HotToastyRag Certain roles, like Hamlet, Ebenezer Scrooge, and Dr. Jekyll, are continually redone. Usually it's because big stars wish to show off their acting chops and play these iconic roles, and no matter how many times we've already seen the story, we usually flock to the theaters and support our favorite leading men. The only versions of Robert Louis Stevenson's story Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde I've seen are the ones starring Michael Caine and Kirk Douglas! Where my celebrity boyfriends go, I go.In this television musical, there's a juxtaposition of two very different movies. One movie is a classic adaptation of the spooky drama in which a respected scientist takes his experiments too far and transforms into a monster. The other is a very silly musical with very silly songs. As the music and lyrics were written by Lionel Bart, of Oliver! fame, you might think the contrast of a very dark story with silly songs might work out. Unfortunately, in this case, it doesn't. As hard as Kirk Douglas tries to inject a little class into the movie, he's given such lousy raw materials to work with, there really isn't any chance that the audience can take the movie seriously. The opening song, in which passersby believe Dr. Jekyll to be a man of good character, is pretty cute. But, after you've heard the last chorus of "Whatever it is, whatever Jekyll's doing, I'm sure it's something very, very good!" you've heard the last cute song. The rest are so silly and simple they just might turn you into your own version of Mr. Hyde.

jacobjohntaylor1 This is a great horror movie. It is also a very good musical. This movie as great acting. Great songs. Great singing. It also has great special effects. This is a very scary movie. It very different. There are not to many musicals based on horror novels. There should be more musicals based on horror stories. It would make them more interesting. Doctor Jekyll finds out that man has two souls. And good soul and an evil soul. He invents a formula that brings out his evil side. It takes him over. This movies is very intense. This is Kirk Douglas's best movie. Kirk Douglas is a great actor. He is also a great singer. Susan George is a great actress. This movie is a must see.

Michael_Elliott Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1973) ** (out of 4)Extremely uneven, made-for-TV version of the Robert Louis Stevenson novel finds the kind Henry Jekyll (Kirk Douglas) being turned down by an insane asylum when he asks permission to treat one of their patients with his new drug. With no where else to turn Jekyll decides to try it on himself and soon he's transformed into the evil Mr. Hyde. This film originally played on NBC and has become somewhat of a Holy Grail for me over the past couple years because no matter how hard I tried I just could never track down a copy. Finally the movie showed up and I must admit that it was pretty disappointing but in areas that I really wasn't expecting it. I'll start off by saying that you're entertainment level is going to depend on how many of the songs you enjoy. I'm not sure how well a Musical version of the Jekyll and Hyde story went over back in the day but when viewing this film today one can't help but, at times, roll their eyes and laugh. I've heard rumors that some of the songs here were originally cut from OLIVER! but a few experts say this isn't true. I certainly hope not because I found the songs here to be incredibly boring, stiff and just downright flat. I guess, to be fair, you could say that some of them were inventive in terms of the lyrics but they still didn't work for me because I just didn't find any energy or emotion in any of them. Another problem is that director Winters is all over the place and never really seems to know how he wants the film to play. At times you'd swear you were watching some sort of spoof because of how over the top some of the performances and songs are. Just take a look at the first transformation sequence with Douglas turning into Hyde and you'll be wondering why the director never stepped in and demanded a second take. There were actually several moments where I wondered if an outtake had slipped into the production because the numbers were either that bad or just didn't live up to be anything special. Douglas seems a bit too laid back as Jekyll but he does manage to come to life as Hyde later in the film. I think the crazier Hyde gets the better Douglas' performance becomes. The real shock here is Susan George who plays the role of the prostitute. I'd dare say this is the best performance I've seen her in next to STRAW DOGS and her singing was actually very good. Another major thumbs up goes to Donald Pleasence who plays a watch thief and he too manages to sing quite well. Michael Redgrave appears briefly and is a bit too wooden. The set design is actually pretty good looking and the costumes are another major plus but these few good things can't save an otherwise dull film. If one enjoys the music they'll probably rate this one a bit higher but I'd say the majority of people are going to walk away disappointed.

Woodyanders Here's a very unlikely and peculiar fright feature: an early 70's NBC-TV musical adaptation of Robert Louis Stevenson's classic Victorian-era novella with an unusually cast Kirk Douglas in the dual role of the good-hearted, blandly respectable Dr. Jekyll and his evil, lusty, gleefully immoral and animalistic id-run-amok alter ego Mr. Hyde. What's most surprising about this audaciously imaginative enterprise is how to a sizable degree it works extremely well. There's no denying that the schizophrenic titular part is any true actor's dream role; Douglas clearly knows this and gladly sinks his teeth into the part, playing the two wildly contrasting characters with lip-smacking brio. The rest of the cast is made up of top-drawer British thespians: Susan Hampshire radiates considerable charm as Jekyll's fiancé, Sir Michael Redgrave portrays Hampshire's prim'n'proper gentleman father to stuffy perfection, Donald Pleasence simply delights as a petty, scraggly street peddler, Susan George has a grand bawdy time as a fiercely proud and blithely naughty saloon showgirl, and Stanley Holloway displays an appropriate amount of concern as Jekyll's loyal, worried butler.Sherman Yellen's script astutely captures the repressive mores and scientific curiosity which defined late 19th century London. The lavish costumes and fog-shrouded sets vividly evoke the period. The score by Lionel Bart, Mel Mandell and Norman Sachs is rather hit-or-miss, supplying a decidedly mixed bag of tunes which range from mediocre and forgettable to lively and enjoyable. The better songs are good, jaunty fun, distinguished by especially catchy and witty lyrics. The cast belt out the songs with terrifically infectious aplomb; it's a real treat to see Douglas, Pleasence and the underrated George cheerfully rip into their numbers. Alas, there are a few glaring flaws which gum things up to a fair extent: pedestrian, workmanlike direction by David Winters (who later helmed the laughably bad Joe Spinell psycho vehicle "The Last Horror Film"), flat cinematography, and a blurry, rough-on-the-eyes shot-on-video look that results in an ugly and unappealing visual texture. These faults asides, this picture still holds up as an admirably fresh and novel take on an often-told hoary old chestnut creepy tale.