Opiniones de usuarios

I am not really surprised that "Edge of Sanity" has only a few reviews.This film is pretty tough to find,which is no bad thing.Anthony Perkins plays here Dr Jekyll/Jack Hyde,who as a Hyde murders and mutilates hookers in Jack the Ripper style.The acting from the supporting cast is diabolical,only Perkins proving effective,mainly due to his cadaverous features and tormented demeanor.The idea of a split personality with a particular sexual dysfunction also works with this material.Unfortunately the killings are mostly off-screen,but still "Edge of Sanity" has a pretty disturbing and sleazy quality to it.Some scenes are downright weird and rather unpleasant,so be prepared.Check it out,if you're curious.6 out of 10.

I've had the unrated version for this, since about the time I started buying tapes. Gerard Kikoine (once a Jess Franco disciple!) really cuts loose with this one, and he brings Anthony Perkins along for the ride! Despite ubiquitous art direction that sacrifices much for the "look" ( the lab has numerous beakers, all filled to the same level, with blue liquid. What it is, I don't know). Perkins really goes off as the respected scientist, who unleashes his inner self through experiments with the new drug, cocaine. He even somehow, apparently creates some sort of Crack, that can be lit with a wooden fireplace match!?! Production values are surprisingly high! Like a friend of mine said, I could almost buy into the idea, that Jack The Ripper was a sexually frustrated scientist experimenting with new drugs. Lush, often restrained, but also often quite gory. Probably more in tune with 70's arty euro-porn, than the history of horror films, this is often quite disturbing, and Perkins is at his best. Almost assured of a better reputation as time goes on. Don't miss, at least once.

Pax

--Judexdot1--

This dreary film based on an intriguing concept which cross-contaminates the Jack the Ripper murders with the "Dr. Jekkyl and Mr. Hyde" story. For such a far fetched idea, the script is painfully grim, with Perkins seemingly reveling in his relentlessly character. The film feels European in its pacing and photography, with the Budapest locations filling in for 19th century London.

Director Kikoïne plays the film completely straight, the moody script offering no respite from the tedious reel of violence and perverse sexuality. Other than Perkins, the supporting cast is forgettable, much like the film itself. Failing on the level of being scary, or entertaining, it is hard to recommend anything about this. Perkins shows his talent, playing two vastly different characters without the aid of radical make-up effects.

Like a nightmare, this film feels so much longer than it actually is. It is perhaps the longest 85 minute film ever made, which is no compliment. The story does not seem to progress anywhere, the film relies entirely on violence and sex - and frankly, there is too much of each. Anthony Perkins is acting below his level here, which is a terrible shame considering his talent. It is quite amazing that he still shines even in this piece of traumatic drivel. This surely is no "Psycho".

In conclusion, "Edge of Sanity" is neither enjoyable or scary, which one would suppose makes it a poor attempt. This is a wasted concept, the possibilities for such a story are almost endless, so why is this film bogged down with it's long, boring script? Die-hard Perkins fans may draw something from this, but for the average movie goer, give it a miss.

In Victorian London Anthony Perkins plays shy but brilliant Dr. Henry Jekyll. He has a loving wife (Glynis Barber), a beautiful home and is a respected man. One night he accidentally ingests some vapors from alcohol mixed with cocaine and becomes evil, vicious, sex-obsessed Mr. Hyde. Also around this time Jack the Ripper is killing prostitutes. Is it Perkins...or someone else?

This came and went VERY quickly in 1988. It was cut to ribbons by the MPAA and the critics called it a sick, unpleasant piece of trash with Perkins at his worst. While I agree it's no classic it's not the disaster I heard it was.

It's a very sleazy movie and makes no apologies for it (which is sort of refreshing). It's full of female nudity and even full frontal male (which was cut out of the R rated version). It is unpleasant with graphic stabbings but it's shot on elaborate, beautiful, expressionistic (check out Perkins' lab) sets. It's obvious a lot of money went into this. The script is also quite interesting getting into Jekyll's mind about what's going on.

