Karry Best movie of this year hands down!

Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

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.

thinker1691 Amid the long lists of accomplishments, for actor Jack Palance, is this truly remarkable film achievement. Robert Louis Stevenson created his memorable set of characters; humanitarian Jekyll and terrifying Mr. Hyde, never realizing how many thespians would attempt to personify his creations. On stage and later in Hollywood several actors tried. From the 1930s' to a modern interpretation involving Michael Caine, a dozen actors have attempted the duel parts. Many are consider excellent, but for my money, the very best is none other than Jack Palance as Dr. Henry Jekyll and Mr. Edward Hyde. I suppose its because, Jack Palance throughout his movie career, has established himself as a reputable heavy. No one, including myself, had ever seen him emulate a respectable, sophisticated and admired medical man of science. His performance in this role is nothing short of magical, nay, electrifying. For the first time in film history, has an actor stun the audience with such an incredible performance, as to leave them applauding him with praise and wonderful accolades. To his credit, his fellow actors believed that as well. They included Denholm Elliott as Mr. George Devlin, Leo Genn as Dr. Lanyon, Torin Thatcher as Sir John Turnbull and wonderful Oscar Homolka as Stryker. You may see other film adaptions of this horror tale, but in my opinion, few to equal this version. *****

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.

FOCKLERRC This was the first version of the story I ever saw so I may be a bit biased. As a long time student of this genre and of this story in particular, I can say that while not the Stevenson novella verbatim, it is still much closer than other adaptations. Of particular note are the references to drug addiction of young people in Victorian London. Mr. Palance gives a bravura performance in the dual role. Is it my imagination or does the Mr. Hyde make-up created by Master Make-Up Artist Dick Smith resemble classic depictions of Satan or perhaps the Satyr? Dan Curtis assembled an excellent cast in a sterling production. The new DVD version offers enhanced picture and sound quality as well as various subtitles for your viewing enjoyment. You may consider this video/DVD a valued asset to your collection of this strange story of one man's fascination with man's dual nature. Perhaps there is a bit of Edward Hyde in all of us!