Beystiman It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Sarita Rafferty There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

Lela The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

tavm This is yet another of the obscure werewolf movies I've been reviewing lately. It stars Gloria Talbott-who'd later star in a cult classic called I Married a Monster from Outer Space, John Agar who appeared in plenty of these genre films during this time, and Arthur Shields whose more famous brother Barry Fitzgerald won the Oscar for Going My Way. Ms. Talbott inherits the house of her father, the famous Dr. Jekyll. He's being described as once having turned into Mr. Hyde who in this version is a werewolf who can be killed by a stake in his heart. Talk about mixing legends! Despite that mixed-up premise, this was quite an enjoyably atmospheric thriller that only runs an hour and 10 minutes. The direction by Edgar G. Ulmer was good enough for making the material as believable as possible. So that's a recommendation of Daughter of Dr. Jekyll.

macabro357 Not one of Edgar G. Ulmer's best, but I'm glad they saw fit to release this one on DVD. However, if you're looking for another little Ulmer classic like BLUEBEARD (1944) or DETOUR (1945), you'd better look somewhere else 'cause this ain't it.Gloria Talbott, the daughter of the late Dr. Jekyll, is slowly being hypnotized and pumped full of drugs into believing that she is the killer of a couple of women who were found near her late father's estate. She is slowly being driven mad by the real killer who wants her to take the blame for it.Of course she isn't the one because she's the heroine and we can't have the heroine turn out to be a bad guy. This is the 50s, after all. We also have John Agar as the Talbott's fiancée and Arthur Shields as the weirdo who is the executor of the late Dr. Jekyll's estate. They don't really add much of anything to all this beyond chewing up some film time. That is, until the very last 5 minutes of the film. But what's really a bummer is that the killer is revealed in the very first flashback of the film, so why Ulmer threw away the element of surprise is a real mystery. I guess you'll just have to see it for yourself.And considering the fact that Allied Artists didn't always use the best of film stock, the digital remastering looks as good as can be expected for a low budget film like this. No more excessively grainy prints to look at.I'll give it a 4 out of 10 for at least being worth a look, especially if you're into Ulmer's films like I sometimes am.

horrorbargainbin Most of the time this movie is creepy and decently shot reminding me at best of "Night of the Hunter" and at worst of atmospheric fog machine filled horror. I thought of "Night of the Hunter" during the scene where the Daughter waits outside her father's tomb while in the same shot we see the big village man carving a stake. Very ominous. That said, the stake death is the worst I've seen.The technique of superimposing one shot over another for action/dream sequences worked well in my opinion, but others may find it unoriginal. Monster make-up and blood effects were pretty good. Over all the movie is serious with a comic moment I liked with the Monster showing obvious joy as he views a women in her night clothes through an open window. The narration at the beginning and the Monster's ridiculous line don't fit the mood of the picture.

Eegah Guy I've read plenty about director Ulmer being some poverty-row genius but this flick is only 70 minutes long and is still boring. Mixing the Jekyll monster with werewolves may sound like a fun idea but the treatment here leaves much to be desired. The new widescreen DVD of this movie looks real soft throughout much of the movie which might be a fault of the original movie or just a bad transfer.