Good acting all around helps. Ben Cole (looking like he came from "A Clockwork Orange") plays a male prostitute and is good. Barber is excellent as Jekyll's wife. All the ladies playing prostitutes are actually pretty good actresses--they're beautiful and have no trouble taking off their clothes. However Perkins holds this movie together. He does overact as Hyde but in a good way. When he's on screen you can't take your eyes off him.

The MGM DVD released a few years ago is the unrated version, not the R one as is advertised---not that I'm complaining. So it is graphic and unpleasant but also very interesting and well-made. Worth seeing if you're not easily offended. A 7.

While watching this movie it's quite apparent that somewhere deep down in it there was a good movie and a good idea behind it all. However the overall end result it's pretty poor and really not interesting and exciting enough.

It does sound like a good main premise; Combine the Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde story with the London killings done by Jack the Ripper, at the end of the 19th century. Yet the movie its concept and story never seems to get off the ground. It's mostly because of the dull and uninspiring storytelling that the movie and its concept fall flat. There is rarely anything good or interesting happening in this movie and it's a real problem that the movie is lacking in some good decent mystery and tension.

The movie also fails to create a good atmosphere for its story. It seems so easy to create a dark and moody atmosphere, set in dark and moody London after midnight. Yet the movie is often too bright with its colors and everything is too smooth and perfect looking.

Lets take the victims for example. They are all perfectly figured young girls, who are real natural beauty's, with perfectly smooth faces and hair that obviously gets treated well on a daily basis. Not very convincing, considering that these girls are supposed to be 20th century prostitutes, who were considered to be the lowest of the lowest.

The story itself is also far from convincing. It's one thing that Dr. Jekyll turns into Mr. Hyde, due to the use of cocaine but this doesn't really explain his odd and sudden transformation into a completely different looking person. It's also quite amazing that no one ever suspect this aggressive and creepy looking guy to be perhaps in some way connected to any of the murders of the prostitutes, that he himself was also often seen involved with by many others. no wonder that the police never caught the ripper, if they really were this stupid as well in real life.

What makes this movie even more a weird watch is the fact that it can also definitely been seen as a soft-core-porn flick. There is really quite a lot of nudity in it and lots of different sexual acts get explicitly implied.

It's interesting to see Anthony Perkins in this type of role but he basically gets far too little interesting or new to do with his character. Nevertheless, he was a more than great actor, so it's still a bit of a pleasure to watch him in this. He was actually a very underrated actor in my opinion and it's a bit of a shame that most people only know him for his iconic "Psycho" role, while he was much more versatile as an actor. It's still a wrong move by this movie to only purely focus on his character, while things could had been given more depth and tension if it had some other strong solid characters in it as well.

A failed attempt at a potentially interesting and refreshing idea.

4/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

An overdone Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde rendition based very freely on the Robert Louis Stevenson novel. As Doctor Jekyll : Anthony Perkins living in London is happily married to Glynis Barber . While Henry Jekyll is working in his laboratory , testing cocaine for use as an anesthetic happens an unfortunate accident. When a lab monkey knocks liquid into the coke and the the fumes cause the doc turns into hedious Jack Hyde, a prototype for Jack the Ripper . Along the way, he searches for his prey in the London streets, as prostitutes at night and eventually at a brothel. Beware the beast within !. Double the terror, double the fun ! . Psycho is over the edge !. Pyschopatic, pure evil, perverted!.

Grim and scary film with chills , thrills , sleaziness , ugly scenes and lots of nudism . Dealing with doc Jekyll whose experiments with cocaine have gotten out of control, as he transforms into the ominous Jack Hyde. Perkins gives overacting , in a really psychotic interpretation , as he knows the schizoid territory thanks to his other usual performances as Psycho I to IV . He is accompanied by a little known support cast, such as : Glynis Barber, Claudia Udy and David Lodge. The production design is acceptable and passable interpretations , but the film is neither for squeamish people , nor for the easily queazy . There is also an available in 90 minute , unrated version. The motion picture was regularly directed by Gerard Kikoine .

