Calum Hutton It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

Celia A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Billy Ollie Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Leofwine_draca This film is another adaptation of a classic horror novel by Dan Curtis, the man who pretty much owned TV horror in the 1960s and 1970s. Jack Palance gives a very good performance in the dual role, and this version of the Robert Louis Stevenson novel, although hampered by the TV budget, is appropriately authentic and atmospheric. Dick Smith, the man behind THE EXORCIST, supplies the make-up effects, which are unusual and effective, and some seasoned character actors like Leo Genn and Denholm Elliott work well in support. One stand-out is a young Billie Whitelaw as a prostitute, who receives an 'introducing' credit. The film is slightly overlong at two hours, but the scenes of high drama are effective, and the transformations, although low fi, really work.

snicewanger This is easily my favorite version of the Robert Louis Stevenson monster tale. Jack Palance is ideally cast as Mr Hyde. He is physically strong, athletic, menacing, and quite vicious when crossed.Legendary make up artist Dick Smith created Hyde's Satanic look. Palance's Dr Jekyll is effective as well.He plays him as socially awkward and uncomfortable with his emotions. An excellent supporting cast includes Denholm Elliot, Leo Genn, Oskar Homolka, and Torn Thatcher. Billie Whitelaw plays Gwyn as sexy,vulnerable and the object of Hyde's sadistic lust.Dan Curtis became a master of Gothic story telling and he gets strong performances from everyone involved. He capture's the look of London in the 1880's with its foggy and gas lit back streets with help from set dresser Fred Brown.Robert Colbert's eerie theme music would later show up in Curtis's Dark ShadowsA chillingly good story and outstanding performances make this one a must for any horror film connoisseur.8 out of 10.

Christian Tsoutsouvas Robert Louis Stevenson's book was more of detective story than anything else, hence its called "The Strange CASE of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde". It is about Dr Lanyon hearing of these unusual and horrific events and trying to piece them together, and in the final few chapters (Jekyll's letters) the story is finally told. As a book, that was very interesting, though as a film this would have been rather dull, and it is much more exciting to see these events unfold on a screen.The story is very well-known, a scientist splits his personalities and creates an inhuman tyrannical demon that destroys the lives of both of them as well as many others. Only in the book Jekyll invented the drug because he thought that as every man had only one life and two sides, it is impossible to leave a life that satisfies the urges of both of these sides. So he splits them and tries to lead to separate lives, each undisturbed by the other, though of course he fails. Here it is merely out of reckless curiosity, he does something purely because he can without stopping to think if he should.It also suggests the idea that Dr Jekyll is responsible for Hyde's murders, not Hyde. This is because Hyde isn't a whole person, therefore he can't be judged as a real person or held responsible for his actions. Hyde is the dark side of Jekyll, and nothing about Hyde wasn't already inside the doctor. Jekyll should never have empowered him and let him run loose. I would agree with this.A brilliant display of fine performances and dialogue, as well as some very interesting imagery, Dan Curtis' adaptation is a delight.In particular, Jack Palance is extraordinary in both roles. Showing us carelessness and selfishness and in the end fear and desperation in Jekyll as well as impulsiveness, anger and just pure evil in Hyde.Outstanding! Particularly towards the end.

synstok This 1968 version is both intense and entertaining. The performance of the title character by Jack Palance is excellent. His Hyde is at first light hearted but soon turns to what the author Robert Louis Stevenson attended. A total beast with no regards but to act on impulses. I do have a few complaints1. Why was this movie shot in a video tape format? Is it because the producer Dan Curtis whom also created the horror soap "Dark Shadows" shot this show also in the same format. 2. What's up with the pool in the streets of London? In the second act after a tryst with 2 ladies of the evening Hyde pushes one of the two "working girls" off a bank of steps into a area of water. I never understood that scene. 3. And finally after a meeting with his best friend Devin, Jekyll passes out from exhaustion he pulls down a cage filled with rabbits. I always wondered about those rabbits being injured.