REVIEW: Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde (1931)

Title: Dr Jekyll And Mr Hyde
Release Year: 1931
Genre: Hammer Horror
Cast: Fredric March and Miriam Hopkins
Plot: A mad scientist sets out to prove that man has two independant characters, good and evil, that can be separated. In order to achieve that, he experimented on himself, but things got out of control, and in control.
Rating: ⭐️＿ ＿ ＿ ＿ 

Review: I've always wanted to watch a film about Jekyll and Hyde, ever since I was a child, after watching the Warner Brothers cartoon with Sylvester as him. It's probably one of my favourite versions hehehe.
Anyway, in my search for one, I found out there were many versions made across the golden era. I was a little torn between what to watch, the 1930s or the 1940s version. I ended up watching the 1930s because I had always heard about this one. Later I found out that the 1940s version starred Spencer Tracy and Ingrid Bergman, so it might've been good, but I was statisfied with Fredric March at the time.

The film is an adaptation of the 1886 book, The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, by Robert Louis Stevenson, but mostly based on the stage adaptation made in 1887 that was re-written with additional characters by Thomas Russell Sullivan.

The Story:
A distinguished scientist created a potion that can alter his appearance as well as character. It was an experiment he performed in order to prove that man can have two different entities, good and evil, and is able to control them. The experiment didn't go quite as planned though, when he started realising that one entity began to dominate the other.

God-defying stories always disturb me, but what I like about classic horror is that the perpetrators never get away with it and there's always some kind of punishment at the end.


The Characters:
John Barrymore starred in the original Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde version made in 1920, so when Paramount wanted to do a remake, they wanted him to reprise his role as the lead. Unfortunately for him though, his contract with MGM didn't allow it, so the role went to March. I've never seen any of Barrymore's films, so I don't know how that would've turned out to be, but March was a great actor, so it didn't affect the choice. The strange thing is that they both looked so much alike hehe. Wonder if that was why they thought of hiring March.

Phillips Holmes was another one considered for the lead but the director felt that he couldn't portray the evil side for some reason. I haven't watched any of his films either but think he's absolutely dreamy, don't you hehehe.

March as the lead was perfect, I can never complain about his acting. I couldn't imagine he could portray the evil side so perfectly before this film. He was certainly talented.

The heavy makeup used on him for Mr Hyde, almost damaged his face and he was hospitalised because of it. Still with all the trauma, March got great reviews after his performance and started recieving better and more dramatic roles after the film's success.

Miriam Hopkins played Ivy Pearson a harlot that Mr Hyde obsesses over. Hopkins first rejected the role because she preferred playing Dr Jekyll's fiance but the director told her that she could easily be replaced, so she gave in.

I really disliked Hopkins in this film because I didn't expect her to be so indecent. There was an extremely inappropriate scene at the beginning of the film where Hopkins got undressed...and it took forever!

Anything remotely rude in a film puts me off and I hate the film after that no matter how good the acting or the story was. I wasn't aware about Pre-code Hollywood, otherwise I would've checked the censorship guidelines before I watched this. It was unnecessary to the story, though it is never necessary to be vulgar.
I read that after that dirty Hollywood era was over-thown, around ten minutes of the film was removed before it was shown again in theatres. I wish I had seen that version instead.

The Direction:
The film starts with a subjective camera of Jekyll's view. I liked the idea because it allows us to view the world through Jekyll's eyes and then through Hyde's, so we can distinguish the difference. Unfortunately, they didn't accomplish that. It was only done in a brief moment at the beginning and the director must've forgotten about it when Hyde was in the picture. It felt useless, however, this type of sequence paved the way for future horror films. 

I didn't like the physical transformation from Jekyll to Hyde because he looked so much like an ape but I guess they wanted the evil side to be that of a Neanderthal; a man of no morals, rather than a typical monster. I liked the transition though, it seemed very clean and gradual, which must've been very new for that time. Also it was hilarious to watch.

Favourite Scenes:
There was a very terrifying scene - which was the only one I liked - when Ivy went to Jekyll and told him about Hyde, then got a visit from Hyde. I was scared stiff hahahaha

The Reception:
The film more than doubled it's profit and was praised by the critics. It was also the first horror film to recieve an Oscar.

March also recieved an Oscar for Best Actor in a Leading Role and it was his first of two.

Adaptations:
There are so many adaptations but I've only watched one and it's not really an adaptation but a screwball comedy version; Abbott and Costello Meet Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, 1953. It was one the silliest films. Bud Abbott always got on my nerves and I can't stand him. He can't act and he's just not funny. He definitely ruined the Abbott and Costello act. Lou Costello would've been as popular as other classic comedians today, if it hadn't been for Abbott.

In 1950, March reprised his role as Jekyll and Hyde for a radio version.

I can't recommend this film only for that ugy scene. I do want to watch the 1940s version because by that time, cinema got cleaner, and I would be able to see the film without any disturbances.