There are several adaptations based on Robert Louis Stevenson classic novel : 1920 starred by John Barrymore. Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde 1931 by Robert Mamoulian with Fredric March, Miriam Hopkins. 1941 MGM rendition by Victor Fleming with Spencer Tracy, Lana Turner, Ingrid Bergman . Doctor Jekyll and Mr Hyde 1960 by Terence Fisher with Paul Massie , Christopher Lee, Dawn Addams. Mr Jekyll and his sister Hyde 1971 by Roy Ward Baker with Ralph Bates, Martine Beswick. Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde 1973 by David Winters with Kirk Douglas, Donald Pleasence, Susan George. And continental renditions as Dr Jekyll and Wolfman by Leon Klimovski with Paul Naschy or Jacinto Molina, Jack Taylor and Dr Jekyll et Les Femmes 1981 by Valerian Borowczyk with Udo Kier, Patrick McNee, Marina Pierro, among others.

Edge Of Sanity is a dark thriller/horror movie and is an interesting and sordid, sleazy take on the Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde story with nods to Jack The Ripper spliced in as well. Anthony Perkins is up for the task and delivers a solid and very creepy performance in this film. His experiments with cocaine, bring to life evil persona Mr. Hyde. Mr. Hyde has a lot fun serial fornicating and slashing the throats of beautiful hookers across Victorian era London. The story is not always cohesive in the way it is told, but it more than makes up for it with stunning cinematography and stunning actresses that have no problem disrobing for this film. The film has a nice score and some Gothic atmosphere as well. As Mr. Hyde, Anthony Perkins looks like he would blend in easily at a Sisters Of Mercy or Bauhaus show. The supporting cast is good, but the visuals and Anthony Perkins performance are what most commands the audience's attention. The film here is pretty grim and violent as well, this is not recommended for the squeemish. Edge Of Sanity is a depraved, unhinged and highly erotic, if that sounds good to you, I doubt this flick will let you down.

"Edge of Sanity" is an attempt to spice up the Jekyll and Hyde story by intensifying the risque elements which were only hinted at in the novel, as well as combining it with the true life story of Jack the Ripper. While it is clearly not intended as a straight adaptation of the book (the credits don't even MENTION Robert Louis Stevenson!) the story, of a warped Mr. Hyde who prowls round London seducing and then killing prostitutes, seemed to have prospects of being a classic, especially with the great Anthony Perkins playing the main role(s). Sadly, poor directing and a weak script let this film down badly, making it quite a disappointment.

The first time I watched this film I was struggling to stay awake, nothing in it grabbed me, and I remembered little about it afterwards. I assumed this was just because I was tired anyway, so I watched it again when I wasn't feeling so tired... and I got almost just the same feeling. The film is little more than a monotonous bore.

The plot, although interesting in concept, lacks any real depth or suspense. It feels so empty that a brief synopsis would basically sum up the whole film. It just feels like the script could have been put together in half an hour, without any real thought. And the lacklustre script isn't helped at all by the lazy and unenthusiastic directing. The film has a profoundly dull, monotonous atmosphere the whole way through, and simply plods along without any particularly striking moments. The attempt at a dramatic climax is feeble, the film seems to have no sense of suspense or any remote feeling of horror, and the ending is so weak that you're just left wondering what the whole point was in the first place. I have nothing against the erotic elements or the frequent scenes of nudity- it's just that the film is handled so badly.

