Diagonaldi Very well executed

Ameriatch One of the best films i have seen

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

Neive Bellamy Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

kerwickjosh To be blunt, Jekyll + Hyde was terrible. In the original novella, the idea behind the characters of Jekyll and Hyde was that he was meant to create Hyde to represent the evil side of himself, and so that he could partake in these evil activities without notice. In Jekyll + Hyde though, from what I gathered, his reasons for creating Hyde were purely materialistic. He just wanted to be someone different who would have confidence and be able to talk to girls, and creates a pill derived from ecstasy that only changes his personality (very minimally too) into a bad person, and continuously has sex with different women and kills people, and there seems to be no real reason why. In this excuse for a movie, there is not even a transformation from Jekyll to Hyde, or vice versa. It's hard to tell when Jekyll is Hyde, or when Hyde is Jekyll. The idea is supposed to be that Hyde looks vastly different, or at least has a defining feature that separates him from Jekyll. There is nothing in this movie to indicate this, apart from the fact he inherits more violent tendencies and of course, as mentioned, has a lot of sex. It really just seems that he becomes addicted to a drug that changes the way he acts, rather than a drug that makes him a completely different person. As for other aspects of film-making, the cinematography was uninspired, the acting was pretty terrible and the script, aside from story issues, was written terribly, and had many parts that felt unnecessary.In case my opinion had not come off clearly enough, I think Jekyll + Hyde is a very poor attempt at film-making. Not only is the original story of The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde completely butchered, but it is also put into the genre of teen slasher horror, perhaps the most heinous type of genre to evaluate such a book into. The original has traces of horror, yes, but it also thrives on its subtlety and the telling of the story, and quite frankly, Jekyll + Hyde does neither of these things.

galensaysyes First things first: this is not a modern retelling of the Stevenson story, no matter what the blurb on the case claims. It's a different story in the same line, with characters who happen to be named the same as Stevenson's. Also, it isn't truly a horror story, but a dramatized sermon disguised as such. I wouldn't be surprised to learn it was produced by a church. It contains no mention of God (except in vain) or of doctrine, but it's an elaborate illustration of a moral, which is actually stated aloud at the end: evil exists in all of us. The specific moral message delivered, if any, can only be: don't mess with drugs.In spite of or because of this, it isn't a bad movie. The director (or someone covering for him) shows one overriding talent: an ability to hold the interest; and that, in spite of making just about every mistake in the book. Take the first scene, where a character discovers a dead body. Instead of our discovering it at the same time he does, we get a series of cutaways from different angles, none of them from anyone's point of view; these take us out of the scene entirely. In other scenes, at points where it would become necessary to build suspense, or to pay it off, the director seems to have no confidence of his being able to do that, so he just ends the scenes there. Throughout, he overlays a loud, rather arty musical score, which is appealing in its own right but usually incongruous with the dramatic action, and often drowns it out altogether.The virtue of the director's that does the most to counterbalance faults like these is his skill in getting good performances out of actors. Apart from the movie's leading lady, a producer's-girlfriend type, the cast all come off well. The leading man is perhaps a little callow, but perhaps that was part of the point.The one important skill the director apparently lacks is the ability to create a solid script, or the judgment to recognize one. This one has playable scenes, but doesn't move right. It jerks around in time, never makes its chronology clear, telegraphs the ending at the beginning, and constantly cuts away from scenes just as they become interesting. Moreover, it's sketchy about the characters' motivations--most notably, Hyde's--and the progressions of their relationships. It needed at least one more go-through.But I expect that the director will soon move up to bigger productions, with tighter scripts, and once he has the legs to stand on, will show what he can really do.

Scarecrow-88 "Someone once said evil is the ultimate temptation. What's so terrifying is that it's within us all. If you let it, like a cancer it will consume you." Medical student Jekyll(Bryan Fisher)has been tampering experimentally using existing elements from the drug Ecstasy hoping to create an elaborate pill that can shift your personality..he says for the better. What happens, however, is that in using the drug himself by ingestion this dominant predatory personality of "Hyde" emerges killing those friends..and especially female sexual companions..he once frequented with before starting the intake. The cause of trying these experiments, anyway, was so that he could break free from his timid nerdy shell. When he becomes more aggressive and winsome with the ladies turning into some sort of GQ model with violent tendencies, "J" is hooked to that personality until he's unable to resist Hyde..the good that was Jekyll is being eradicated by Hyde. The addiction kicks in and when "J" receives some "infected" chemicals to make his drug from pal Lanyon(Jeff Roop)Hyde begins to emerge at any moment making it incredibly hard for Jekyll to hold the monster at bay. Jekyll is in love with Martha(Bree Turner)who would take "J" as her lover even if he remained the geek he was. As Hyde, she's quite attracted as he makes the moves Jekyll never would..not to mention, Hyde is quite good in bed which she shows with such enthusiasm in a sex scene. Other friends targeted by Hyde..Dan(Zachary Bennett), someone Hyde hates because it reminds him of Jekyll who also carries a torch for Martha and Josh(Adam MacDonald), a cousin to Bree who is good drug pals with Lanyon. The incident that rattles the cycle of Hyde's emergence and Jekyll's decision to begin rapid intake of his experimental drug was the OD of a close friend to Bree and the rest, Mary(Katrina Matthews).Good production values and a very serious tone show that this was quite a professionally made product with everyone trying to create a legitimate work worthy of praise. For me it moves at a rather slow pace never quite delivering the thrills a premise like this could easily deliver. At times the flick wishes to be naughty such as the various sexual escapades and some nudity, but the flick is more about the evils that overtake the good souls hoping to create something of worth, seduced by allure of sin. The actors try to etch out vivid characterizations such as Fisher, who I felt really doesn't have quite the range for such a complex role.

kelz-2003 I think this movie was done very very well. I to have not seen any of the actors/actresses perform before, however for a movie that hasn't had many reviews they were brilliant. I believe that most people will find it a tad predictable, this is only because everyone knows the story before this movie was made. The precision to Hyde (Jays) character was done so well, and it goes to show you how little humans do know about themselves! To be able to understand the mind of such a person is a difficult task, and I think if it had of been more complex in this movie it would have clearly lost viewers. Because most can't grasp the concept of what our true instincts can involve, and having the ability to focus oneself souly on acting on desires and wants, people tend to shy away from such a subject due to fear of finding such tendencies in themselves. Perhaps before pointing the finger at the world and blaming it for the actions of others, we should take a look and see what truly hides within ourselves.On a second note for those of you who wish to experiment on subjects such as yourselves, make sure you have a fair idea of what you're getting yourself into. I have experienced a chemical inbalance in the brain to cause violence and absence of mind control, it isn't a nice thing to endure, especially when that majority part of my life is mostly blank, but goes to show how easily things happen when created let alone when nature takes it true course.