Softwing Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

Holstra Boring, long, and too preachy.

Manthast Absolutely amazing

Orla Zuniga It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

morrison-dylan-fan Reading an old issue of Empire,I found a review by Kim Newman praising Arrow for bringing out Blu-Ray that have caused a major re- evaluation of "Adult" auteur film maker Walerian Borowczyk. Taking part in a poll on ICM for the best movies of 1981 whilst reading the review,I noticed a fellow poster share tantalising screenshots of a Dr. Jekyll adaptation,which led to me looking at Borowczyk for the first time:The plot:Before getting married to Miss Fanny Osborne, Dr. Henry Jekyll has to host a dinner with wealthy friends/family whose approval they need. During the dinner,Jekyll goes to his lab and takes a drinks he has created that transforms him into Mr. Edward Hyde. Losing all of his morals,Jekyll/Hyde goes on a murderous and sexual rampage which Osbourne finds unexpectedly alluring.View on the film:Bringing Borowczyk's Dr. Jekyll into light,Arrow deliver a superb transfer,with the French/English dubs (the title was shot with no original soundtrack) being clean,and Arrow retaining the film grain on the picture.Opening Jekyll's eyes with Giallo black gloves and a stylised,extended first person tracking shot,writer/production designer/director Walerian Borowczyk & cinematographer Noël Véry set their sights on fetish, masochism,with Borowczyk finding an unsettling elegance in shots whirling round a drenched in blood body,and a bath of Jekyll's potion having a grubby earthy appearance. Backed by an excellent simmering electronic score from Bernard Parmegiani, Borowczyk heightens the masochism by taking the Gothic Horror to the level of a surrealist farce,as the guests, Miss Fanny Osbourne and Jekyll become entranced in a cocktail of transgressive aggression and horror decadence.Entering this adaptation of Robert Louis Stevenson's book from a distinctive corner,the screenplay by Borowczyk brews a frosty nightmare horror state of Jekyll's future murder/sex attacks being threaded into the "present" dinner like a darkness on the horizon. Investigating the strange case between Jekyll and Osbourne, Borowczyk brilliantly builds a toxic bond which leads to them bathing in each other's potions, as Miss Osbourne and Dr. Jekyll discover the strange case of Mr. Hyde)

lonchaney20 Despite being considered one of the all time great horror stories, Robert Louis Stevenson's Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde has a disappointing track record on film. While it has inspired several interesting interpretations over the years (the most striking, perhaps, being Hammer Films' gender-bending Dr. Jekyll and Sister Hyde), few of them have really proved to be all that satisfying. One notable exception is the brilliant Rouben Mamoulian film from 1931, which features an astonishing performance by Fredric March as both Jekyll and Hyde. Though the make-up in that film is somewhat over-the-top, the characterization is spot-on, nailing Hyde's sadism and his lust for life, and without shying away from the more unsavory aspects of his appetites. It's also one of the most stylish mainstream horror films of its time, featuring an innovative opening shot entirely from Jekyll's point-of-view. In short, it's a hard act to follow, as Victor Fleming's tame remake attests to, but I believe that The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Miss Osbourne, made fifty years after Mamoulian's adaptation, is a worthy successor.There are several qualities that make Borowczyk an ideal interpreter of Stevenson's novella: he's a consummate visual stylist, at times worthy of Kubrick in the perfection of his images; his artistic occupation with transgressive eroticism ensured that he would explore Hyde's perversity to its fullest potential; and, just as significantly, he sees the humor inherent in the subject matter. Thus we are given a Jekyll and Hyde that is just as visually astonishing as Mamoulian's, which gives us a Hyde that is more wicked and depraved than even Stevenson's original, and most importantly does not just lazily imitate any of the adaptations preceding it. For this Hyde there are no boundaries he will not cross in pursuit of pleasure. The moody and shocking opening scene finds Hyde (here played by Gerard Zalcberg) brutally beating a young girl with a cane and attempting to rape her, the violence of his blows splintering his weapon. From here on out no orifice is safe, and before the film is finished both men and women find themselves fatally penetrated by his monstrously large genitals.Borowczyk confines the action of the story to a single night and in one location: Dr. Jekyll's house, where he and his fiancée, Fanny Osbourne (a tongue in cheek reference to Stevenson's identically named wife) are holding their engagement party. The humor largely derives from Hyde's interactions with Jekyll's snobby, upper-class guests, including a Reverend (Clement Harari), Jekyll's colleague Dr. Lanyon (played by Jess Franco regular Howard Vernon), and General Carew (unforgettably played by Patrick Magee). While the film is perfectly cast across the board, special honors must go to Magee, who gets the film's funniest scene. He also has a field day in the most perverse non-Hyde scene, in which he punishes his daughter for copulating with Hyde. I won't go too much into detail, but the way that man acts with his tongue is profoundly unwholesome.The legendary Udo Kier plays the title role, while Borowczyk's muse Marina Pierro plays Miss Osbourne. While Kier is dubbed unexceptionally into English by a different actor, his talent shines through in the delirious transformation scenes (which are re-imagined here as a chemical bath rather than a potion.) One can't help but wish he would've also played Hyde, but Zalcberg is suitably creepy and intimidating in the role, and it makes it more plausible that the characters would believe them to be two different people. Pierro's performance is harder to judge, but she shines in the film's delirious climax, which I wouldn't dare to spoil here. Much of the film's power, especially in the aforementioned climax, also stems from Bernard Parmegiani's experimental soundtrack, which in a way reverses Kubrick's musical strategy in 2001 (here using modern synth-based music in a classical setting) to equally good effect.Last but not least I must briefly comment on Arrow Films' brilliant blu-ray release. I first watched this film on a fuzzy and incredibly dark VHS-derived bootleg, as it was commercially unavailable for decades. Arrow Films rescued it from obscurity last year, and their astonishing restoration really does wonders for the Vermeer-inspired cinematography. This is easily one of the most beautifully photographed horror films ever produced, and with any luck the new restoration will give it the reputation it deserves among cinephiles.

CupidGrl It took me a while to find this one, but I finally did. I was dying to see it (because Udo Kier is in it), but I was totally disappointed. As you may know, it is a Jekyll Hyde plot. Udo plays Dr. Jekyll, and some totally ugly guy plays Mr. Hyde. I agree with the other person who commented, it's much like a disturbing nightmare. Like a dream. The colors in parts are sort of like and Argento film. And it is really bad that it's cut to pieces. I mean, everything half gory must have been cut out.The movie is dubbed (cutting out Udo's great voice), and he has a really lame hair-do! I just had to tell y'all fellow Udo fans. It's not really worth tracking down, like I did. I give it - 4/10

info-108 Doctor Jekyll is a rather different version than most adaptations of the Jekyll & Hide story. Its emphasis lies on sex, this time. Jekyll changes into a rather beastly kind of lover/murderer who seduces, haunts and kills all the people gathered in the house for a party. Although the story is well known, this change of direction makes it very interesting to watch. The photography is rather special, with light almost bursting of the screen. The only negative thing I found was the English dubbing which is done very badly. Try to find the original version if you can. Udo Kier and Patrick Magee are very amusing to watch.