But having said that, "Edge of Sanity" is saved from being a truly bad movie by Anthony Perkins' fine performance. He was the perfect actor to cast as Jekyll and Hyde in this film- if anyone else had played the role, the film would probably have been consigned to the dustbin of true trash. Perkins tries his hardest against the dire script to give his character some real development. The sad point is, Jekyll/Hyde is written in virtually no depth at all. It seems that Hyde, rather than being an evil side of Jekyll's character that has been released by the experiment, is more or less Jekyll himself. Jekyll and Hyde seem to have no difference in personality- it seems more like Jekyll IS Hyde naturally, but feeling his respectable position prevents him from committing the crimes he desires, he simply assumes an alternate form in which to be his true evil self. He gets little screen time as Jekyll, and we learn little of his character. And the fact that the reason why he possesses such evil desires is never really explored in any depth only serves to make his character pitifully shallow. We see a flashback to an incident from his childhood which scarred his mind, in one of the movie's few good scenes, but other than that he gets no development. Anthony Perkins tries hard to make his character seem convincing against the poor scripting, and he does a good job because while the film is mostly forgettable, Jack Hyde is a truly memorable character who should have been a classic villain. He looks brilliant (although it has to be said that there is little physical difference between Jekyll and Hyde, but I get the idea this is intentional) and Perkins plays him strongly enough to make him an overall impressive character, if flawed by his lack of development. He is the film's only strong point, and deserved to be in a better movie than this.

Therefore, aside from Perkins' excellent performance, "Edge of Sanity" is a real let-down that could (and should) have been a classic, but failed to reach this status. It's worth watching for Anthony Perkins alone, but aside from that, only a few scenes in the brothel (brilliantly designed) provide any real interesting moments. This is a weak effort, and there are plenty of better Jekyll and Hyde films.

Anthony Perkins gives a bizarre and unhinged performance in this gothic style adaption of the Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde story complete with elements from Jack the Ripper. This time it's a cocaine-like substance which causes the good doctor to metamorph into the uncontrollable Jack Hyde. When Perkins is transformed into the savage beast he decides to make slashing the throats of prostitutes a hobby. Intriguing take on the over-played Jekyll and Hyde story with some twists and turns thrown in to keep the viewer interested. Also an excellent performance from Glynis Barber as Mrs.Jekyll. Atmospheric settings, weird situations, and over the top performances make this one an eye opener for anyone looking for something a little different. And when it comes to the role of Perkins, Edge of Sanity is a more than appropriate title.

Anthony Perkins plays Dr. Jekyll who after a lab incident caused by his guinea monkey turns him into the sinister Mr. Hyde. Soon the bodies start popping up all over London.

The story is well known, but we get a little twist here. The twist being that Mr. Hyde is actually Jack the Ripper. I really liked the fusing of these two stories. It gave the film another dimension to it. Edge of Sanity is a surprisingly sleazy film too, thank goodness. One J.P. Félix is one of the two writers credited with the screenplay. This Félix is apparently actually one of smut peddler Jess Franco's many pseudonyms. It's hardly surprising then that we get regular doses of nudity and some not overly gratuitous violence. We even get the odd humor on occasion. Just watch as the rabid Mr. Hyde has bent a prostitute over the table inspecting her butt and we see her bored face. He's just another weird customer with a fetish. The script is pretty good, but without knowing exactly what, I still felt that a certain something to put it over the top was missing.

Anthony Perkins shines as the star of the show. He balances nicely between the two personalities. Perkins has a very charming side, as we've seen in Psycho, which can change in an second. In this film his psychotic features are enhanced with make-up, giving him more of a wax figure look. It looks supremely creepy. In several instances he reminded me of the zombified Stephen from Dawn of the Dead (1978). The story is really a sad one. Dr. Jekyll is only a man traumatized during childhood years and his decent into madness starts off as an unfortunate accident. Jekyll is more a victim of circumstance than anything. He accidentally inhales the smoke from the broken glasses unaware of what the mix will do to him. Unfortunately for the good doctor the effects have fatal consequences. Jekyll's smoking device looks like a crack pipe. This film came in 1989, which was at a time when crack was at its height in the US. Edge of Sanity appears to be a cautionary tale covered in layers of filth. We see Perkins trying to resist it, but his demons get the better of him. His spiral downwards is very well depicted. We see the raving madman and a cold and calculating monster that is Mr. Hyde gradually taking over Jekyll. This is perfectly realized in a party scene, where the topic of freedom is brought up. Jekyll wonders what anyone really knows about freedom. "I thought I was free?" retorts one of the posh ladies. The doctor starts talking about freedom to do whatever we feel like. You see something you like and you take it. The other guests are a tad upset by this, but Jekyll rages calmly on. "You all act as if our manners, our morality, were handed to us by God." With skeptical eyes she replies: "But they are." Perkins continues: "No madam, they're not. We made them up by mutual agreement. But what if I don't agree?" He goes from the dinner table leaving the others in shock. There is a distinct flavor of Nietzsche's philosophy here, which is the rejection of morality as an absolute truth. I doubt Nietzsche would have approved Mr. Hyde's thoughts of doing whatever one feels like, but accepting that life is essentially meaningless is key. The other dinner guests' refusal to accept this makes them passive nihilists. The active nihilist on the other hand sees opportunity to build something instead of hiding in fear behind religion. Jekyll/Hyde is somewhere in between. He rejects God and morality, but instead of building he tears the world apart. And, fortunately for him, in a society as judgmental as this, who would expect that any well educated person could possibly be behind such atrocious crimes?

