Les deux visages de Dr. Jekyll

Robert Louis Stevenson's 1886 novella Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde has provided inspiration for many a film-maker throughout the years, with various degrees of faithfulness shown to the source. Always eager to put their own Gothic spin on a popular tale, Hammer Films tackled the story in 1960, not only ensuring that debauchery levels were maximised, but changed a key aspect to the plot that makes the whole experience all the more delightfully wicked. Here, in Terence Fisher's film, Dr. Jekyll is dull and ugly, while Mr. Hyde is handsome and highly charismatic, as well as being an utter bastard.

Believing the human mind to consist of two personalities from opposite sides of the spectrum - good and evil - outcast Dr. Jekyll (Paul Massie) sets out to separate the two in order to help mankind embrace the good. Living almost in solitude, he neglects his wife Kitty (Dawn Addams), a promiscuous, spoilt woman currently embarking on an affair with her husband's best friend, Paul Allen (Christopher Lee). Jekyll drinks his newly created potion and Hyde emerges, introducing himself at a social gathering with swagger and charm (and getting into a fight with a young Oliver Reed). There he meets Paul and Kitty, who don't recognise him, and begins to toy with the two of them, all the while indulging on the many seductive pleasures of London.

Although it's difficult to believe that Jekyll's wife and best friend wouldn't recognise him without his ludicrous fake beard and mono- brow, The Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll is a enjoyable romp from start to finish. Massie is clearly having a ball in the dual role, and convinces as Hyde grows bored with money, gambling and women, and soon turns to darker alternatives, notably murder and manipulation. It doesn't pull it's punches either, portraying Hyde's journey into the further extremities of debauchery as intoxicating as Hyde clearly finds it, featuring the odd swear word and a scene of heavily implied rape. Special mention must also go to the recently departed Lee, who somehow finds a shred of sympathy for his cocky and pathetic rich boy character. One of Hammer's most effortlessly gratifying gems.

Like many Hammer Films that were pooh-poohed at the time of their release as exploitational, THE TWO FACES OF DR. JEKYLL is much better than its reputation would have you think, and it's surprisingly frank in its depictions of adultery and sexuality. It's well-directed by Terence Fisher, and the sets, costumes, set decorations and cinematography are excellent, making very good use of color (particularly in the Can-Can sequence). Performances are also excellent, particularly Paul Massie in the title roles, though he may seem a bit over-the-top at times. He does an excellent job of differentiating between Jekyll and Hyde, even vocally (though he sounds oddly post-synched in both roles). No, this isn't the foggy, gas-lit London of previous versions of J&H - color more or less ruled that out - but its nevertheless effective in its own way and deserves re-examination.

Dr. Henry Jekyll (Paul Massie) is working on a serum that brings out the animal instincts of man. After testing it on a monkey (who goes berserk), he turns to himself. As his alternate self, Edward Hyde, he stumbles upon his friend's treachery and his wife's sordid affair. Hyde, the animal that he is, is ready to go on his own little excursion into debauchery and hedonism.

I was really blown away by this film. The Jekyll/Hyde story has been told again and again and the main character has been portrayed by countless actors. Yet, this may be the great version out there -- definitely the best one I've seen yet. The Canadian actor playing both roles was a new face for me, but is pretty amazing and I couldn't see the two personas as the same actor no matter how hard I tried. It was quite impressive.

Christopher Lee, ever-present in the Hammer films (did he ever have a day off?), plays friend Paul Allen. Wow. I've praised Lee in "Scream of Fear", but he should be praised no less in this, where he's a convincingly sleazy gambler and womanizer. Not the way I picture Lee to be, but it seems so natural here. The more I see this man in action, the more I see what the generation before me saw. I had always been a Peter Cushing fan, but maybe it's time for me to switch sides? I enjoyed the philosophical questions raised by this film. There's the portrayal of Hyde as younger, more handsome and more charming... not the monster he's usually shown to be. I think this fit well... he still had the spontaneous violence, but not unlike the devil himself, knew his way to get to people with savoir faire. Early on, Jekyll also talks of the man "beyond good and evil", the "higher man", evoking the words of philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, though certainly not in the way Nietzsche would have endorsed. Both Nietzsche's and Jekyll's higher man use their wills to gain what they most desire, but Hyde is something of an unhinged creature, not the refined and academic man Nietzsche preferred.

Nietzsche also spoke of "beyond good and evil" as a transcendence of morality, moving beyond our traditional concepts and accepting that there is good and bad, but no overarching divine good or evil. In this regard, Hyde may be comparable. He certainly has no care for his "evil" actions... though one suspects that not even Nietzsche would support these "bad" actions destroying those around him.

You must pick up this film (preferably in the four-disc set of Hammer films also containing "The Gordon" and "Scream of Fear"). You don't need to be as analytical or philosophical as I am when digesting it, but you'll love the film for its great characters and hedonistic wickedness... drunken, licentious men in 1870s London? Let the depravity begin.

Having long been a serious Hammer fan, this film somehow escaped me for years. I recently viewed it for the first time, and was very impressed. Christopher Lee rarely had such a delicious part, as the pompous and sleazy Paul Allen. Director Terence Fisher and composer Monty Norman are in top form as well. Of course, the story itself is familiar but thoroughly engaging.

One thing troubles me, the tape I saw had a few obvious dialog cuts. If you've never seen The Two Faces of Dr. Jeckyll, AND you like the horror cinema of this period, I strongly urge you to see this one.

Very nice and quite original adaptation of this often (ab)used material. This is probably the only version where Hyde is actually more handsome, social and sexy - even in a sort of school-boyish way to begin with - than Jekyll, who is a total wet blanket. There is indeed one of the sexiest performances by Christopher Lee in the film. I'm very happy he isn't in the lead role - I suggest he would have been directed to be his usual grim and menacing self again. Instead of that we get a smiling, easy-going Lee, dripping with wicked charm and sexuality. There aren't many available films to see him still under 40, so if you are a fan of his, I suggest you check this one out. Sure, it tends to be a bit melodramatic, but fortunately everyone around the poor, misunderstood Jekyll is so delightfully evil - his double-crossing wife, and double double-crossing friend - that the dramatic outbursts are nicely suppressed. Also, you get a very intimate close up at the holiest of holies of a scantily dressed snake charmer, and we get the "b"-word loud and clear - rather nice for 1960. Nice sets, nice Victorian frolics, very good looking cast, and generally a more fun version of the book than we usually get. I only have a strange looking pan and scan bootleg version of this film, which obviously was shot in widescreen. Typical vibrant colours of the period, good score and expert direction plus mostly proper British accent from everyone in the cast. I'm very glad I stumbled upon this film, and should I ever see a legitimate widescreen version released, I'd snatch it without a second thought. I'm rich, you see.