Pretty good for a low budget adaptation
Okay, first off, if I'm comparing this to a movie I'd see in theater's that cost 100 million dollars, then it's a 5 or 6, but I get that this is a low budget adaptation. I love the book and I like checking out movies with the Jekyll and Hyde influence. One of my favorite's is FIGHT CLUB. Is this FIGHT CLUB, no, of course not. But one of the things I like best about that movie is that they use two different actors to represent the split personality.
If you've ever actually read the the book Jekyll and Hyde, then you would understand that there is an actual physical transformation and Stevenson treats Jekyll and Hyde as two different characters. I like that this version took a chance and did something out of the norm and used two different actors.
It moves pretty slow, but the pacing is comfortable and compares to the book. It's a great adaptation, and a pretty good low budget movie.
I get the reviews that knock thsi for being too low budget and I get the reviews that praise it for being a good adaptation. It's probably somehwere in between. I liked it.
If you've ever actually read the the book Jekyll and Hyde, then you would understand that there is an actual physical transformation and Stevenson treats Jekyll and Hyde as two different characters. I like that this version took a chance and did something out of the norm and used two different actors.
It moves pretty slow, but the pacing is comfortable and compares to the book. It's a great adaptation, and a pretty good low budget movie.
I get the reviews that knock thsi for being too low budget and I get the reviews that praise it for being a good adaptation. It's probably somehwere in between. I liked it.
- PhilPacker
- 18 avr. 2018