The technical aspects of Edge of Sanity are simply outstanding! The camera-work is impeccable with lots of crooked angels, intruding close-ups of Mr. Hyde and smooth dolly shots. The lighting and use of colors are strong and vivid adding additional delirium. There are gorgeous set-pieces to feast our eyes on. You really couldn't ask for more. In a lot of ways this has an adult Tim Burton feel to it.

Edge of Sanity is a nice and creepy horror film. For some reason, despite all its accomplishments I still felt slightly detached to it all. That however, shouldn't deter anyone looking for a sleazy horror with originality, a menacing Perkins and production values far beyond your normal fright flick.

The umpteenth adaptation of Robert Louis Stevenson's classic story "The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" and probably one of the worst and most clueless versions ever made. In fact, the only one I can recall that is worse is "The Adult Version of Jekyll and Hyde", but that was a no-budget sex movie and constantly showed an ugly naked fat guy on the screen. This movie had sufficient budget and even managed to attract "Psycho" star Anthony Perkins, but notwithstanding it remains a terrible waste of time. The synopsis caught my attention, as the plot attempts to link the Jekyll & Hyde saga to the notoriously unsolved Jack the Ripper murder-spree. Hammer Films accomplished something similar during the early 70's with "Dr. Jekyll and Sister Hyde", and the result was a sublime and hugely inventive horror movie. A hybrid between Jekyll and Hyde and Jack the Ripper must be a thrilling and intriguing concept, but unfortunately "Edge of Sanity" is a dud of a film. "The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" is a traditional and mostly psychological tale of terror, whereas this is an ordinary 80's slasher movie. It's supposed to revolve on the inner battle between good and evil, but "Edge of Sanity" is simply an excuse to depict vile and misogynist murders, pseudo-pornographic sleaze footage and drug abuse. Dr. Henry Jekyll is a happily married and brilliant medical scientist working on the development of a new and groundbreaking anesthetic. When his lab monkey knocks over some test tubes, Jekyll inhales the fumes and transforms into his malignant and depraved alter ego Jack Hyde. Hyde vividly remembers Jekyll's Freudian childhood traumas and uses them as an excuse to go out on the lurid London streets and sadistically butcher prostitutes. And when we say "sadistically", you may take this very literal. The murder sequences are extremely perverse and repulsive, with loads of hideously slit throats, mutilated corpses and nasty S&M attributes. It's also more than obvious that director Gérard Kikoïne has a past in the adult film industry. The sex scenes leave very little to the imagination and the orgies and hallucinations are even downright sordid, including bits and pieces of cane-masturbation, voyeurism, the Oedipus complex and crucifixion. It's truly revolting to witness how such a classic and brilliant story of genuine horror receives such a cheap and exploitative makeover! Shame on you, Mr. Perkins!

