played by orchestra during opening credits and in some scenes by an anonymous organist dubbing Fredric March
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- El hombre y el monstruo
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirma
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 535.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 16.615 $
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 38 Min.(98 min)
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.20 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen