With so many screen adaptations and versions of Robert Louis Stevenson’s classic novella, “Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,” two things come to mind when a new movie based on the story is made: 1) Why is another
With so many screen adaptations and versions of Robert Louis Stevenson’s classic novella, “Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,” two things come to mind when a new movie based on the story is made: 1) Why is another one necessary? 2) If they had to make it, it must be good.
The 2006 version, “The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,” does not really approach the “good” label, therefore leaving the “why?” part of the equation unknown.
Tony Todd stars as both Jekyll and Hyde. Todd has become one of the quintessential “that guy” actors, at least to me. I’d never know his name if asked and couldn’t remember anything I’ve seen him in, but he’s a very recognizable character actor.
The story is updated to modern times and has Todd portraying a successful doctor with a bad heart. His experiments involving chimpanzees have created a state-of-the-art injection that basically changes the animal’s DNA so that its body can heal itself.
As the success became evident, Jekyll decided to use the serum on himself.
Amazingly and shockingly to the viewers, there were some mildly negative side effects.
(Read previous sentence in a sarcastic voice.)
Todd actually did a great job in all his scenes as the transformed and deranged William Hyde, and as good a job as he could as the much calmer Jekyll.
The most unbelievable thing about the Hyde character was his face. I can’t properly express in words what this “man” looked like… but I’ll try. Hyde looked like a combination of The Incredible Hulk and Chewbacca, yet people would just treat him as if he were a normal human.
Hyde goes on a murderous rampage, targeting young women at the nearby college. The attacks are so vicious the investigators think it could only have been done by an animal.
The police trying to figure out who is committing the murders are just about as cliché as it gets. The co-ed duo spouts plenty of uninspired dialog and has some strange interactions.
After a run-in with the deranged Hyde, who they suspect to be a murderer, the female detective wants to go down to the basement and see if he is there in his lab. The male seems to think that could be a dangerous idea and advises against it, to no avail.
Wouldn’t the typical response be, “All right, but I’m not letting you go alone,” followed by a gaze into her eyes that indicates more than just a partner relationship?
Not this time. His response: “All right, I’ll be in the lobby if you need me.”
Thanks, partner!
Later we learn the female does not carry her gun because a previous partner had his explode in his hand.
“A piece of his skull hit me in the eye!” she yelled to the chief.
Not a sentence you hear everyday.
The movie was competently made and the horror aspects are decent. There is enough blood for most folks and the transformations between Jekyll and Hyde are pretty well done.
There are some irrelevant storylines along the way, mostly involving Jekyll’s young girlfriend — she has an admirer in her social network, she runs a coffeehouse that is putting on an “opera night,” etc.
Todd keeps the movie chugging along at a pretty good pace and his scenes are compelling. The cops, on the other hand, should just have been peripheral characters. They provide no emotional ties to the viewers and seem completely expendable.
Aside from the terrible Hyde costume and worthless police, the movie turned out to be very campy but pretty entertaining, with plenty of (unintentional) comedy along the way.
While it might have better been titled “The Strange Hiring of an Awful Make-Up Artist,” I can’t say I hated this one.