To be honest, I have never seen or read the original story. Maybe this is a good thing, I don't know. As far as I can understand it gets the basic idea and only harshly does it re-make previous versions. Performances and film pace is overall OK. No stupid subplots and all, even some smiles raise from time to time. Due to some erotic scenes involving prostitutes, it can easily be characterized sexploitation, and as far as erotic stimulation is concerned, it scores quite high. Moreover having Anthony Perkins starring in it, it could easily be loved by horror completists or cultists. All in all, I had a nice time.

This is the nth variation on the Jekyll/Hyde perennial that I've watched – it's not among the better versions, but nor is it quite as bad as its maligned reputation would suggest!

An unhinged Anthony Perkins (joining a distinguished roster of actors to tackle the dual role) is always worth watching: his disruption of a society dinner is quietly effective – as Dr. Jekyll expounds on his theory about the power inherent in a personality unbound by laws and traditions, and of its imminent emergence. The Hyde make-up does not extend to much other than making Perkins look somewhat younger, rather effeminate and vaguely sinister. The overall look of the film, retaining the period setting of Stevenson's original novel, is fairly pleasing – within the limitations of its budget and the exploitation angle it clearly aims for (what with the presence of blood and sleaze galore).

Unsurprisingly, the narrative attaches a mother/whore complex to the main character – not to mention the fact that Perkins' Hyde adopts the characteristics one usually associates with Jack The Ripper (following in the footsteps of Hammer's DR. JEKYLL AND SISTER HYDE [1971])! By the way, the film was co-produced by Harry Alan Towers – with his wife/former starlet Maria Rohm credited as Associate Producer!

I have still another version to check out – the recent 2002 production released on DVD (as a SE no less!) by Alpha, and may even get to MARY REILLY (1996) before the month is out...

Henry Jekyll (Anthony Perkins) experiments with cocaine, and the experiments have gotten out of control, transforming him into the hideous Jack Hyde. As Hyde he searches the London streets at night for his prey in whorehouses and opium dens.

Early in the film, we see a blade against an eye. This is a very impressive effect, clearly looking like a real eye and areal blade. (I mean, it is not "Un Chien Andalou", but what is?)

There is one scene with a bath house full of several nude men, one of whom is in a rather suggestive pose. I am surprised this passed the censors. While not sexual, this seemed a bit provocative to me. And what purpose did it serve? Was this just a way of showing the paradoxes and contradictions in Victorian society?

Is this an anti-drug film? I would say no, as it is not remotely a realistic portrayal of cocaine addiction. They could have just as easily invented a new drug for the purposes of the film. And yet, they did not do so -- so why single out cocaine?

What could have been a wonderfully sinister adaptation of the famous story 'Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde' is no more than an excuse for wall-to-wall filth, sleaze and pornography. Don't be fooled into thinking this is a serious attempt to adapt the novel - the Jekyll & Hyde element has just been tacked on to help the film sell.

Dr Jekyll (who might as well be Doc Holiday for what it has to do with the film) is experimenting with drugs which bring out the more savage emotions in animals. But after he inhales the vapour in an accident in his lab he is transformed into what looks like a predecessor of Barbara Cartland. From then on it's all just one obscenity after another, the plot terminally dull and slow-moving, the climax (if you can call it that) utterly feeble. Anthony Perkins is at his best but he's just wasted here. Some of the other characters from the Jekyll Hyde novel are included, but blink and you'd miss them.

If you want to see a screen adaptation of Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde then you'd be much better off watching the Michael Caine version, or any other version for that matter. This one isn't worth the tape it's printed on.

Join Anthony Perkins as respected Dr Henry Jekyll a physician who has discovered the use of cocaine as an anesthetic in this little known Arthouse blend of Stevensons Jekyll/ Hyde classic meets the Ripper slasher. One night in his lab a monkey spills a chemical onto the bowl of coke and a vaporous reaction occurs, Jekyll is inhaling the fumes as he cleans up the mess and we first meet Jack Hyde the sinister side of Jekyll, who smokes crack and engages in debauchery while terrorizing Whitechapel prostitutes with male onlookers or participation and visits to trap houses of the era. You can see Perkins Jekyll character struggle with his addictions of becoming Hyde and by the end there is little of the accomplished physician left. An interesting seedy take on these two stories with a blend of the 80's to modernize these Victorian classics. Quite a bit of nudity, there's an interesting scene involving a bathhouse that has male frontal, not often seen, and plenty of boobs. Watch this one alone or party if everyone's keys are going into a bowl by nights end. 3/5.

