Lollivan It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Portia Hilton Blistering performances.

Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

Cristal The movie really just wants to entertain people.

jacobjohntaylor1 The Story of Dr.Jekyll and Mr Hyde in general is good. The books is great. There have been some great films based on it. Dr. Jekyll and Mr.Hyde (1931) is a great film. Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde (1920) is a great film. Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde (1941) is a great film. This one is very disappointing. The story line is awful. And it has an awful ending. It is very slow. The hole thing became a court room drama trying to prove that Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde are not same person. It was based on the book but it did not say very true to it. Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde (1912) is great. But this is pooh pooh. This is a big stinky fart. Don't wast your money.

Michael_Elliott Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (2008) * 1/2 (out of 4) Modern updating of the Robert Louis Stevenson's novel has a serial killer stalking the people of Boston. It turns out to be the respected Dr. Jekyll (Dougray Scott) who while on a trip overseas came up with a potion and when used on himself it turned him into the murderous Mr. Hyde. With the help of a friend (Tom Skerritt) Jekyll is able to get a lawyer (Krista Bridges) who tries to understand him. I've seen well over a dozen versions of this classic novel and I must say this is the first one where Hyde kisses Jekyll on the mouth. I'm not one who is against familiar things being changed around as the London setting has been moved to Boston and it takes place during modern times. I think this could have been used to the film's benefit but instead it just bogs down the story even more as we get silly special effects of Jekyll looking at his monitors before turning into Hyde. This movie offers up a few interesting ideas about the good/evil side of the character but it's all pretty much wasted. I really didn't care for the direction because it seems like Barzman was trying too hard to be stylish and this is clearly a case where less would have been a lot more. Just take a look at many of the transformation scenes and you'll see that the camera is constantly twirling and spinning around and it really does look as if the scenes were being filmed during an earthquake. I'm guessing this was done to try and build up some tension but it never works. We also get other scenes where the camera quickly zooms in and then we're treated to some fast-cut editing, which just makes the entire film look even cheaper than it is. The screenplay doesn't do enough with the current settings and just wait to you see what happens once Jekyll is captured and put on trial. Scott isn't bad but he's not good either. He certainly gives a decent performance and especially when you consider what type of film this is but I had a real problem with both the Hyde and Jekyll characters as he really didn't bring much out of either. Skerritt doesn't get to do too much but it's always nice seeing him. I did enjoy Bridges performance but one only wishes it had been in a better movie. There are so many versions of this story out there that if you're new to them then it's a no-brainer that you should skip this one. If you're like me and enjoy tracking down as many versions as you can then you might want to give this a rental but don't have your expectations too high.

kryziss Although I obviously know the concept of Jekyll and Hyde, this is the first full film I ever saw on the subject. The movie was decent to watch, but I have the feeling it's a bit superficial. Never was I actually scared, shocked or thrilled. It was all too normal for my taste.Another negative side to the film is its ending. I guess a minimum of 90% of the viewers will be able to guess the ending after seeing the prison interview where the lawyer gives Jekyll the syringe.Despite this negative critique, the movie also has its up side. The film's mildly entertaining.All in all decent cinematography, quite superficial narrative, reasonable acting. It's 'watcheable' just don't expect too much of it.

Thierry Cadier It's as simple as I said. Bizarre. Everyone knows the story of Jekyll and Hyde, and this version of it, well, it's weird... The acting of Scott is very good, don't be fooled that because the movie is horrible, the acting has to be too. As I don't want to give the whole movie, I will only express myself in one matter: I was disoriented when Hyde disappears on unexplained circumstances. I figure the director wanted to explain this by making Dr Jekyll say "it could have happened because..." but it's just not the way a movie is done. No matter how cliché it may sound, it has to be an explanation, otherwise they'll just make everyone wonder for the rest of the entire movie. Anyway, this is not a movia I'd recommend to see on a Friday night, but it's not a movie not to rent, it's always good to see something bad in order to really appreciate what is actually good.