ManiakJiggy This is How Movies Should Be Made

Nonureva Really Surprised!

Doomtomylo a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Lucia Ayala It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

rob30316 I saw this show twice on its pre-Broadway tour and while it may not have been Sondheim, it was solid, and it was a lot of fun. This version is a tragic mess. I'd heard that the Broadway version didn't compare to what it used to be, but I was shocked at how awful it became. The best numbers are either gone (Alive!) or missing their best parts (Lisa Carew) or given new arrangements that totally ruin the song (His Work and Nothing More). Yes, those are all songs from the first act - I'll force myself to watch the second at some point, maybe.Now the fun part...Hasselhof needs to be served a cease and desist against acting. He has a surprisingly strong voice, but his lack of acting ability trumps that. At best, when he's singing, he looks like he's struggling to remember his lines. When he talks...oh my God. It's painful.In a way, it's perfect that Hasselhof is in this. J & H was a very promising musical, if somewhat campy, until it hit New York. I have my suspicions that the producer and accountant were planning on flying to Rio when it failed on opening night.It's really, really, REALLY bad. Unless you thought the Broadway version was decent - even with David Hasselhof - avoid it at all costs.I don't think I've ever ranked a movie as a 1 before. It's that bad.

drama_chick312 I went into this as an almost impartial observer (I'm a theatre buff, so I've got some judgementalness...) and was really looking forward to seeing Hasselhof blow me away. I was prepared.I spent the entire time making fun of the movie. Emma is ridiculously amazing, Lucy is pretty good (she's a wee bit nazzle), but when the manservant did better in the scene than Hasselhof, it was just sad. He does funny hand things and his movements are really awkward. Moreso was his singing. Some people like wavering around a note, but in Broadway, you need to hit it and stay on it. He uses his hair to tell the two characters apart instead of a more drastic character shift. Jekkyl and Hyde need to have soaring vocal moments that help to separate them. The confrontation is just comical. that's all there is to it. He's got half his hair pinned back and half in his face and kind of talk sings through these fantastic musical runs. (you can tell that there's more to the music) His performance was high school. at best. I know he tried, but some people are better on the stage and others work better on film. And not a filmed stage performance. Watch it for a good time.

Jim Dixon I love this musical. I am a huge fan of all things Jekyll and Hyde (particularly the original novella by Robert Louise Stevenson) but this production of the musical really did not work. I sometimes get out my copy and watch it for a laugh just because David Hasselhoff is so bad. David seemed to have a lot of potential, don't get me wrong. He looks great as both Jekyll and Hyde and his acting even was OK, although it was a little too hammed up for my taste. The problem is his singing. It seems as though he is racing the orchestra, who are having trouble keeping up with him. Because of this, all meaning in the lyrics is stripped away and the songs are left as merely a shell of what they should be. His style of singing is also a tad strange. His notes just don't sound right. It also seems that he relied more on lighting and hair to differentiate between the characters of Jekyll and Hyde. However, like I said before, when he is acting without singing he's not all that bad, though I doubt he would do a better job than Bob Cuccioli or most other Broadway leading men who have taken the part. The rest of the cast do a fine job but it seems that none have that great a grasp on their characters. A real problem is accents. None of the accents sound quite right and it is really irritating. The best performance would have to be from Coleen Sexton as Lucy. She sounded great, looked great and acted OK.The set and lighting of the production are quite impressive and each do a good job of setting the mood of the production. The orchestra is great but unfortunately has the hard task of keeping up with Hasselhoff (maybe after all the slow motion in Baywatch he took a vow to do everything at super speeds.) This production is worth seeing for any fan of the musical who is yet to see a professional production of it but I refuse to believe it is the best that Broadway has to offer of Jekyll and Hyde.

vegeta_6969 I did the play Jekyll and Hyde about 5 months ago. I was the lead for this play, and I had to watch this movie with the rest of the cast and I must say, it really was not that helpful. At least not on my part. I'll get to that but first some of the good things.The people in the cast did a good job portraying their characters. Most of them were from the original cast when the play came out. George Merritt and Barrie Ingham were good as Utterson and Carew. I was also very impressed with Coleen Sexton's portrayal of Lucy. No one will ever beat Linda Eder, in my opinion, but Sexton doesn't do a bad job. It was just too bad she couldn't have sang "Bring on the Men", instead of "Good and Evil." I didn't know she was only 20 when doing this show. Andrea Rivette also did a good job playing Emma too. I would give the whole cast a solid B for effort.The one thing our theater group thought that was stupid was David Hasselhoff playing the lead of Jekyll. I give credit to Hasselhoff for his Hollywood career, and for being a babe magnet on Baywatch, but this guy is no Broadway performer. At least not in this role. Every time I listened to this guy sing I kept thinking what Wildhorn was thinking about when he hired him. Was he trying to turn this into a comedy. If so, the joke was not funny. I understand that he was trying to make money, but putting faith in Hasselhoff was the worst call to make. He made a horses*** of the role. The only song he sang decently was "Lost in the Darkness." Another problem I had was that most of the singing parts in the play were cut out of the show with stupid boring dialog that would put any J&H fan to sleep. I would give Hasselhoff an F for this performance, but I respect the fact that he was trying something new so i'll give him a D-.Overall I give the performance a C. I wish Wildhorn could have hired Anthony Warlow to do this show, he was fantastic in the "The Gothic Musical Thriller soundtrack of Jekyll and Hyde." He was the perfect guy for this role. It's just too bad that he lives in Australia. I just hope Hasselhoff never plays the role of Jekyll again.