This is a shallow retread of the "Jekyll and Hyde" myth, so sloppily thrown together that we never get any idea about the true content of the story; the script has no depth whatsoever and makes no attempt at descending into the hero's psyche. The movie is gratuitously overdirected (with way too many weird camera angles that add up to nothing), and Anthony Perkins gives, perhaps intentionally, a performance so mannered and campy that it becomes ludicrous. (*1/2)

It's an odd idea that this was to be really the Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde story and then more of less destroy it and combine with Jack the Ripper and also not really tell that story at all. The director mixes sex and violence and hopes it works. Oddly it does, of course because Anthony Perkins is great, a little bit over acted now and again but with all the gruesome stories and Perkins somehow how it looks great although it is really nasty killing and sex almost as porn. Perkins does it so well and you have to admit that Gerard Kikoine knows how to lavish on the sleaze with the rather terrible mix and it is very unusual.

I am one of those guys that likes horror movies less gory so that's one reason this wasn't my thing, and also, how repetitive can you get. A movie has to evolve and I love the story of "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" and if I would make it I wold start out with Mr. Hyde to being pretty bad, to cruel, to evil, to murderous. But this film jumped to being murderous and and din't evolve for like 80 minutes. Just kept on killing naked prostitutes, becoming Dr. Jekyll, then became Jake the ripper Hyde and murdered another naked prostitute. For a person to say this film was good or scary would have to have a shallow, immature taste in films and just wants to see it not for the art or brilliance but for the breasts and blood.

Edge of Sanity is not a particularly good film, but it is a memorable one, largely because it sees Anthony Perkins of Psycho fame getting nice 'n' sleazy with several hookers. The film is also visually impressive, using expressionistic camera angles and brightly coloured set design with just a touch of anachronism (one of the aforementioned prostitutes dresses like Madonna). The raunchiness and avant-garde aesthetic gives the film a very European flavour, although the directors whose work it most reminded me of were Michael Winner and Ken Russell.

The plot is a combination of The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and Jack the Ripper, with Perkins' renowned surgeon Henry Jekyll experimenting with a revolutionary anaesthetic, only to be transformed into a murderous and lecherous maniac when he accidentally huffs a load of mind altering fumes. As Jack Hyde, the deranged doctor (now with emo hair and wearing red eyeliner) makes his way to the East End, where he explores the back streets and brothels, slashing up ladies of the night with his scalpel.

Gérard Kikoïne's unusual directorial style, Perkins' unhinged performance, and lots of nudity from the film's remarkably attractive whores, plus a smattering of gore, made this film a surprisingly enjoyable watch. It's not for everyone, but I was entertained throughout. The offbeat approach from almost everyone involved (Glynis Barber puts in the only 'normal' performance as Henry's wife) makes me suspect that some of Jekyll's 'anaesthetic' might have been snorted by the cast and crew between takes.

6/10.

The sad thing about Anthony Perkins career is after he did Psycho, he got type cast playing crazy characters. So someone decided that we didn't have nearly enough adaptations of "Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde" and did one with Anthony playing both roles.

Unfortunately, it has about ten minutes of story and 80 minutes of filler involving Hyde slashing up prostitutes . It is sort of implied that Jeckyll's mysterious formula was some form of cocaine, because, hey, it was the 1980's and Nancy Reagan was all over that.

It's actually fairly sloppy in its reproduction of 1880's London, with costumes that are anachronistic.

Gotta talk about the transformation... When he's doing the Hyde-caine, Perkins gets some pasty makeup, they give him some red eyeliner and muss up his hair. Again, the guy was a pretty good actor who got typecast into these kind of roles, which is sad.